[House Report 105-843]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                                 Union Calendar No. 484

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
105th Congress                                                   Report
  2d Session            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                105-843

_______________________________________________________________________



                               ACTIVITIES

                                 of the

                     HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT

                          REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

                       ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

                       FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS

                               1997-1998

                   (Pursuant to House Rule XI, 1(d))

                                     



                                     

January 2, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                               --------

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE                    
53-106 CC                  WASHINGTON : 1999




              COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

                     DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York         HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
J. DENNIS HASTERT, Illinois          TOM LANTOS, California
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland       ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., West Virginia
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut       MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
STEVEN H. SCHIFF, New Mexico \10\    EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
CHRISTOPHER COX, California          PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida         GARY A. CONDIT, California
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York             COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota \3\
STEPHEN HORN, California             CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
JOHN L. MICA, Florida                THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
THOMAS M. DAVIS III, Virginia        ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington, 
DAVID M. McINTOSH, Indiana               DC
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana              CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida             TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania \7\
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona             ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio           DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD, South     ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
    Carolina                         DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois \4\
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., MARYLAND     JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts \4\
    \5\                              JIM TURNER, Texas \4\
KEVIN BRADY, Texas \2\               THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine \4\
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire        HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee \8\
PETE SESSIONS, Texas                             ------
MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey           BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 
VINCE SNOWBARGER, Kansas                 (Independent)
BOB BARR, Georgia \1\
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio \6\
DAN MILLER, Florida \9\
RON LEWIS, Kentucky \11\

                      Kevin Binger, Staff Director
                 Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
           David A. Kass, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian
                      Carla J. Martin, Chief Clerk
                 Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director

----------
\1\ Elected to committee January 21, 1997 (H.Res. 32).
\2\ Resigned from committee February 5, 1997 by communication to the 
Speaker.
\3\ Resigned from committee February 5, 1997 by communication to the 
Speaker.
\4\ Elected to committee February 5, 1997 (H.Res. 36).
\5\ Resigned from committee March 19, 1997 by communication to the 
Speaker.
\6\ Elected to committee April 9, 1997 (H.Res. 108). Resigned from 
committee November 13, 1997 by communication to the Speaker.
\7\ Resigned from committee April 17, 1997 by communication to the 
Speaker.
\8\ Elected to committee April 17, 1997 (H.Res. 120).
\9\ Elected to committee November 13, 1997 (H.Res. 331).
\10\ Deceased March 25, 1998.
\11\ Elected to committee May 13, 1998 (H.Res. 429).




                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                  House of Representatives,
                                   Washington, DC, January 2, 1999.
Hon. Jeff Trandahl,
Clerk of the House of Representatives
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Trandahl: I am pleased to submit the enclosed 
report entitled, ``Activities of the House Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight, 105th Congress, First and 
Second Sessions.''
    This report follows the committee's past practice of 
publishing its activities report annually as an interim report 
at the end of each first session of a Congress and as a 
separate final report at the end of a full Congress.
    The present report includes matters required by Rule XI, 
1(d) to be reported to the House not later than January 2, 
1999, on the activities of the committee and in carrying out 
its duty under Rule X to ``review and study, on a continuing 
basis, the application, administration, execution, and 
effectiveness'' of laws whose subject matter is within the 
jurisdiction of the committee.
    The present report describes fully the committee's 
jurisdiction and organization, and details its activities. Of 
particular note, in a productive Congress, are committee 
efforts in the following areas: the year 2000 computer crisis 
(Y2K); the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program; the 
Persian Gulf war veterans illness; oversight and implementation 
of the Results Act; the investigation of political fundraising 
improprieties; and, review of the Food and Drug Administration 
and its regulations respecting terminally ill patients and 
their ability to access desired treatments.
            Sincerely yours,
                                               Dan Burton, Chairman




                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Part One. General statement of organization and activities.......     1
  I. Jurisdiction, authority, powers, duties.....................     1
 II. Historical background.......................................     9
III. Organization................................................    15
        A. Subcommittees.........................................    15
        B. Rules of the Committee on Government Reform and 
            Oversight............................................    16
 IV. Activities, 105th Congress..................................    25
        A. Investigative reports.................................    25
        B. Legislation...........................................    26
        C. Reorganization plans..................................    37
        D. Committee prints......................................    38
        E. Committee action on reports of the Comptroller General    38
Part Two. Report of committee activities.........................    41

                 I. Matters of Interest, Full Committee

        A. General...............................................    41
              1. Oversight Plans of the Committees of the U.S. 
                House of Representatives.........................    41
              2. Views and Estimates for Fiscal Year 1999........    44
              3. Investigations..................................    44
                  a. Oversight of Implementation of the 
                      Government Performance and Results Act of 
                      1993.......................................    44
                  b. Review of the Federal Government Acquisition 
                      Strategy Regarding the Federal 
                      Telecommunications System 2001 Program.....    45
                  c. The Committee's Investigation of Political 
                      Fundraising Improprieties and Possible 
                      Violations of Law..........................    46
                  d. The Committee's Oversight of the Department 
                      of Justice Campaign Finance Investigation..    50
                  e. Review of the Food and Drug Administration 
                      and its Regulations and Activities 
                      Respecting Terminally Ill Patients and 
                      their Ability to Access Desired Treatments.    53
                  f. Review of the Food and Drug Administration's 
                      Human Subject Protection Guidelines, 
                      Informed Consent Documents, and the Use of 
                      Children and Patients with Mental Illness 
                      in Clinical Trials.........................    54
                  g. Inquiry into Complementary and Alternative 
                      Medicine Cancer Research at the National 
                      Institutes of Health.......................    55
                  h. Review of the Food and Drug Administration's 
                      Proposed Changes to Structure/Function 
                      Rules and Regulations Relating to the 
                      Dietary Supplements and Health Education 
                      Act........................................    57
                  i. Elimination of Section 1555 of the Federal 
                      Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 [FASA] 
                      (Public Law 103-355).......................    57
                  j. The Sale of Body Parts by the People's 
                      Republic of China..........................    57
              4. Legislation.....................................    58
                  1. H.R. 1553, a bill to amend the President 
                      John F. Kennedy Assassination Records 
                      Collection Act of 1992.....................    58
                  2. H.R. 1836, the Federal Employees Health Care 
                      Protection Act of 1997.....................    59
                  3. H.R. 3166, the Federal Employees Health Care 
                      Freedom of Choice Act......................    59
                  4. H.R. 2883, the Government Performance and 
                      Results Act Technical Amendments...........    60
                  5. Cost Accounting Standards in the Federal 
                      Employees Health Benefits Program..........    63
                  6. S. 1364, the Federal Reports Elimination Act 
                      of 1998, Public Law 105-362................    64
                  7. H.R. 1057, a bill to designate the building 
                      in Indianapolis, Indiana, which houses the 
                      operations of the Indianapolis Main Post 
                      Office as the Andrew Jacobs, Jr., Post 
                      Office Building............................    64
                  8. H.R. 1058, a bill to designate the facility 
                      of the U.S. Postal Service under 
                      construction at 150 West Margaret Drive in 
                      Terre Haute, Indiana, as the John T. Myers 
                      Post Office Building.......................    64
                  9. H.R. 3630, a bill to designate the facility 
                      of the U.S. Postal Service located at 9719 
                      Candelaria Road, NE, in Albuquerque, New 
                      Mexico, and known as the Eldorado Station 
                      Post Office as the Steve Schiff Post Office    65

                           II. Investigations
             a. investigations resulting in formal reports

Full Committee...................................................    67
      1. ``Investigation of Political Fundraising Improprieties 
          and Possible Violations of Law,'' House Report No. 105-
          829, September 17, 1998, Sixth Report of the Committee 
          on Government Reform and Oversight, Together with 
          Additional and Minority Views..........................    67
      2. ``Contempt of Congress--Refusal of Attorney General 
          Janet Reno to Produce Documents Subpoenaed by the 
          Government Reform and Oversight Committee,'' House 
          Report No. 105-728, September 17, 1998.................    68
Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
  Technology, Hon. Stephen Horn, Chairman........................    69
      1. ``A Citizen's Guide on Using the Freedom of Information 
          Act and the Privacy Act of 1974 to Request Government 
          Records,'' House Report No. 105-37, March 20, 1997, 
          First Report by the Committee on Government Reform and 
          Oversight..............................................    69
      2. ``Making the Federal Government Accountable: Enforcing 
          the Mandate for Effective Financial Management,'' House 
          Report No. 105-664, July 31, 1998, Third Report by the 
          Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, Together 
          with Additional Views..................................    69
      3. ``The Year 2000 Problem,'' House Report No. 105-827, 
          October 28, 1998, Fourth Report by the Committee on 
          Government Reform and Oversight, Together with 
          Additional Views.......................................    74
Subcommittee on Human Resources, Hon. Christopher Shays, Chairman    77
      1. ``Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses: VA, DOD Continue to 
          Resist Strong Evidence Linking Toxic Causes to Chronic 
          Health Effects,'' House Report No. 105-388, November 7, 
          1997, Second Report by the Committee on Government 
          Reform and Oversight, Together with Additional Views...    77
      2. ``Hepatitis C: Silent Epidemic, Mute Public Health 
          Response,'' House Report No. 105-820, October 15, 1998, 
          Seventh Report by the Committee on Government Reform 
          and Oversight..........................................    82
      3. ``Medicare Home Health Services: No Surety in the Fight 
          Against Fraud and Waste,'' House Report No. 105-820, 
          October 15, 1998, Eighth Report by the Committee on 
          Government Reform and Oversight........................    83
Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
  Regulatory Affairs, Hon. David M. McIntosh, Chairman...........    83
      1. ``Investigation of the Conversion of the $1.7 Million 
          Centralized White House Computer System, Known as the 
          White House Database, and Related Matters,'' House 
          Report 105-828, October 30, 1998, Fifth Report by the 
          Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, Together 
          with Minority and Supplemental Views...................    83

                        b. other investigations

Subcommittee on the Census.......................................    85
      1. Reviewing the Short and Long Form Questionnaires........    85
      2. Statistical Issues in Conducting and Adjusting the 
          Decennial Census.......................................    88
      3. Examining the Dress Rehearsals with Regard to Oversight 
          of the 2000 Census.....................................    91
      4. Reviewing the 1990 Census to Improve the 2000 Census....    93
      5. Status of Dual Track Preparations for the 2000 Census...    96
      6. Community Based Approaches for a Better Enumeration.....    97
Subcommittee on the Civil Service................................   102
      1. Impact of the President's FY-1998 Budget on Federal 
          Employees..............................................   102
      2. Federal Hiring from the Welfare Rolls...................   105
      3. Assisting the District of Columbia with it's Pension 
          Liabilities............................................   108
      4. Review of Federal Employees Group Life Insurance [FEGLI] 
          Program................................................   112
      5. Erroneous Enrollments in the Federal Retirement System..   114
      6. Employment Discrimination in the Federal Workplace......   117
      7. Employment Discrimination in the Pursuit of Diversity...   122
      8. Oversight of Contracting Out Practices..................   125
      9. Review of Premiums Under the Federal Employees Health 
          Benefits Program [FEHBP]...............................   128
      10. Suspension of Affirmative Action at the IRS............   129
      11. The Merits of Holding a CSRS to FERS Open Season.......   131
      12. Medical Savings Accounts [MSAs] in the FEHBP...........   133
      13. FEHBP: Program Guidance for 1999.......................   135
      14. Long Term Care Insurance for Federal Employees.........   136
      15. Review of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program 
          [FEHBP] as a Possible Complement to Military Health 
          Care...................................................   141
      16. Civil Service Reform Issues............................   143
      17. FEHBP Premium Increases for 1999.......................   149
      18. Cost Accounting Standards..............................   151
      19. Improper Release of Confidential Information on a 
          Federal Employee.......................................   151
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia.........................   152
      1. Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant..................   152
      2. Public Law 104-8, District of Columbia Financial 
          Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority 
          (D.C. Control Board)...................................   153
      3. D.C. Metropolitan Police Department and the Booz-Allen 
          Memorandum of Understanding............................   154
      4. District of Columbia Public School 1997 Repair Program 
          and Facilities Master Plan.............................   155
      5. Management Reform--Cost, Savings, Net...................   156
      6. Fiscal Year 1997 District of Columbia Audit Report and 
          CFO Oversight..........................................   156
      7. District of Columbia Public School Census and Enrollment 
          Oversight..............................................   157
      8. Oversight on the Academic Plan for the District of 
          Columbia Public Schools................................   157
      9. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department 
          Oversight and Federal Law Enforcement Assistance.......   158
      10. New Washington Convention Center.......................   158
      11. Status of District of Columbia Public School Readiness 
          for the 1998-1999 School Year..........................   159
      12. District of Columbia Y2K Compliance Challenges.........   159
Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
  Technology.....................................................   161
      1. GAO High-Risk Series....................................   161
      2. Year 2000 Computer Date Problem.........................   162
      3. Implementation of the Government Performance and Results 
          Act....................................................   166
      4. Internal Revenue Service Management.....................   171
      5. Debt Collection.........................................   173
      6. Federal Measures of Race and Ethnicity..................   178
      7. The Post FTS-2000 Telecommunications Contract...........   180
      8. White House Management Issues...........................   181
      9. Executive Branch Information Dissemination..............   181
      10. The Medicare Transaction System........................   182
      11. Total Quality Management...............................   183
      12. Electronic Funds Transfer..............................   184
      13. Inspectors General.....................................   185
      14. Performance-Based Organizations........................   186
      15. Governors Island.......................................   188
      16. Government Sponsored Enterprises.......................   189
      17. Metropolitan Statistical Areas.........................   191
      18. Statistical Proposals..................................   192
      19. Defense Surplus Equipment..............................   194
      20. U.S. Customs Service...................................   195
      21. U.S. Forest Service....................................   198
      22. Clinger-Cohen Act......................................   200
      23. Management Practices in State and Local Governments....   202
      24. Federal Advisory Committee Act.........................   203
      25. The Federal Election Commission........................   207
      26. Office of Workers' Compensation........................   209
      27. H.R. 1966, the Special Government Employee Act of 1997.   210
Subcommittee on Human Resources..................................   210
      1. Food and Drug Administration [FDA] Steps Against the 
          Health Threat Posed by ``Mad Cow Disease'' and Other 
          Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies [TSEs].......   210
      2. The Need for Better Focus in the Rural Health Clinic 
          Program................................................   211
      3. Cabinet Department and Agency Oversight.................   212
      4. Oversight of the Department of Health and Human 
          Services' Healthy Start Program........................   214
      5. Nursing Home Fraud......................................   214
      6. Fixing the Consumer Price Index [CPI]...................   215
      7. Bio-Ethics and Informed Consent.........................   215
      8. Analysis of the Medicare Transaction System [MTS].......   216
      9. Food and Drug Administration's [FDA] Enforcement of 
          Blood Safety Regulations...............................   216
      10. Reducing Education Mandates............................   217
      11. Restructuring the Department of Veterans Affair [VA] 
          Medical Services.......................................   218
      12. Pfiesteria and Public Health...........................   218
      13. Job Corps..............................................   219
      14. Privatization of Child Support Enforcement Services....   219
      15. Department of Labor Enforcement of the Employee 
          Retirement Income Security Act [ERISA] and the Limited 
          Scope Audit Exemption..................................   220
      16. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration 
          for Children and Families, ``Early Head Start: Linking 
          Early Childhood Programs to Success''..................   220
      17. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
          ``Fixing the Consumer Price Index''....................   221
      18. AIDS: Availability, Cost and Access to Long-Term 
          Treatment Options......................................   221
      19. Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses: The Research Agenda......   222
      20. Department of Health and Human Services ``Oversight of 
          the National Organ Procurement and Transplantation 
          Network''..............................................   222
      21. The Complexity of the Medicare program: The Evolution 
          of the Program, the Effects of Complexity, and Impact 
          on Waste, Fraud and Abuse..............................   223
      22. Department of Health and Human Services, ``Public 
          Health 2000: Immune Globulin Shortages--Causes and 
          Cures''................................................   223
      23. Vulnerabilities in the Department of Housing and Urban 
          Development [HUD]'s Procurement and Contracting 
          Practices..............................................   224
      24. National Institutes of Health, ``Institutional Review 
          Boards: A System in Jeopardy''.........................   224
      25. Department of Labor, Employment and Training 
          Administration, ``Job Corps: An Examination of the 
          Program and Operational Components''...................   225
      26. Food and Drug Administration ``Blood Safety: Minimizing 
          Plasma Product Risks''.................................   225
      27. Restructuring the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] 
          Medical Services.......................................   225
      28. Department of Labor, Employment and Training 
          Administration, ``Employment and Training in the 
          Welfare-to-Work Environment''..........................   226
      29. Department of Education, ``An Examination of Federal 
          Regulations and School Districts''.....................   226
Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
  Regulatory Affairs.............................................   226
      1. Investigation of the White House Database...............   226
      2. Investigation of the Misuse of Statistics by the 
          Department of Energy...................................   227
      3. Investigation of OIRA's Review of NAAQS Rules...........   227
      4. Securities and Exchange Commission......................   227
      5. Oversight of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands 
          Programs...............................................   229
      6. Oversight of the Security and Exchange Commission's 
          ``Disclosure of Accounting Policies for Derivative 
          Financial Instruments and Derivative Commodity 
          Instruments''..........................................   232
      7. EPA's Particulate and Ozone Rulemaking..................   235
      8. GAO Findings on Superfund Cleanup.......................   240
      9. Office of Management and Budget's ``Report to Congress 
          on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations''.....   244
      10. EPA's Strategic Plan...................................   245
      11. Oversight of EPA and the Regulatory Process............   247
      12. Brookhaven National Laboratory.........................   248
      13. Investigation of President Clinton's Executive Order 
          13083, ``Federalism''..................................   251
      14. Investigation of Paperwork and Regulatory 
          Accomplishments by the Office of Management and 
          Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs..   252
      15. The Congressional Review Act...........................   255
      16. Investigation of the White House Initiative on Global 
          Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol..................   259
      17. Hearings on the Kyoto Protocol.........................   261
      18. Investigation of the OIRA's Review of NAAQS Rules......   268
      19. Oversight of the National Highway Traffic Safety 
          Administration's Proposed Rule, ``State-Issued Driver's 
          Licenses and Comparable Identification Documents''.....   268
      20. Oversight of the Patent and Trademark Office's Proposed 
          Consolidation/Relocation...............................   270
      21. The Noxious Nine: The Worst Clinton Regulations of 1997   270
      22. Oversight of the Department of Transportation's 
          ``Proposed Statement of Enforcement Policy on Unfair 
          Exclusionary Conduct by Airlines''.....................   273
      23. Securities and Exchange Commission's Travel Oversight..   274
Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and 
  Criminal Justice...............................................   276
      1. National Drug Control Policy............................   276
      2. Immigration and Naturalization Service's Program 
          Citizenship USA........................................   297
      3. Department of Defense Inventory Management..............   301
      4. Combating Terrorism.....................................   306
      5. Oversight of the National Aeronautics and Space 
          Administration.........................................   326
      6. Oversight of the Census Bureau and Census 2000..........   328
Subcommittee on the Postal Service...............................   331
      1. General Oversight of the U.S. Postal Service: The 
          Inspector General of the Postal Service and the Board 
          of Governors...........................................   331
      2. General Oversight of the U.S. Postal Service: The 
          General Accounting Office and the Postmaster General...   334
      3. U.S. Postal Service: Little Progress Made in Addressing 
          Persistent Labor-Management Problems...................   337
      4. International Mail Market...............................   343
      5. Electronic Commerce.....................................   344
      6. Outsourcing.............................................   344
      7. Investigation of the Postmaster General: For Knowingly 
          Participating as a Government Officer or Employee in 
          Which he had a Financial Interest......................   345
      8. General Oversight of the U.S. Postal Service: The 
          Inspector General, U.S. Postal Service; the General 
          Accounting Office; the Postmaster General and Chief 
          Executive Officer......................................   346
      9. Oversight of Labor Management Issues....................   350
      10. Electronic Postal Diversion............................   350
      11. ``u.s.'' Domain Space..................................   351

                            III. Legislation

                            a. new measures

Subcommittee on the Civil Service................................   353
      1. H.R. 240, Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1997.   353
      2. H.R. 1316, to amend Chapter 87 of Title 5, United States 
          Code, with respect to the order of precedence to be 
          applied in the payment of life insurance benefits......   355
      3. H.R. 1836, Federal Employees Health Care Protection Act 
          of 1997................................................   356
      4. H.R. 2675, the Federal Employees Life Insurance 
          Improvement Act........................................   357
      5. H.J. Res. 56, celebrating the end of slavery in the 
          United States..........................................   358
      6. H. Con. Res. 95, recognizing and commending American 
          airmen held as political prisoners at the Buchenwald 
          concentration camp during World War II for their 
          service, bravery, and fortitude........................   358
      7. H. Con. Res. 109, recognizing the many talents of the 
          actor Jimmy Stewart and honoring the contributions he 
          made to the Nation.....................................   359
      8. H.R. 2526, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to make 
          the percentage limitations on individual contributions 
          to the Thrift Savings Plan more consistent with the 
          dollar amount limitation on elective deferrals, and for 
          other purposes.........................................   359
      9. H.R. 2566, the Civil Service Retirement System Actuarial 
          Redeposit Act of 1998..................................   359
      10. H.R. 2943, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to 
          increase the amount of leave time available to a 
          Federal employee in any year in connection with serving 
          as an organ donor, and for other purposes..............   360
      11. H.R. 3249, the Federal Retirement Coverage Corrections 
          Act....................................................   360
      12. H.R. 4259, the Haskell Indian Nations University and 
          Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute 
          Administrative Systems Act of 1998.....................   365
      13. H.R. 4280, to provide for greater access to child care 
          services for Federal employees.........................   366
      14. S. 1021, the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 
          1998...................................................   366
      15. H. Con. Res. 302, recognizing the importance of 
          children and families in the United States and 
          expressing support for the goals of National KidsDay 
          and National Family Month..............................   366
      16. H. Res. 520, congratulating Mark McGwire of the St. 
          Louis Cardinals for breaking the Major League Baseball 
          single season home run record..........................   367
      17. H. Res. 536, congratulating Sammy Sosa of the Chicago 
          Cubs for tying the current major league record for home 
          runs in one season.....................................   367
      18. H. Res. 590, recognizing and honoring Hunter Scott for 
          his efforts to honor the memory of the captain and crew 
          of the U.S.S. Indianapolis and for the outstanding 
          example he has set for the young people of the United 
          States.................................................   367
      19. S. Con. Res. 83, remembering the life of George 
          Washington and his contributions to the Nation.........   368
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia.........................   368
      1. H.R. 514, to permit the waiver of District of Columbia 
          residency requirements for certain employees of the 
          Office of Inspector General of the District of 
          Columbia, and for other purposes.......................   368
      2. H.R. 2015, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997..............   369
      3. H.R. 3025, to amend the Federal charter for Group 
          Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc., and for 
          other purposes.........................................   373
      4. H.R. 1963, mark-up on the National Capital 
          Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 
          1997...................................................   373
      5. Mark-up on H.R. 4523; H.R. 4566; and H.R. 4568..........   374
      6. H.R. 513, to exempt certain contracts entered into by 
          the government of the District of Columbia from review 
          by the council of the District of Columbia.............   374
      7. H.R. 4237, to amend the District of Columbia Convention 
          Center and Sports Arena Authorization Act of 1995 to 
          revise the revenues and activities covered under such 
          act, and for other purposes............................   374
Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
  Technology.....................................................   374
      1. H.R. 173, authorization to donate surplus law 
          enforcement canines to their handlers..................   374
      2. H.R. 680, transfer of surplus personal property for 
          donation to nonprofit providers of necessaries to 
          impoverished families and individuals..................   375
      3. H.R. 930, Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 1997..   376
      4. H.R. 404, to authorize the transfer to State and local 
          governments of certain surplus property for use for law 
          enforcement and public safety purposes.................   377
      5. H.R. 52, Fair Health Information Practices Act of 1997..   378
      6. H.R. 1962, Presidential and Executive Office Financial 
          Accountability Act of 1997.............................   379
      7. H.R. 716, Freedom from Government Competition Act of 
          1997...................................................   380
      8. H.R. 2508, A bill to provide for the conveyance of 
          Federal land in San Joaquin County, California, to the 
          City of Tracy, California..............................   381
      9. H.R. 2635, the Human Rights Information Act.............   381
      10. H.R. 2883, the Government Performance and Results Act 
          Technical Amendments of 1998...........................   382
      11. H.R. 2958, Quality Child Care for Federal Employees Act   382
      12. H.R. 2977, the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
          Amendments of 1997.....................................   383
      13. H.R. 3900, the Consumer Health and Research Technology 
          [CHART] Protection Act; and H.R. 52, the Fair Health 
          Information Practices Act of 1997......................   383
      14. H.R. 4007 and S. 1379, the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure 
          Act....................................................   384
      15. H.R. 4243, Government Waste, Fraud, and Error Reduction 
          Act of 1998............................................   385
      16. H.R. 4244, Federal Procurement System Performance 
          Measurement and Acquisition Workforce Training Act of 
          1998...................................................   385
      17. H.R. 4620, the Statistical Consolidation Act of 1998...   386
      18. S.J. Res. 58, recognizing the accomplishments of the 
          Offices of the Inspectors General......................   387
Subcommittee on Human Resources..................................   388
      1. H.R. 399, the Subsidy Termination for Overdue Payments 
          [STOP] Act.............................................   388
Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and 
  Criminal Justice...............................................   388
      1. H.R. 956, Drug Free Communities Act of 1997.............   388
      2. H.R. 2610/H.R. 4328, Reauthorization of the Office of 
          National Drug Control Policy...........................   390
      3. H.R. 3310, the Small Business Paperwork Reduction Act 
          Amendments of 1998.....................................   393
      4. H.R. 1704, the Congressional Office of Regulatory 
          Analysis Creation Act..................................   394
Subcommittee on the Postal Service...............................   395
      1. H.R. 22, the Postal Reform Act of 1997..................   395
      2. H.R. 282, to designate the United States Post Office 
          building located at 153 East 110th Street, New York, 
          New York, as the ``Oscar Garcia Rivera Post Office 
          Building''.............................................   398
      3. H.R. 499, to designate the facility of the United States 
          Postal Service under construction at 7411 Barlite 
          Boulevard in San Antonio, Texas, as the ``Frank M. 
          Tejada Post Office Building''..........................   399
      4. H.R. 681, to designate the United States Post Office 
          building located at 313 East Broadway in Glendale, 
          California, as the ``Carlos J. Moorehead Post Office 
          Building''.............................................   399
      5. H.R. 1057, to designate the building in Indianapolis, 
          Indiana, which houses the operations of the Circle City 
          Station Post Office as the ``Andrew Jacobs, Jr. Post 
          Office Building''......................................   400
      6. H.R. 1058, to designate the facility of the United 
          States Postal Service under construction at 150 West 
          Margaret Drive in Terre Haute, Indiana as the ``John T. 
          Myers Post Office Building''...........................   400
      7. H.R. 1231, the ``Post Office Relocation Act of 1997''...   401
      8. H.R. 1254, to designate the United States Post Office 
          building located at Bennett and Kansas Avenue in 
          Springfield, Missouri, as the ``John N. Griesemer Post 
          Office Building''......................................   401
      9. H.R. 1585, to allow postal patrons to contribute to 
          funding for breast cancer research through the 
          voluntary purchase of certain specially issued U.S. 
          postage stamps.........................................   402
      10. H.R. 2013, to designate the facility of the United 
          States Postal Service located at 551 Kingstown Road in 
          South Kingston, Rhode Island, as the ``David B. 
          Champagne Post Office Building''.......................   403
      11. H.R. 2015, Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (also known as 
          the Budget Reconciliation bill)........................   403
      12. H.R. 2129, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 150 North 3rd Street in Steubenville, Ohio, 
          as the ``Douglas Applegate Post Office''...............   404
      13. H.R. 2378 (S. 1023), making appropriations for the 
          Treasury Department, the U.S. Postal Service, the 
          Executive Office of the President, and certain 
          independent agencies, for the fiscal year ending 
          September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.............   405
      14. H.R. 2564, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 450 North Centre Street in Pottsville, 
          Pennsylvania, as the ``Peter J. McCloskey Postal 
          Facility''.............................................   406
      15. S. 1378, a bill to extend the authorization of use of 
          official mail in the location and recovery of missing 
          children, and for other purposes.......................   406
      16. H.R. 2348, to redesignate the Federal building located 
          at 701 South Santa Fe Avenue in Compton, California, 
          and known as the Compton Main Post Office, as the 
          ``Mervyn Dymally Post Office Building''................   407
      17. H.R. 2349, a bill to redesignate the Federal building 
          located at 10301 South Compton Avenue, in Los Angeles, 
          California, and known as the Watts Finance Office, as 
          the ``Augustus F. Hawkins Post Office Building''.......   408
      18. H.R. 2623, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 1625 Highway 603, Kiln, Mississippi as the 
          ``Ray J. Favre Post Office Building''..................   408
      19. H.R. 2766, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 215 East Jackson Street in Painesville, 
          Ohio, as the ``Karl Bernal Post Office Building''......   409
      20. H.R. 2773, to designate the facility of the United 
          States Postal Service located at 3750 North Kedzie 
          Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``Daniel J. Doffyn 
          Post Office Building''.................................   410
      21. H.R. 2798, to redesignate the building of the United 
          States Postal Service located at 2419 West Monroe 
          Street, in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``Nancy B. 
          Jefferson Post Office Building''.......................   410
      22. H.R. 2799, to redesignate the building of the United 
          States Postal Service located at 324 South Laramie 
          Street, In Chicago, Illinois, as the ``Reverent Milton 
          R. Brunson Post Office Building''......................   411
      23. H.R. 2836, to designate the building of the United 
          States Postal Service located at 180 East Kellogg 
          Boulevard in Saint Paul, Minnesota, as the ``Eugene J. 
          McCarthy Post Office Building''........................   412
      24. H.R. 3120, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 95 West 100 South Street in Provo, Utah, as 
          the ``Howard C. Nielson Post Office Building''.........   413
      25. H.R. 3167, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 297 Larkfield Road in East Northport, New 
          York, as the ``Jerome Anthony Ambro, Jr., Post Office 
          Building''.............................................   414
      26. H.R. 3630, to redesignate the facility of the United 
          States Postal Service located at 9719 Candelaria Road 
          N.E. in Albuquerque, New Mexico, as the ``Steven Schiff 
          Post Office''..........................................   414
      27. H.R. 3725, to make the Occupational Safety and Health 
          Act of 1970 applicable to the U.S. Postal Service in 
          the same manner as any other employee..................   415
      28. H.R. 3808, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 47526 Clipper Drive in Plymouth, Michigan as 
          the ``Carl D. Pursell Post Office''....................   417
      29. H.R. 3810, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 202 Center Street in Garwood, New Jersey as 
          the ``James T. Leonard, Sr. Post Office''..............   417
      30. H.R. 3846, to designate the post office located at 203 
          West Paige Street, in Tompkinsville, Kentucky, as the 
          ``Tim Lee Carter Post Office Building''................   418
      31. H.R. 3939, to designate the United States Postal 
          Service building located at 658 63rd Street, 
          Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the ``Edgar C. Campbell, 
          Sr., Post Office Building..............................   419
      32. H.R. 3999, to designate the United States Postal 
          Service building located at 5209 Greene Street, 
          Philadelphia, Pennsylvania as the ``David P. 
          Richardson, Jr., Post Office Building''................   419
      33. H.R. 4000, to designate the United States Postal 
          Service building located at 400 Edgmont Avenue, 
          Chester, Pennsylvania, as the ``Thomas P. Foglietta 
          Post Office Building''.................................   420
      34. H.R. 4001, to designate the United States Postal 
          Service building located at 2601 North 16th Street, 
          Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the ``Roxanne H. Jones 
          Post Office Building''.................................   421
      35. H.R. 4002, to designate the United States Postal 
          Service building located at 5300 West Jefferson Street, 
          Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the ``Freeman Hankins 
          Post Office Building''.................................   422
      36. H.R. 4003, to designate the United States Postal 
          Service building located at 2037 Chestnut Street, 
          Pennsylvania, as the Max Weiner Post Office Building''.   422
      37. H.R. 4052, to establish designations for United States 
          Postal Service buildings located in Coconut Grove, Opa 
          Locka, Carol City, and Miami, Florida..................   423
      38. H.R. 4516, to designate the United States Postal 
          Service building located at 11550 Livingston Road, In 
          Oxon Hill, Maryland, as the ``Jacob Joseph Chestnut 
          Post Office Building''.................................   424
      39. H.R. 4616, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 3813 Main Street in East Chicago, Indiana, 
          as the ``Corporal Harold Gomez Post Office''...........   425
      40. S. 916, to designate the United States Post Office 
          building located at 750 Highway 28 East in 
          Taylorsville, Mississippi, as the ``Blaine H. Eaton 
          Post Office Building''.................................   425
      41. S. 985, to designate the United States Post Office 
          located at 194 Ward Street in Paterson, New Jersey, as 
          the ``Larry Doby Post Office''.........................   426
      42. S. 1298, to designate a Federal building located in 
          Florence, Alabama, as the ``Justice John McKinley 
          Federal Building''.....................................   427
      43. S. 2370, designate the facility of the United States 
          Postal Service located at Tall Timbers Village Square, 
          United States Highway 19 South, in Thomasville, 
          Georgia, shall be known and designated as the 
          Lieutenant Henry O. Flipper Station....................   427

           b. review of laws within committee's jurisdiction

Full Committee...................................................   428
Subcommittee on the Census.......................................   435
Subcommittee on the Civil Service................................   438
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia.........................   445
Subcommittee on Human Resources..................................   505
Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
  Regulatory Affairs.............................................   507
Subcommittee on the Postal Service...............................   507

                      IV. Other Current Activities

                  a. general accounting office reports

Full Committee...................................................   511
Subcommittee on the Census.......................................   520
Subcommittee on the Civil Service................................   525
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia.........................   553
Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
  Technology.....................................................   559
Subcommittee on Human Resources..................................   587
Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
  Regulatory Affairs.............................................   601
Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and 
  Criminal Justice...............................................   638
Subcommittee on the Postal Service...............................   643

                     b. other reports or statements

Subcommittee on Human Resources..................................   657

         V. Prior Activities of Current or Continuing Interest

Subcommittee on the Census.......................................   659
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia.........................   659
Subcommittee on Human Resources..................................   659
Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and 
  Criminal Justice...............................................   661
Subcommittee on the Postal Service...............................   662

               VII. Views of the Ranking Minority Member

Views of Hon. Henry A. Waxman....................................   663




                                                 Union Calendar No. 484

105th Congress                                                   Report
  2d Session            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                105-843

=======================================================================



 
  ACTIVITIES OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

                                _______
                                

January 2, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______


  Mr. Burton, from the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, 
                        submitted the following

                                 REPORT

  FINAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT 
  REFORM AND OVERSIGHT, 105TH CONGRESS, 1ST AND 2D SESSIONS, 1997 AND 
                                  1998

       PART ONE. GENERAL STATEMENT OF ORGANIZATION AND ACTIVITIES

             I. Jurisdiction, Authority, Powers, and Duties

    The Rules of the House of Representatives provide for 
election by the House, at the commencement of each Congress, of 
19 named standing committees, 1 of which is the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight.\1\ Pursuant to House 
Resolutions 12 and 13 (adopted January 7, 1997), and House 
Resolution 14 (adopted January 7, 1997), establishing the 
membership at 41. Subsequent membership was set at 42 pursuant 
to House Resolution 32 (adopted January 21, 1997), membership 
was decreased to 40 pursuant to communication to the Speaker on 
February 5, 1997, House Resolution 36 (adopted February 5, 
1997) filled the vacancies of the membership, on March 19, 
1997, membership was decreased to 43 pursuant to communication 
to the Speaker, House Resolution 108 (adopted April 9, 1997) 
increased the membership to 44, on April 17, 1997, membership 
was decreased to 43 pursuant to communica- 
tion to the Speaker, membership increased to 44 pursuant to 
House Resolution 120 on April 17, 1997, membership was 
decreased to 43 pursuant to communication to the Speaker on 
November 13, 1997, and on November 13, 1997, membership was 
increased to 44 pursuant to House Resolution 331. The death of 
a member on March 25, 1998, decreased membership to 43. 
Membership increased to 44 pursuant to House Resolution 429 on 
May 13, 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Rule X.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Rule X sets forth the committee's jurisdiction, functions, 
and responsibilities as follows:

                                 RULE X

         Establishment and Jurisdiction of Standing Committees

                 THE COMMITTEES AND THEIR JURISDICTION

    1. There shall be in the House the following standing 
committees, each of which shall have the jurisdiction and 
related functions assigned to it by this clause and clauses 2, 
3, and 4; and all bills, resolutions, and other matters 
relating to subjects within the jurisdiction of any standing 
committee as listed in this clause shall (in accordance with 
and subject to clause 5) be referred to such committees, as 
follows:

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            (g) Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

    (1) The Federal Civil Service, including intergovernmental 
personnel; the status of officers and employees of the United 
States, including their compensation, classification, and 
retirement.
    (2) Measures relating to the municipal affairs of the 
District of Columbia in general, other than appropriations.
    (3) Federal paperwork reduction.
    (4) Budget and accounting measures, other than 
appropriations.
    (5) Holidays and celebrations.
    (6) The overall economy and efficiency of Government 
operations and activities, including Federal procurement.
    (7) National archives.
    (8) Population and demography generally, including the 
Census.
    (9) Postal service generally, including the transportation 
of the mails.
    (10) Public information and records.
    (11) Relationship of the Federal Government to the States 
and municipalities generally.
    (12) Reorganizations in the executive branch of the 
Government.
    In addition to its legislative jurisdiction under the 
preceding provisions of this paragraph (and its oversight 
functions under clause 2(b) (1) and (2)), the committee shall 
have the function of performing the activities and conducting 
the studies which are provided for in clause 4(c).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   GENERAL OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES

    2. (a) In order to assist the House in--
          (1) its analysis, appraisal, and evaluation of (A) 
        the application, administration, execution, and 
        effectiveness of the laws enacted by the Congress, or 
        (B) conditions and circumstances which may indicate the 
        necessity or desirability of enacting new or additional 
        legislation, and
          (2) its formulation, consideration, and enactment of 
        such modifications of or changes in those laws, and of 
        such additional legislation, as may be necessary or 
        appropriate,
the various standing committees shall have oversight 
responsibilities as provided in paragraph (b).
    (b)(1) Each standing committee (other than the Committee on 
Appropriations and the Committee on the Budget) shall review 
and study, on a continuing basis, the application, 
administration, execution, and effectiveness of those laws, or 
parts of laws, the subject matter of which is within the 
jurisdiction of that committee, and the organization and 
operation of the Federal agencies and entities having 
responsibilities in or for the administration and execution 
thereof, in order to determine whether such laws and the 
programs thereunder are being implemented and carried out in 
accordance with the intent of the Congress and whether such 
programs should be continued, curtailed, or eliminated. In 
addition, each such committee shall review and study any 
conditions or circumstances which may indicate the necessity or 
desirability of enacting new or additional legislation within 
the jurisdiction of that committee (whether or not any bill or 
resolution has been introduced with respect thereto) and shall 
on a continuing basis undertake future research and forecasting 
on matters within the jurisdiction of that committee. Each such 
committee having more than twenty members shall establish an 
oversight subcommittee, or require its subcommittees, if any, 
to conduct oversight in the area of their respective 
jurisdiction, to assist in carrying out its responsibilities 
under this subparagraph. The establishment of oversight 
subcommittees shall in no way limit the responsibility of the 
subcommittee with legislative jurisdiction from carrying out 
their oversight responsibilities.
    (2) The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight shall 
review and study, on a continuing basis, the operation of 
Government activities at all levels with a view to determining 
their economy and efficiency.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c) Each standing committee of the House shall have the 
function of reviewing and studying on a continuing basis the 
impact or probable impact of tax policies affecting subjects 
within its jurisdiction as described in clauses 1 and 3.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONS OF COMMITTEES

    4. * * *
    (c)(1) The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
shall have the general function of--
          (A) receiving and examining reports of the 
        Comptroller General of the United States and of 
        submitting such recommendations to the House as it 
        deems necessary or desirable in connection with the 
        subject matter of such reports;
          (B) evaluating the effects of laws enacted to 
        reorganize the legislative and executive branches of 
        the Government; and
          (C) studying intergovernmental relationships between 
        the United States and the States, and municipalities, 
        and between the United States and international 
        organizations of which the United States is a member.
    (2) In addition to its duties under subparagraph (1), the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight may at any time 
conduct investigations of any matter without regard to the 
provisions of clause 1, 2, or 3 (or this clause) conferring 
jurisdiction over such matter upon another standing committee. 
The committee's findings and recommendations in any such 
investigation shall be made available to the other standing 
committee or committees having jurisdiction over the matter 
involved (and included in the report of any such other 
committee when required by clause 2(1)(3) of Rule XI).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    Rule XI provides authority for investigations and studies, 
as follows:

                                RULE XI

              Rules of Procedure for Committees in General

    1. * * *
    (b) Each committee is authorized at any time to consider 
such investigations and studies as it may consider necessary or 
appropriate in the exercise of its responsibilities under Rule 
X, and (subject to the adoption of expense resolutions as 
required by clause 5) to incur expenses (including travel 
expenses) in connection therewith.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (d) Each committee shall submit to the House, not later 
than January 2 of each odd-numbered year, a report on the 
activities of that committee under this rule and Rule X during 
the Congress ending at noon on January 3 of such year.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                            COMMITTEE RULES                            

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Power to sit and act; subpoena power

    (m)(1) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions 
and duties under this rule and Rule X (including any matters 
referred to it under clause 5 of Rule X), any committee, or any 
subcommittee thereof, is authorized (subject to subparagraph 
(2)(A) of this paragraph)--
          (A) to sit and act at such times and places within 
        the United States, whether the House is in session, has 
        recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold such hearings, 
        and
          (B) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the 
        attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the 
        production of such books, records, correspondence, 
        memorandums, papers, and documents as it deems 
        necessary.
The chairman of the committee, or any member designated by such 
chairman, may administer oaths to any witness.
    (2)(A) A subpoena may be authorized and issued by a 
committee or subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) in the 
conduct of any investigation or series of investigations or 
activities, only when authorized by a majority of the members 
voting, a majority being present. The power to authorize and 
issue subpoenas under subparagraph (1)(B) may be delegated to 
the chairman of the committee pursuant to such rules and under 
such limitations as the committee may prescribe. Authorized 
subpoenas shall be signed by the chairman of the committee or 
by any member designated by the committee.
    (B) Compliance with any subpoena issued by a committee or 
subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as 
authorized or directed by the House.

Use of committee funds for travel

    (n)(1) Funds authorized for a committee under clause 5 are 
for expenses incurred in the committee's activities; however, 
local currencies owned by the United States shall be made 
available to the committee and its employees engaged in 
carrying out their official duties outside the United States, 
its territories or possessions. No appropriated funds, 
including those authorized under clause 5, shall be expended 
for the purpose of defraying expenses of members of the 
committee or its employees in any country where local 
currencies are available for this purpose; and the following 
conditions shall apply with respect to travel outside the 
United States or its territories or possessions:
          (A) No Member or employee of the committee shall 
        receive or expend local currencies for subsistence in 
        any country for any day at a rate in excess of the 
        maximum per diem set forth in applicable Federal law, 
        or if the Member or employee is reimbursed for any 
        expenses for such day, then the lesser of the per diem 
        or the actual, unreimbursed expenses (other than for 
        transportation) incurred by the Member or employee 
        during that day.
          (B) Each Member or employee of the committee shall 
        make to the chairman of the committee an itemized 
        report showing the dates each country was visited, the 
        amount of per diem furnished, the cost of 
        transportation furnished, any funds expended for any 
        other official purpose and shall summarize in these 
        categories the total foreign currencies and/or 
        appropriated funds expended. All such individual 
        reports shall be filed no later than sixty days 
        following the completion of travel with the chairman of 
        the committee for use in complying with reporting 
        requirements in applicable Federal law and shall be 
        open for public inspection.
    (2) In carrying out the committee's activities outside of 
the United States in any country where local currencies are 
unavailable, a member or employee of the committee may not 
receive reimbursement for expenses (other than for 
transportation) in excess of the maximum per diem set forth in 
applicable Federal law, or if the member or employee is 
reimbursed for any expenses for such day, then the lesser of 
the per diem or the actual, unreimbursed expenses (other than 
for transportation) incurred, by the member or employee during 
any day.
    (3) A member or employee of a committee may not receive 
reimbursement for the cost of any transportation in connection 
with travel outside the United States unless the member or 
employee has actually paid for the transportation.
    (4) The restrictions respecting travel outside of the 
United States set forth in subparagraphs (2) and (3) shall also 
apply to travel outside of the United States by Members, 
officers, and employees of the House authorized under clause 8 
of rule I, clause 1(b) of this rule, or any other provision of 
these Rules of the House of Representatives.
    (5) No local currencies owned by the United States may be 
made available under this paragraph for the use outside of the 
United States for defraying the expenses of a member of any 
committee after--
          (A) the date of the general election of Members in 
        which the Member has not been elected to the succeeding 
        Congress; or
          (B) in the case of a Member who is not a candidate in 
        such general election, the earlier of the date of such 
        general election or the adjournment sine die of the 
        last regular session of the Congress.
The committee also exercises authority under a number of 
congressional mandates.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ For legislation imposing duties specifically on the committee, 
see, for example, sec. 203(e)(6) of the Federal Property and 
Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 484(6)(e)), relating to 
negotiated disposal of Federal surplus property. It requires that, with 
limited exceptions, explanatory statements be sent ``to the appropriate 
committees of the Congress'' in advance of negotiated disposal under 
the Act. It covers disposal of all real and personal property whose 
estimated fair market is over $15,000 in the case of personal property 
and over $100,000 in the case of real property. The current language 
stems from a 1988 amendment (Public Law 100-612), which retained the 
explanatory statement requirement but changed the dollar value 
thresholds, which theretofore had been $1,000 for both personal 
property and real property. The House and Senate Government Operations 
Committees are expressly identified as the appropriate panels in House 
Report 1763, 85th Congress, which accompanied the measure that 
contained the 1958 amendment. See also GSA's Federal Property 
Management Regulations at 41 CFR-47.304-12(d).
    [N. B. The further examples given in the original footnote text 
cover sections (section 414 of the 1969 Housing Act and section 304 of 
the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act) have been repealed. The 
reference to sections 191-194 of title 2, U.S. Code, does not deem 
pertinent here.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           5 U.S.C. Sec. 2954

            Information to committees of Congress on request

    An Executive agency, on request of the Committee on 
Government Operations of the House of Representatives or of any 
seven members thereof, or on request of the Committee on 
Government Operations of the Senate, or any five members 
thereof, shall submit any information requested of it relating 
to any matter within the jurisdiction of the committee.

                          18 U.S.C. Sec. 1505

Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

    Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct 
compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigation 
demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process 
Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any 
place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by 
other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to 
written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the 
subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits 
another to do so; or
    Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any 
threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or 
impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due 
and proper administration of the law under which any pending 
proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the 
United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of 
inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had 
by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint 
committee of the Congress--
    Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more 
than five years, or both.

                           31 U.S.C. Sec. 712

                 Investigating the use of public money

    The Comptroller General shall--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (3) analyze expenditures of each executive agency the 
Comptroller General believes will help Congress decide whether 
public money has been used and expended economically and 
efficiently;
    (4) make an investigation and report ordered by either 
House of Congress or a committee of Congress having 
jurisdiction over revenue, appropriations, or expenditures; and
    (5) give a committee of Congress having jurisdiction over 
revenue, appropriations, or expenditures the help and 
information the committee requests.

                           31 U.S.C. Sec. 719

Comptroller General reports

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    (e) The Comptroller General shall report on analyses 
carried out under section 712(3) of this title to the 
Committees on Governmental Affairs and Appropriations of the 
Senate, the Committee on Government Operations and 
Appropriations of the House, and the committees with 
jurisdiction over legislation related to the operation of each 
executive agency.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ For other requirements which relate to General Accounting 
Office reports to Congress and which affect the committee, see secs. 
232 and 236 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (Public Law 
91-510).
                       II. Historical Background

    The committee was initially named the ``Committee on 
Expenditures in the Executive Departments.'' Its antecedents 
are summarized in Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
Representatives, vol. VII, sec. 2041, p. 831 (1935), as 
follows:
          This committee was created, December 5, 1927, by the 
        consolidation of the eleven Committees on Expenditures 
        in the various Departments of the Government, the 
        earliest of which has been in existence since 1816. As 
        adopted in 1816, the rule did not include the 
        committees for the Departments of Interior, Justice, 
        Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor. The committees for 
        these Departments date, respectively, from 1860, 1874, 
        1889, 1905 and 1913.
    The resolution providing for the adoption of the rules of 
the 70th Congress discontinued the several committees on 
expenditures and transferred their functions to the newly 
created Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments:
          On March 17, 1928, the jurisdiction of the committee 
        was further enlarged by the adoption of a resolution, 
        reported from the Committee on Rules, including within 
        its jurisdiction the independent establishments and 
        commissions of the Government.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Examples of the wide-ranging scope of the committee's 
jurisdiction may be found in Cannon's Precedents, supra VII, secs. 
2042-2046, pp. 831-833 (1935).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From 1928 until January 2, 1947, when the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946 became effective, the committee's 
jurisdiction was set forth in Rule XI, 34, of the House Rules 
then in force (H. Doc. 810, 78th Cong., 2d Sess. (1945)), as 
follows:

                    POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES                    

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    34. The examination of the account and expenditures of the 
several departments, independent establishments, and 
commissions of the Government, and the manner of keeping the 
same; the economy, justness, and correctness of such 
expenditures; their conformity with appropriation laws; the 
proper application of public moneys; the security of the 
Government against unjust and extravagant demands; 
retrenchment; and enforcement of the payment of moneys due the 
United States; the economy and accountability of public 
officers; the abolishment of useless offices, shall all be 
subjects within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Expenditures in the Executive Departments.
    The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, section 121(b), 
as adopted in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of Rule XI, 8, of 
later Rules of the House (XI, 9, the 93d Congress), provided:

                   COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

    (a) Budget and accounting measures, other than 
appropriations.
    (b) Reorganizations in the executive branch of Government.
    (c) Such committee shall have the duty of--
          (1) receiving and examining reports of the 
        Comptroller General of the United States and of 
        submitting such recommendations to the House as it 
        deems necessary or desirable in connection with the 
        subject matter of such reports;
          (2) studying the operation of Government activities 
        at all levels with a view to determining the economy 
        and efficiency;
          (3) evaluating the effects of laws enacted to 
        reorganize the legislative and executive branches of 
        the Government;
          (4) studying intergovernmental relationships between 
        the United States and the States and municipalities, 
        and between the United States and international 
        organizations of which the United States is a member.
          (d) For the purpose of performing such duties the 
        committee, or any subcommittee thereof when authorized 
        by the committee, is authorized to sit, hold hearings, 
        and act at such times and places within the United 
        States, whether or not the House is in session, is in 
        recess, or has adjourned, to require by subpoena or 
        otherwise the attendance of such witnesses and the 
        production of such papers, documents, and books, and to 
        take such testimony as it deems necessary. Subpoenas 
        may be issued under the signature of the chairman of 
        the committee or of any subcommittee, or by any member 
        designated by any such chairman, and may be served by 
        any person designated by any such chairman or 
        member.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Paragraph (d) was adopted by the House Feb. 10, 1947.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Rule X, 1(h), of later Rules of the House, effective 
January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Congress), added the 
additional jurisdiction of general revenue sharing (formerly 
within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means), 
and the National Archives (formerly within the jurisdiction of 
the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service).
    Rule X, 1(j)(6), of later Rules of the House listed the 
additional jurisdiction of measures providing for off-budget 
treatment of Federal agencies or programs, which was added by 
sec. 225 of Public Law 99-177, the Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (December 12, 1985).
    The 1946 Act contained the following proviso:
          Provided: That unless otherwise provided herein, any 
        matter within the jurisdiction of a standing committee 
        prior to January 2, 1947, shall remain subject to the 
        jurisdiction of that committee or of the consolidated 
        committee succeeding to the jurisdiction of that 
        committee.
This proviso was omitted from the Rules of the House adopted 
January 3, 1954.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ H. Res. 5, 83d Cong. (99 Cong. Rec. 15). Cf. rules in H. Doc. 
562, 82d Congress, 2d session p. 328 and in H. Doc. 739, 81st Congress, 
2d session, p. 326.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Constitution (Art. I, sec. 5, cl. 2), ``Each 
House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings.'' Omission of 
the proviso made no substantive change, since the scope of the 
committee's jurisdiction prior to January 2, 1947, was embraced 
within the committee's jurisdiction as stated in existing rules 
and precedents.
    The committee's membership, which was fixed at 21 when it 
was consolidated on December 5, 1927, was increased to 25 when 
the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 became effective on 
January 2, 1947. In 1951, the committee's membership was 
increased to 27.\7\ From 1953 until January 1963, the 
committee's membership remained at 30.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ H. Res. 60, 83d Congress, 1st session (97 Cong. Rec. 194).
    \8\ H. Res. 98, 83d Cong. (99 Cong. Rec. 436); H. Res. 94, 84th 
Cong. (101 Cong. Rec. 484); H. Res. 89, 85th Cong. (103 Cong. Rec. 
412); H. Res. 120, 86th Cong. (105 Cong. Rec. 841); H. Res. 137, 87th 
Cong. (107 Cong. Rec. 1677).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Pursuant to H. Res. 108, 88th Congress, adopted January 17, 
1963, the committee was enlarged to 31 members. In the 89th 
Congress the membership of the committee was increased to 34 
through passage of H. Res. 114, January 14, 1965. The committee 
membership in the 90th and 91st Congresses of 35 was first 
established by H. Res. 128, 90th Congress, approved January 16, 
1967. The committee membership in the 92d Congress of 39 was 
established by H. Res. 192, approved February 4, 1971. It was 
raised to 41 by H. Res. 158, adopted January 24, 1973. The 
committee membership of 42 was established by H. Res. 1238, 
adopted July 17, 1974. It was increased to 43 by H. Res. 76 and 
101, adopted January 20 and 28, 1975. Membership was maintained 
at 43 in the 95th Congress by H. Res. 117 and 118, adopted 
January 19, 1977. The committee membership was set at 39 in the 
96th Congress by H. Res. 62 and 63, adopted January 24, 1979. 
The committee membership was set at 40 in the 97th Congress by 
H. Res. 44 and 45, adopted January 28, 1981. The committee size 
was increased to 41 by the adoption of H. Res. 370 on February 
24, 1982. Pursuant to House Res. 26 and 27, adopted January 6, 
1983, the committee membership for the 98th Congress was set at 
39.
    In the 99th Congress, the membership of the committee was 
set at 39, pursuant to House Res. 34 and 35, adopted January 
30, 1985.
    In the 100th Congress, the membership of the committee was 
set at 39, pursuant to House Res. 45 and 54, adopted January 21 
and 22, 1987, respectively.
    The committee membership in the 101st Congress was 
established at 39 by H. Res. 29 and H. Res. 45, adopted January 
19 and 20, 1989. In the 102d Congress, the membership of the 
committee was set at 41, pursuant to H. Res. 43, 44, and 45, 
adopted January 24, 1991. The committee membership was set at 
42 in the 103d Congress by adoption of H. Res. 8 and 9 on 
January 5, 1993; H. Res. 34 on January 21, 1993; H. Res. 67 on 
February 4, 1993; and H. Res. 92 and 93 on February 18, 1993. 
The membership was increased to 44 by the adoption of H. Res. 
185 on May 26, 1993 and H. Res. 219 on July 21, 1993. Beginning 
September 28, 1949, the moneys appropriated to the committee 
were, by House resolution in each session of Congress, 
available for expenses incurred in conducting studies and 
investigations authorized under Rule XI, whether made within or 
without the United States.\9\ In the 103d Congress, these 
matters are covered in paragraph (b) of clause 1 of Rule XI, as 
set forth above and by clause 5 of Rule XI. The funds for the 
committee's studies and oversight function during the first 
session of the 103d Congress were provided by H. Res. 107 
adopted March 30, 1993 (H. Rept. 103-38).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ See items under (1) in footnote 3, of the final calendar of the 
committee for the 93d Congress (Dec. 31, 1974).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The committee's name was changed to ``Committee on 
Government Operations'' by House resolution adopted July 3, 
1952.\10\ The Congressional Record indicates the reasons 
underlying that change in name were, in part, as follows: \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ H. Res. 647, 82d Cong. (98 Cong. Rec. 9217). The Senate had 
made a similar change of name on Mar. 3, 1952, after conference between 
the chairman of the House and Senate Committees on Expenditures in the 
Executive Departments to ensure both Houses would adopt the change in 
name. S. Res. 280, 82d Cong. (98 Cong. Rec. 1701-1702). See also S. 
Rept. No. 1231, 80th Congress, 2d Session, p. 3 (May 3, 1948).
    \11\ Letter of Feb. 19, 1952, from the chairman, Senate Committee 
on Expenditures in the Executive Departments, Senator McCellan to 
Senator Hayden (98 Cong. Rec. 1702).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          This committee is proposing the indicated change in 
        the present title, in view of the fact that it is 
        misleading and the committees' functions and duties are 
        generally misunderstood by the public.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    In suggesting the proposed change the committee based its 
decision on what it considers to be the major or primary 
function of the committee under the prescribed duties assigned 
to it to study ``the operations of Government activities at all 
levels with a view to determining its economy and efficiency.'' 
It was the unanimous view of the members of the committee that 
the proposed new title would be more accurate in defining the 
purposes for which the committee was created and in clearly 
establishing the major purpose it serves.
    On January 4, 1995, the 104th Congress opened with a 
Republican majority for the first time in forty years. The 
shift in power from Democrats to Republicans has resulted in a 
realignment of the legislative priorities and committee 
structure of the House of Representatives. Perhaps more than 
any other committee, the Government Reform and Oversight 
Committee embodies the changes taking place in the House of 
Representatives. The committee itself was created by 
consolidating three committees into one, resulting in budget 
and staff cuts of nearly 50 percent. The committees that were 
merged include the Committee on Government Operations, the 
Committee on the Post Office and Civil Service, and the 
Committee on the District of Columbia.
    In order to fulfill the Republican Contract with America, 
the committee held a record number of hearings and mark-ups, 
and members cast more votes during this 100 day period than in 
any of the previous committees' histories. Over the course of 
the first session, 295 bills and resolutions were referred to 
the committee and its subcommittees, and 180 hearings and mark-
ups were held. Five of these measures have been signed into 
law.
    In addition to its greatly expanded legislative 
jurisdiction, the Government Reform and Oversight Committee 
serves as the chief investigative committee of the House, with 
the authority to conduct governmentwide oversight. Because the 
committee only authorizes money for a small number of Federal 
agencies and programs, it is able to review government 
activities with an independent eye.
    The 105th Congress and the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight under the leadership of Chairman Dan Burton (R-
IN) enjoyed a productive year as Congress continued to move 
closer to its goals established with the Contract of America to 
seek to achieve a smaller, smarter, and more efficient common 
sense government.
    In addition to the committee's oversight responsibilities, 
the Government Reform and Oversight Committee has pursued an 
active, ambitious agenda throughout the 105th Congress with its 
ongoing investigation of suspected illegal activities during 
the 1996 elections. The committee and its eight subcommittees 
conducted 252 hearings during the 105th Congress. Hearings 
covered the following diverse range of subjects: the year 2000 
computer crisis; the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program; 
the Persian Gulf war veterans illnesses; oversight and 
implementation of the Results Act; the investigation of 
political fundraising improprieties; and the review of the Food 
and Drug Administration and its regulations respecting 
terminally ill patients and their ability to access desired 
treatments. The committee staff developed a web site 
(www.house.gov/reform) to post up-to-minute witness testimonies 
and reports for quick availability.

                           III. Organization

                         A. SUBCOMMITTEES \12\

    In the 104th Congress, significant steps were taken to 
reduce the number of committees, subcommittees, and the number 
of congressional staff. As a result, the Congress eliminated 
the District of Columbia Committee and the Post Office and 
Civil Service Committee. The jurisdiction of these committees 
were merged into the Government Operations Committee and its 
name was changed to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ The chairman and the ranking minority member of the committee 
are ex-officio members of all subcommittees on which they do not hold a 
regular assignment (Committee Rule 9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In order to perform its functions and to carry out its 
duties as fully and as effectively as possible, the committee 
under the leadership of its chairman, the Honorable Dan Burton 
of Indiana, at the beginning of the 105th Congress, established 
seven standing subcommittees, which cover the entire field of 
executive expenditures and operations. On November 13, 1997, 
the U.S. House of Representatives passed House Resolution 326, 
authorizing the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight to 
establish an eighth subcommittee to accomodate the need for 
extensive oversight over the census. The names, chairpersons, 
and members of these subcommittees are as follows:
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS, Dan Miller, Chairman; 
        members: Thomas M. Davis, John B. Shadegg, Vince 
        Snowbarger, Ron Lewis, Carolyn B. Maloney, Rod R. 
        Blagojevich, and Danny K. Davis.
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CIVIL SERVICE, John L. Mica, 
        Chairman; members: Michael Pappas, Constance A. 
        Morella, Christopher Cox, Pete Sessions, Elijah E. 
        Cummings, Eleanor Holmes Norton, and Harold E. Ford, 
        Jr.
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Thomas M. 
        Davis, Chairman; members: Constance A. Morella, Ileana 
        Ros-Lehtinen, Stephen Horn, Eleanor Holmes Norton, and 
        Thomas H. Allen.
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, INFORMATION, 
        AND TECHNOLOGY, Stephen Horn, Chairman; members: Pete 
        Sessions, Thomas M. Davis, Joe Scarborough, Marshall 
        ``Mark'' Sanford, John E. Sununu, Ron Lewis, Dennis J. 
        Kucinich, Paul E. Kanjorski, Major R. Owens, Carolyn B. 
        Maloney, and Jim Turner.
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES, Christopher Shays, 
        Chairman; members: Vince Snowbarger, Benjamin A. 
        Gilman, David M. McIntosh, Mark E. Souder, Michael 
        Pappas, (vacancy), Edolphus Towns, Thomas H. Allen, Tom 
        Lantos, Bernard Sanders, Thomas M. Barrett, and Dennis 
        J. Kucinich.
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL ECONOMIC GROWTH, NATURAL 
        RESOURCES, AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS, David M. McIntosh, 
        Chairman; members: John E. Sununu, J. Dennis Hastert, 
        Joe Scarborough, John B. Shadegg, Steven C. LaTourette, 
        Vince Snowbarger, Bob Barr, Pete Sessions, John F. 
        Tierney, Bernard Sanders, Harold E. Ford, Jr., Paul E. 
        Kanjorski, Gary A. Condit, Dennis J. Kucinich, and 
        (vacancy).
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY, INTERNATIONAL 
        AFFAIRS, AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE, J. Dennis Hastert, 
        Chairman; members: Mark E. Souder, Christopher Shays, 
        Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, John M. McHugh, John L. Mica, John 
        B. Shadegg, Steven C. LaTourette, Bob Barr, (vacancy), 
        Thomas M. Barrett, Tom Lantos, Robert E. Wise, Jr., 
        Gary A. Condit, Rod R. Blagojevich, Jim Turner, Elijah 
        E. Cummings, and John F. Tierney.
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE POSTAL SERVICE, John M. McHugh, 
        Chairman; members: Marshall ``Mark'' Sanford, Benjamin 
        A. Gilman, Steven C. LaTourette, Pete Sessions, Chaka 
        Fattah, Major R. Owens, and Danny K. Davis.

      B. RULES OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

    Rule XI, 1(a)(1) of the House of Representatives provides:

          The Rules of the House are the rules of its 
        committees and subcommittees so far as applicable, 
        except that a motion to recess from day to day, and a 
        motion to dispense with the first reading (in full) of 
        a bill or resolution, if printed copies are available, 
        are nondebatable motions of high privilege in 
        committees and subcommittees.

    Rule XI, 2(a) of the House of Representatives provides, in 
part:

          Each standing committee of the House shall adopt 
        written rules governing its procedures.

    In accordance with the foregoing, the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight, on February 12, 1997, adopted 
the rules of the committee. The rules read as follows:

                     Rule 1.--Application of Rules

    Except where the terms ``full committee'' and 
``subcommittee'' are specifically referred to, the following 
rules shall apply to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight and its subcommittees as well as to the respective 
chairmen.
        [See House Rule XI, 1.]

                           Rule 2.--Meetings

    The regular meetings of the full committee shall be held on 
the second Tuesday of each month at 10 a.m., when the House is 
in session. The chairman is authorized to dispense with a 
regular meeting or to change the date thereof, and to call and 
convene additional meetings, when circumstances warrant. A 
special meeting of the committee may be requested by members of 
the committee following the provisions of House Rule XI, 2(c)2. 
Subcommittees shall meet at the call of the subcommittee 
chairmen. Every member of the committee or the appropriate 
subcommittee, unless prevented by unusual circumstances, shall 
be provided with a memorandum at least three calendar days 
before each meeting or hearing explaining (1) the purpose of 
the meeting or hearing; and (2) the names, titles, background 
and reasons for appearance of any witnesses. The ranking 
minority member shall be responsible for providing the same 
information on witnesses whom the minority may request.
        [See House Rule XI, 2(b).]

                            Rule 3.--Quorums

    A majority of the members of the committee shall form a 
quorum, except that two members shall constitute a quorum for 
taking testimony and receiving evidence, and one-third of the 
members shall form a quorum for taking any action other than 
the reporting of a measure or recommendation. If the chairman 
is not present at any meeting of the committee or subcommittee, 
the ranking member of the majority party on the committee or 
subcommittee who is present shall preside at that meeting.
        [See House Rule XI, 2(h).]

                       Rule 4.--Committee Reports

    Bills and resolutions approved by the committee shall be 
reported by the chairman following House Rule XI, 2(l).
    Every investigative report shall be approved by a majority 
vote of the committee at a meeting at which a quorum is 
present. Supplemental, minority, or additional views may be 
filed following House Rule XI, 2(l)(5). The time allowed for 
filing such views shall be three calendar days, beginning on 
the day of notice but excluding Saturday, Sundays, and legal 
holidays (unless the House is in session on such a day), unless 
the committee agrees to a different time, but agreement on a 
shorter time shall require the concurrence of each member 
seeking to file such views. A proposed report shall not be 
considered in subcommittee or full committee unless the 
proposed report has been available to the members of such 
subcommittee or full committee for at least three calendar days 
(excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays) before 
consideration of such proposed report in subcommittee or full 
committee. An investigative report or oversight report will be 
considered as read if available, to the members, at least 24 
hours before consideration, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and 
legal holidays unless the House is in session on such days. If 
hearings have been held on the matter reported upon, every 
reasonable effort shall be made to have such hearings available 
to the members of the subcommittee or full committee before the 
consideration of the proposed report in such subcommittee or 
full committee. An investigative or oversight report may be 
filed after sine die adjournment of the last regular session of 
the Congress, provided that if a member gives timely notice of 
intention to file supplemental, minority or additional views, 
that member shall be entitled to not less than seven calendar 
days in which to submit such views for inclusion with the 
report.
    Only those reports approved by a majority vote of the 
committee may be ordered printed, unless otherwise required by 
the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                          Rule 5.--Proxy Votes

    In accordance with the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, members may not vote by proxy on any measure 
or matter before the committee or any subcommittee.
        [See House Rule XI, 2(f).]

                          Rule 6.--Roll Calls

    A roll call of the members may be had upon the request of 
any member upon approval of a one-fifth vote.
        [See House Rule XI, 2(e).]

                  Rule 7.--Record of Committee Actions

    The committee staff shall maintain in the committee offices 
a complete record of committee actions from the current 
Congress including a record of the rollcall votes taken at 
committee business meetings. The original records, or true 
copies thereof, as appropriate, shall be available for public 
inspection whenever the committee offices are open for public 
business. The staff shall assure that such original records are 
preserved with no unauthorized alteration, additions, or 
defacement.
        [See House Rule XI, 2(e).]

                   Rule 8.--Subcommittees; Referrals

    There shall be seven subcommittees with appropriate party 
ratios that shall have fixed jurisdictions. Bills, resolutions, 
and other matters shall be referred by the chairman to 
subcommittees within two weeks for consideration or 
investigation in accordance with their fixed jurisdictions. 
Where the subject matter of the referral involves the 
jurisdiction of more than one subcommittee or does not fall 
within any previously assigned jurisdiction, the chairman shall 
refer the matter as he may deem advisable. Bills, resolutions, 
and other matters referred to subcommittees may be reassigned 
by the chairman when, in his judgement, the subcommittee is not 
able to complete its work or cannot reach agreement therein. In 
a subcommittee having an even number of members, if there is a 
tie vote with all members voting on any measure, the measure 
shall be placed on the agenda for full committee consideration 
as if it had been ordered reported by the subcommittee without 
recommendation. This provision shall not preclude further 
action on the measure by the subcommittee.
        [See House Rule XI, 1(a)(2).]

                      Rule 9.--Ex Officio Members

    The chairman and the ranking minority member of the 
committee shall be ex officio members of all subcommittees. 
They are authorized to vote on subcommittee matters; but, 
unless they are regular members of the subcommittee, they shall 
not be counted in determining a subcommittee quorum other than 
a quorum for taking testimony.

                            Rule 10.--Staff

    Except as otherwise provided by House Rule XI, 5 and 6, the 
chairman of the full committee shall have the authority to hire 
and discharge employees of the professional and clerical staff 
of the full committee and of subcommittees.

                       Rule 11.--Staff Direction

    Except as otherwise provided by House Rule XI, 5 and 6, the 
staff of the committee shall be subject to the direction of the 
chairman of the full committee and shall perform such duties as 
he may assign.

                 Rule 12.--Hearing Dates and Witnesses

    The chairman of the full committee will announce the date, 
place, and subject matter of all hearings at least one week 
before the commencement of any hearings, unless he determines, 
with the concurrence of the ranking minority member, or the 
committee determines by a vote, that there is good cause to 
begin such hearings sooner. So that the chairman of the full 
committee may coordinate the committee facilities and hearings 
plans, each subcommittee chairman shall notify him of any 
hearing plans at least two weeks before the date of 
commencement of hearings, including the date, place, subject 
matter, and the names of witnesses, willing and unwilling, who 
would be called to testify, including, to the extent he is 
advised thereof, witnesses whom the minority members may 
request. The minority members shall supply the names of 
witnesses they intend to call to the chairman of the full 
committee or subcommittee at the earliest possible date. 
Witnesses appearing before the committee shall so far as 
practicable, submit written statements at least 24 hours before 
their appearance and, when appearing in a non-governmental 
capacity, provide a curriculum vitae and a listing of any 
Federal Government grants and contracts received in the 
previous fiscal year.
        [See House Rules XI, 2(g)(3), (g)(4), (j) and (k).]

                        Rule 13.--Open Meetings

    Meetings for the transaction of business and hearings of 
the committee shall be open to the public or closed in 
accordance with Rule XI of the House of Representatives.
        [See House Rules XI, 2 (g) and (k).]

                       Rule 14.--Five-Minute Rule

    (1) A committee member may question a witness only when 
recognized by the chairman for that purpose. In accordance with 
House Rule XI, 2(j)(2), each committee member may request up to 
five minutes to question a witness until each member who so 
desires has had such opportunity. Until all such requests have 
been satisfied, the chairman shall, so far as practicable, 
recognize alternately based on seniority of those majority and 
minority members present at the time the hearing was called to 
order and others based on their arrival at the hearing. After 
that, additional time may be extended at the direction of the 
chairman.
    (2) The chairman, with the concurrence of the ranking 
minority member, or the committee by motion, may permit an 
equal number of majority and minority members to question a 
witness for a specified, total period that is equal for each 
side and not longer than thirty minutes for each side.
    (3) The chairman, with the concurrence of the ranking 
minority member, or the committee by motion, may permit 
committee staff of the majority and minority to question a 
witness for a specified, total period that is equal for each 
side and not longer than thirty minutes for each side.
    (4) Nothing in paragraph (2) or (3) affects the rights of a 
Member (other than a Member designated under paragraph (2)) to 
question a witness for 5 minutes in accordance with paragraph 
(1) after the questioning permitted under paragraph (2) or (3). 
In any extended questioning permitted under paragraph (2) or 
(3), the chairman shall determine how to allocate the time 
permitted for extended questioning by majority members or 
majority committee staff and the ranking minority member shall 
determine how to allocate the time permitted for extended 
questioning by minority members or minority committee staff. 
The chairman or the ranking minority member, as applicable, may 
allocate the time for any extended questioning permitted to 
staff under paragraph (3) to members.

              Rule 15.--Investigative Hearings; Procedure

    Investigative hearings shall be conducted according to the 
procedures in House Rule XI, 2(k). All questions put to 
witnesses before the committee shall be relevant to the subject 
matter before the committee for consideration, and the chairman 
shall rule on the relevance of any questions put to the 
witnesses.

                     Rule 16.--Stenographic Record

    A stenographic record of all testimony shall be kept of 
public hearings and shall be made available on such conditions 
as the chairman may prescribe.

                  Rule 17.--TV, Radio, and Photographs

    An open meeting or hearing of the committee or a 
subcommittee may be covered, in whole or in part, by television 
broadcast, radio broadcast, and still photography, or by any 
such methods of coverage, unless closed subject to the 
provisions of House Rule XI, 3.

                Rule 18.--Additional Duties of Chairman

    The chairman of the full committee shall:
          (a) Make available to other committees the findings 
        and recommendations resulting from the investigations 
        of the committee or its subcommittees as required by 
        House Rule X, 4(c)(2);
          (b) Direct such review and studies on the impact or 
        probable impact of tax policies affecting subjects 
        within the committee's jurisdiction as required by 
        House Rule X, 2(c);
          (c) Submit to the Committee on the Budget views and 
        estimates required by House Rule X, 4(g), and to file 
        reports with the House as required by the Congressional 
        Budget Act;
          (d) Authorize and issue subpoenas as provided in 
        House Rule XI, clause 2(m), in the conduct of any 
        investigation or activity or series of investigations 
        or activities within the jurisdiction of the committee;
          (e) Prepare, after consultation with subcommittee 
        chairmen and the minority, a budget for the committee 
        which shall include an adequate budget for the 
        subcommittees to discharge their responsibilities;
          (f) Make any necessary technical and conforming 
        changes to legislation reported by the committee upon 
        unanimous consent; and
          (g) Will designate a vice chairman from the majority 
        party.

                     Rule 19.--Commemorative Stamps

    The committee has adopted the policy that the determination 
of the subject matter of commemorative stamps properly is for 
consideration by the Postmaster General and that the committee 
will not give consideration to legislative proposals for the 
issuance of commemorative stamps. It is suggested that 
recommendations for the issuance of commemorative stamps be 
submitted to the Postmaster General.

               Rule 20.--Interrogatories and Depositions

    The chairman, upon consultation with the ranking minority 
member, may order the taking of interrogatories or depositions, 
under oath and pursuant to notice or subpoena. Such 
authorization may occur on a case-by-case basis, or by 
instructions to take a series of interrogatories or 
depositions. Notices for the taking of depositions shall 
specify the date, time, and place of examination. Answers to 
interrogatories shall be answered fully in writing under oath 
and depositions shall be taken under oath administered by a 
member or a person otherwise authorized by law to administer 
oaths. Consultation with the ranking minority member shall 
include three business day's written notice before any 
deposition is taken. All members shall also receive three 
business day's written notice that a deposition has been 
scheduled.
    The committee shall not initiate contempt proceedings based 
on the failure of a witness to appear at a deposition unless 
the deposition notice was accompanied by a committee subpoena 
issued by the chairman.
    Witnesses may be accompanied at a deposition by counsel to 
advise them of their rights. No one may be present at 
depositions except members, committee staff designated by the 
chairman or ranking minority member, an official reporter, the 
witness, and the witness's counsel. Observers or counsel for 
other persons or for agencies under investigation may not 
attend.
    A deposition shall be conducted by any member or committee 
staff attorney designated by the chairman or ranking minority 
member. When depositions are conducted by committee staff 
attorneys, there shall be no more than two committee staff 
attorneys of the committee permitted to question a witness per 
round. One of the committee staff attorneys shall be designated 
by the chairman and the other shall be designated by the 
ranking minority member. Other committee staff members 
designated by the chairman or the ranking minority member may 
attend, but are not permitted to pose questions to the witness.
    Questions in the deposition shall be propounded in rounds. 
Each round of questioning shall last one hour. A member or 
committee staff attorney designated by the chairman shall ask 
questions first, and the member or committee staff attorney 
designated by the ranking minority member shall ask questions 
second. Thereafter, the member or committee staff designated by 
the chairman and the member or committee staff attorney 
designated by the ranking minority member shall ask questions 
in alternating rounds, until each side has had the opportunity 
to pose all questions to the witness.
    An objection by the witness as to the form of a question 
shall be noted for the record. If a witness objects to a 
question and refuses to answer, the member or committee staff 
attorney may proceed with the deposition, or may obtain, at 
that time or a subsequent time, a ruling on the objection by 
telephone or otherwise from the chairman or a member designated 
chairman. The committee shall not initiate procedures leading 
to contempt proceedings based on a refusal to answer a question 
at a deposition unless the witness refuses to testify after an 
objection of the witness has been overruled and after the 
witness has been ordered by the chairman or a member designated 
by the chairman to answer the question. Overruled objections 
shall be preserved for committee consideration within the 
meaning of clause 2(k)(8) of House Rule XI.
    Committee staff shall insure that the testimony is either 
transcribed or electronically recorded, or both. If a witness's 
testimony is transcribed, the witness or the witness's counsel 
shall be afforded an opportunity to review a copy. No later 
than five days thereafter, the witness may submit suggested 
changes to the chairman. Committee staff may make any 
typographical and technical changes requested by the witness. 
Substantive changes, modifications, clarifications, or 
amendments to the deposition transcript submitted by the 
witness must be accompanied by a letter requesting the changes 
and a statement of the witness's reasons for each proposed 
change. A letter requesting any substantive changes, 
modifications, clarifications, or amendments must be signed by 
the witness. Any substantive changes, modifications, 
clarifications, or amendments shall be included as an appendix 
to the transcript conditioned upon the witness signing the 
transcript.
    The individual administering the oath, if other than a 
member, shall certify on the transcript that the witness was 
duly sworn. The transcriber shall certify that the transcript 
is a true record of the testimony and the transcript shall be 
filed, together with any electronic recording, with the clerk 
of the committee in Washington, DC. Interrogatories and 
depositions shall be considered to have been taken in 
Washington, DC, as well as at the location actually taken once 
filed there with the clerk of the committee for the committee's 
use. The chairman and the ranking minority member shall be 
provided with a copy of the transcripts of the deposition at 
the same time.
    All depositions and interrogatories received pursuant to 
this rule shall be considered as taken in executive session.
    A witness shall not be required to testify unless the 
witness has been provided with a copy of the committee's rules.
    This rule is applicable to the committee's investigation of 
political fundraising improprieties and possible violations of 
law, and is effective upon adoption of a resolution, in the 
House of Representatives, providing the committee with special 
investigative authorities.

   Rule 21.--Letters Rogatory and International Government Assistance

    The chairman, after consultation with the ranking minority 
member, may obtain testimony and evidence in other countries 
through letters rogatory and other means of international 
government cooperation and assistance. This rule is applicable 
to the committee's investigation of political fundraising 
improprieties and possible violations of law, and is effective 
upon adoption of a resolution, in the House of Representatives, 
providing the committee with special investigative authorities.
                     IV. Activities, 105th Congress

                                SUMMARY

    1. In the 105th Congress, the committee approved and 
submitted to the House of Representatives 9 investigative 
reports. In addition, the committee issued 8 committee prints.
    2. In the 105th Congress, 458 bills and resolutions were 
referred to the committee and studied. Of these, the committee 
reported 53. In addition, 12 Memorials, 2 Petitions, and 7 
Presidential messages were referred to the committee.
    3. Pursuant to its duty of studying reports of the 
Comptroller General, the Congress officially received 1,410 
such reports during the 105th Congress, and the committee 
studied 95. In addition, 1,587 Executive Communications were 
referred to the committee under clause 2 of Rule XXIV of the 
House of Representatives.
    4. The full committee met 48 days during the 105th Congress 
while the subcommittees met a total of 305 days in public 
hearings, markups, and meetings.
    The significant actions taken by the committee with respect 
to these and a considerable number of other matters are 
discussed in detail below.

                        A. INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS

    During the 105th Congress, the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight approved and submitted to the Congress 9 
reports of an investigative nature.
    For convenience, the published reports are listed here with 
the names of the originating subcommittees. A more detailed 
discussion of the material will be found in part two below in 
the breakdown of the committee's activities by subcommittee:
          First Report (H. Rept. 105-37): ``A Citizen's Guide 
        on Using the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy 
        Act of 1974 to Request Government Records.'' 
        (Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, 
        and Technology)
          Second Report (H. Rept. 105-388): ``Gulf War 
        Veterans' Illnesses: VA, DOD Continue to Resist Strong 
        Evidence Linking Toxic Causes to Chronic Health 
        Effects.'' * (Subcommittee on Human Resources)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    * Denotes report accompanied by additional, dissenting, minority, 
separate, or supplemental views.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Third Report (H. Rept. 105-664): ``Making the Federal 
        Government Accountable: Enforcing the Mandate for 
        Effective Financial Management.'' * (Subcommittee on 
        Government Management, Information, and Technology)
          Report (H. Rept. 105-728): ``Contempt of Congress--
        Refusal of Attorney General Janet Reno to Produce 
        Documents Subpoenaed by the Government Reform and 
        Oversight Committee.'' * (Full Committee)
          Fourth Report (H. Rept. 105-827): ``The Year 2000 
        Problem.'' * (Subcommittee on Government Management, 
        Information, and Technology)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    * Denotes report accompanied by additional, dissenting, minority, 
separate, or supplemental views.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Fifth Report (H. Rept. 105-828): ``Investigation of 
        the Conversion of the $1.7 Million Centralized White 
        House Computer System, Known as the White House 
        Database, and Related Matters.'' * (National Economic 
        Growth, Natural Resources, and Regulatory Affairs 
        Subcommittee)
          Sixth Report (H. Rept. 105-829): ``Investigation of 
        Political Fundraising Improprieties and Possible 
        Violations of Law.'' * (Full Committee)
          Seventh Report (H. Rept. 105-820): ``Hepatitis C: 
        Silent Epidemic, Mute Public Health Response.'' 
        (Subcommittee on Human Resources)
          Eighth Report (H. Rept. 105-821): ``Medicare Home 
        Health Services: No Surety in the Fight Against Fraud 
        and Waste.'' (Subcommittee on Human Resources)

                             B. LEGISLATION

    The legislative jurisdiction of the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight covers a wide range of important 
governmental operations. In accordance with jurisdiction 
assumed from the former Committee on Government Operations, the 
committee receives all budget and accounting measures other 
than appropriations; all measures relating to the overall 
economy and efficiency of Government operations and activities, 
including Federal procurement, intergovernmental relationships, 
general revenue sharing (the latter subject was formerly within 
the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means), and the 
National Archives (formerly within the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Post Office and Civil Service); all reorganization 
plans and bills providing for the establishment of new 
departments in the executive branch such as the Department of 
Energy and the Department of Education; and most other 
reorganization legislation, examples of which are legislation 
to reorganize the intelligence community, international trade, 
and regulatory agencies. Other legislation includes debt 
collection and proposals relating to delinquent payments and 
paperwork reduction. It also receives legislation dealing with 
the General Services Administration, including the Federal 
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 and special 
bills authorizing the Administrator of General Services to make 
specific transfers of property, plus legislation dealing with 
the General Accounting Office, the Office of Management and 
Budget, the Administrative Expenses Act, the Travel Expenses 
Act, the Employment Act of 1946, and the Javits-Wagner-O'Day 
Act relating to the sale of products and services of blind and 
other handicapped persons. In addition, the committee has 
jurisdiction over the Freedom of Information provisions of the 
Administrative Procedure Act, the Privacy Act, the Government 
in the Sunshine Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee as well 
as the Inspector General Act.
    Rule X, 2(b) of the standing Rules of the House, requires 
the committee to see and review the administration of all laws 
in the legislative jurisdiction, and Rule XI, 1(d) requires 
that the committee report to the House thereon by the end of 
each Congress. The present report outlines the extent and 
nature of the committee and subcommittee activities 
constituting the review.
    During the 105th Congress, the committee studied 458 bills 
and resolutions referred to it and reported 53 to the House. 
The measures reported or ordered reported are discussed more 
fully in part two below. However, they are listed with the name 
of the subcommittee that initially considered them:
          H.R. 173, a bill to amend the Federal Property and 
        Administrative Services Act of 1949, to authorize 
        donation of surplus Federal Law Enforcement canines to 
        their handlers. (Subcommittee on Government Management, 
        Information, and Technology; passed House amended; 
        passed Senate June 26, 1997; Public Law 105-27.)
          H.R. 240, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to 
        provide that consideration may not be denied to 
        preference eligibles applying for certain positions in 
        the competitive service, and for other purposes. 
        (Subcommittee on the Civil Service; H. Rept. 105-40, 
        Pt.1; passed House amended on April 9, 1997; received 
        in Senate on April 10, 1997; referred to Senate 
        Committee on Governmental Affairs.)
          H.R. 282, to designate the United States Post Office 
        building located at 153 East 110th Street, New York, 
        New York, as the ``Oscar Garcia Rivera Post Office 
        Building.'' (Subcommittee on the Postal Service; passed 
        House October 21, 1997; passed Senate November 9, 1997; 
        Public Law 105-87.)
          H.R. 404, to amend the Federal Property and 
        Administrative Services Act of 1949 to authorize the 
        transfer to State and local governments of certain 
        surplus property for use for law enforcement of public 
        safety purposes. (Subcommittee on Government 
        Management, Information, and Technology; passed House 
        amended November 4, 1997; received in the Senate and 
        referred to Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on 
        November 13, 1997.)
          H.R. 514, to permit the waiver of District of 
        Columbia residency requirements for certain employees 
        of the Office of the Inspector General of the District 
        of Columbia, and for other purposes. (Subcommittee on 
        the District of Columbia, H. Rept. 105-29; Public Law 
        105-7.)
          H.R. 680, a bill to amend the Federal Property and 
        Administrative Services Act of 1949, to authorize the 
        transfer to States of surplus personal property for 
        donation to nonprofit providers of necessaries to 
        impoverished families and individuals. (Subcommittee on 
        Government Management, Information, and Technology; 
        passed House amended April 29, 1997; Roll Call Vote 
        418-0; passed Senate amended on July 9, 1997, and the 
        House agreed to these amendments on September 18, 1997; 
        Public Law 105-50.)
          H.R. 681, to designate the United States Post Office 
        building located at 313 East Broadway in Glendale, 
        California, as the ``Carlos J. Moorhead Post Office 
        Building.'' (Subcommittee on the Postal Service; passed 
        House October 21, 1997; passed Senate November 9, 1997; 
        Public Law 105-88.)
          H.R. 930, Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 
        1997. (Subcommittee on Government Management, 
        Information, and Technology; passed House amended April 
        16, 1997; received in the Senate and referred to the 
        Committee on Governmental Affairs; Public Law 105-264.)
          H.R. 956, to amend the National Narcotics Leadership 
        Act of 1988 to establish a program to support and 
        encourage local communities that first demonstrate a 
        comprehensive, long-term commitment to reduce substance 
        abuse among youth, and for other purposes. 
        (Subcommittee on National Security, International 
        Affairs, and Criminal Justice; H. Rept. 105-105, Pt I; 
        passed House amended May 22, 1997; Roll Call Vote 420-
        1; passed Senate; Public Law 105-20.)
          H.R. 1057, to designate the building in Indianapolis, 
        Indiana, which houses the operations of the Circle City 
        Station Post Office as the ``Andrew Jacobs, Jr. Post 
        Office Building.'' (Subcommittee on the Postal Service; 
        passed House amended June 17, 1997; Roll Call Vote 413-
        0; passed Senate November 9, 1997; Public Law 105-90.)
          H.R. 1058, to designate the facility of the United 
        States Postal Service under construction at 150 West 
        Margaret Drive in Terre Haute, Indiana, as the ``John 
        T. Myers Post Office Building.'' (Subcommittee on the 
        Postal Service; passed House June 17, 1997; Roll Call 
        Vote 416-0; passed Senate November 9, 1997; Public Law 
        105-91.)
          H.R. 1316, to amend chapter 87 of Title 5, United 
        States Code, with respect to the order of precedence to 
        be applied in the payment of life insurance benefits. 
        (Subcommittee on the Civil Service; H. Rept. 105-134; 
        passed House amended on June 24, 1997; received and 
        referred to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee 
        on June 25, 1997; Public Law 105-205.)
          H.R. 1553, to amend the President John F. Kennedy 
        Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 to extend 
        the authorization of the Assassination Records Review 
        Board until September 30, 1998. (Subcommittee on 
        National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal 
        Justice; H. Rept. 105-138, Pt. I; passed House June 23, 
        1997; passed Senate June 27, 1997; Public Law 105-25.)
          H.R. 1704, to establish a Congressional Office of 
        Regulatory Analysis. (Subcommittee on National Economic 
        Growth, Natural Resources, and Regulatory Affairs; H. 
        Rept. 105-441, Pt. II.)
          H.R. 1836, to amend chapter 89 of Title 5, United 
        States Code, to improve administration of sanctions 
        against unfit health care providers under the Federal 
        Employees Health Benefits Program, and for other 
        purposes. (Subcommittee on the Civil Service; H. Rept. 
        105-374; passed House amended on November 4, 1997 under 
        suspension of the rules; received and referred to the 
        Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs on November 5, 
        1997; Public Law 105-266.)
          H.R. 1962, to provide for the appointment of a Chief 
        Financial Officer and Deputy Chief Financial Officer in 
        the Executive Office of the President. (Subcommittee on 
        Government Management, Information, and Technology; H. 
        Rept. 105-331; passed House amended on October 21, 
        1997; Roll Call Vote 413-3; received in the Senate and 
        referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs on 
        October 22, 1997.)
          H.R. 2013 (S. 973), to designate the facility of the 
        United States Postal Service located at 551 Kingstown 
        Road in South Kingstown, Rhode Island, as the ``David 
        B. Champagne Post Office Building.'' (Subcommittee on 
        the Postal Service; passed House October 21, 1997; 
        passed Senate October 24, 1997; Public Law 105-70.)
          H.R. 2129, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 150 North 3rd Street in Steubenville, Ohio, 
        as the ``Douglas Applegate Post Office.'' (Subcommittee 
        on the Postal Service; passed House October 21, 1997; 
        passed Senate November 9, 1997; Public Law 105-97.)
          H.R. 2508, to provide for the conveyance of Federal 
        land in San Joaquin County, California, to the City of 
        Tracy, California. (Subcommittee on Government 
        Management, Information, and Technology; passed House 
        September 14, 1998; referred to Senate Committee on 
        Governmental Affairs.)
          H.R. 2526, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to 
        make the percentage limitations on individual 
        contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan more 
        consistent with the dollar amount limitation on 
        elective deferrals, and for other purposes. 
        (Subcommittee on Civil Service; H. Rept. 105-809.)
          H.R. 2564, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 450 North Centre Street in Pottsville, 
        Pennsylvania, as the ``Peter J. McCloskey Facility.'' 
        (Subcommittee on the Postal Service; passed House 
        October 21, 1997; passed Senate November 9, 1997; 
        Public Law 105-99.)
          H.R. 2566, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to 
        expand the class of individuals under the Civil Service 
        Retirement Systems eligible to elect the option under 
        which the deposit which is normally required in 
        connection with a refund previously taken may instead 
        be made up through an actuarially equivalent annuity 
        reduction. (Subcommittee on Civil Service; no written 
        report.)
          H.R. 2610, to amend the National Narcotics Leadership 
        Act of 1988 to extend the authorization for the Office 
        of National Drug Control Policy until September 30, 
        1999, to expand the responsibilities and powers of the 
        Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, 
        and for other purposes. (Subcommittee on National 
        Security, International Affairs and Criminal Justice; 
        passed House amended under suspension of rules on 
        October 21, 1997; received and referred to the Senate 
        Committee on the Judiciary; reported with amendment 
        November 6, 1997; no written report.)
          H.R. 2623, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 16250 Highway 603 in Kiln, Mississippi, as 
        the Ray J. Favre Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on 
        Postal Service; passed House September 9, 1998; 
        reported to Senate by Senate Committee on Governmental 
        Affairs September 25, 1998; no written report.)
          H.R. 2675, to require that the Office of Personnel 
        Management submit proposed legislation under which 
        group universal life insurance and group variable 
        universal life insurance would be available under 
        chapter 87 of Title 5, United States Code, and for 
        other purposes. (Subcommittee on the Civil Service; H. 
        Rept. 105-373; passed House amended on November 4, 1997 
        under suspension of the rules; received in the Senate 
        and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 
        on November 5, 1997; Public Law 105-311.)
          H.R. 2766, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 215 East Jackson Street in Painesville, 
        Ohio, as the Karl Bernal Post Office Building. 
        (Subcommittee on Postal Service; passed House February 
        24, 1998; reported to Senate by Senate Committee on 
        Governmental Affairs April 21, 1998; no written report 
        filed.)
          H.R. 2773, to designate the facility of the United 
        States Postal Service located at 3750 North Kedzie 
        Avenue in Chicago, Illinois, as the Daniel J. Doffyn 
        Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House February 24, 1998; reported to Senate by 
        Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs April 21, 
        1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 2798, to redesignate the building of the United 
        States Postal Service located at 2419 West Monroe 
        Street in Chicago, Illinois, as the Nancy B. Jefferson 
        Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House June 3, 1998; reported to Senate by Senate 
        Committee on Governmental Affairs September 25, 1998; 
        no written report filed.)
          H.R. 2799, to designate the building of the United 
        States Postal Service located at 324 South Laramie 
        Street, in Chicago, Illinois, as the Reverend Milton R. 
        Brunson Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal 
        Service; passed House June 3, 1998; reported to Senate 
        by Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs September 
        25, 1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 2836, to designate the building of the United 
        States Postal Service located at 180 East Kellogg 
        Boulevard in Saint Paul, Minnesota, as the Eugene J. 
        McCarthy Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal 
        Service; passed House February 24, 1998; reported to 
        Senate by Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs 
        April 21, 1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 2883, to amend provisions of law enacted by the 
        Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 to 
        improve Federal agency strategic plans and performance 
        reports. (Subcommittee on Government Management, 
        Information, and Technology; reported amended by roll 
        call vote (21-12) March 5, 1998; H. Rept. 105-429; 
        passed House (242-168) March 12, 1998; referred to 
        Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs.)
          H.R. 2943, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to 
        increase the amount of leave time available to a 
        Federal employee in any year in connection with serving 
        as an organ donor, and for other purposes. 
        (Subcommittee on Civil Service; reported July 23, 1998; 
        H. Rept. 105-752; passed House October 5, 1998.)
          H.R. 3120, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 95 West 100 South Street in Provo, Utah, as 
        the Howard C. Nielson Post Office Building. 
        (Subcommittee on Postal Service; passed House February 
        24, 1998; reported to Senate by Senate Committee on 
        Governmental Affairs April 21, 1998; no written report 
        filed.)
          H.R. 3249, to provide for the recertification of 
        certain retirement coverage errors affecting Federal 
        employees, and for other purposes. (Subcommittee on 
        Civil Service; reported amended July 14, 1998; H. Rept. 
        105-625, Pt. I; Committee on Ways and Means H. Rept. 
        105-625, Pt. II July 20, 1998; passed House July 20, 
        1998.)
          H.R. 3310, to amend chapter 35 of Title 44, United 
        States Code, for the purpose of facilitating compliance 
        by small businesses with certain Federal paperwork 
        requirements, and to establish a task force to examine 
        the feasibility of streamlining paperwork requirements 
        applicable to small businesses. (Subcommittee on 
        National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
        Regulatory Affairs; reported amended March 19, 1998; H. 
        Rept. 105-462, Pt. I; passed House (267-140) March 26, 
        1998; referred to Senate Committee on Governmental 
        Affairs April 2, 1998.)
          H.R. 3630, to redesignate the facility of the United 
        States Postal Service located at 9719 Candelaria Road 
        NE in Albuquerque, New Mexico, as the Steven Schiff 
        Post Office. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; passed 
        House (391-0) June 3, 1998; reported to Senate by 
        Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs September 25, 
        1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 3725, to make the Occupational Safety and Health 
        Act of 1970 applicable to the United States Postal 
        Service in the same manner as any other employer. 
        (Subcommittee on Postal Service; reported to House July 
        23, 1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 3808, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 47526 Clipper Drive in Plymouth, Michigan, 
        as the Carl D. Pursell Post Office. (Subcommittee on 
        Postal Service; passed House (389-0) June 3, 1998; 
        reported to Senate by Senate Committee on Governmental 
        Affairs September 25, 1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 3810, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 202 Center Street in Garwood, New Jersey, as 
        the James T. Leonard, Sr. Post Office. (Subcommittee on 
        Postal Service; passed House September 9, 1998; 
        reported to Senate by Senate Committee on Governmental 
        Affairs September 25, 1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 3939, to designate the United States Postal 
        Service building located at 658 63rd Street, 
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the Edgar C. Campbell, 
        Sr. Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal 
        Service; passed House September 9, 1998; reported to 
        Senate by Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs 
        September 25, 1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 3999, to designate the United States Postal 
        Service building located at 5209 Greene Street, 
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the David P. Richardson, 
        Jr. Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal 
        Service; passed House September 9, 1998; reported to 
        Senate by Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs 
        September 25, 1998; no written report filed.)
          H.R. 4000, to designate the United States Postal 
        Service building located at 400 Edgmont Avenue, 
        Chester, Pennsylvania, as the Thomas P. Foglietta Post 
        Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House October 5, 1998; received in Senate 
        October 6, 1998.)
          H.R. 4001, to designate the United States Postal 
        Service building located at 2601 North 16th Street, 
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the Roxanne H. Jones 
        Post Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House October 5, 1998; received in Senate 
        October 6, 1998.)
          H.R. 4002, to designate the United States Postal 
        Service building located at 5300 West Jefferson Street, 
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the Freeman Hankins Post 
        Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House September 15, 1998; referred to Senate 
        Committee on Governmental Affairs September 16, 1998.)
          H.R. 4003, to designate the United States Postal 
        Service building located at 2037 Chestnut Street, 
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the Max Weiner Post 
        Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House September 15, 1998; referred to Senate 
        Committee on Governmental Affairs September 16, 1998.)
          H.R. 4052, to establish designations for United 
        States Postal Service buildings located in Coconut 
        Grove, Opa Locka, Carol City, and Miami, Florida. 
        (Subcommittee on Postal Service; passed House October 
        9, 1998; received in Senate October 9, 1998.)
          H.R. 4243, to reduce waste, fraud, and error in 
        Government programs by making improvements with respect 
        to Federal management and debt collection practices, 
        Federal payment systems, and Federal benefit programs, 
        and for other purposes. (Subcommittee on Government 
        Management, Information, and Technology; passed House 
        October 14, 1998; received in Senate October 15, 1998.)
          H.R. 4244, to amend the Office of Federal Procurement 
        Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) to provide for 
        measurement of the performance of the Federal 
        procurement system, to enhance the training of the 
        acquisition workforce, and for other purposes. 
        (Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, 
        and Technology; reported amended July 23, 1998.)
          H.R. 4259, to allow Haskell Indian Nations University 
        and the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute each 
        to conduct a demonstration project to test the 
        feasibility and desirability of new personnel 
        management policies and procedures, and for other 
        purposes. (Full Committee; reported (20-16) July 23, 
        1998; H. Rept. 105-700, Pt. I; passed House October 6, 
        1998; passed Senate October 14, 1998; Public Law 105-
        337.)
          H.R. 4280, to provide for greater access to child 
        care services for Federal employees. (Subcommittee on 
        Civil Service; reported amended October 1, 1998 H. 
        Rept. 105-756, Pt. I; passed House October 5, 1998; 
        received in Senate October 6, 1998.)
          H.J. Res. 56 (S.J. Res. 11), Celebrating the end of 
        slavery in the United States. (Subcommittee on the 
        Civil Service; passed House June 17, 1997; Roll Call 
        Vote 419-0; received in Senate on June 18, 1997.)
          S. 916, to designate the United States Post Office 
        building located at 750 Highway 28 East in 
        Taylorsville, Mississippi, as the Blaine H. Eaton Post 
        Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House February 24, 1998; Public Law 105-161.)
          S. 985, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 194 Ward Street in Patterson, New Jersey, as 
        the Larry Doby Post Office. (Subcommittee on Postal 
        Service; passed House February 24, 1998; Public Law 
        105-162.)

                        OTHER LEGISLATIVE ACTION

    The following bills were referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. After analysis by committee 
staff members the committee was discharged from further 
consideration, and therefore, the bills were not reported. 
Latest action is shown:
          H.R. 497, to repeal the Federal charter of Group 
        Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc., and for 
        other purposes. (Subcommittee on the District of 
        Columbia; passed House under suspension of the rules; 
        Roll Call Vote 417-0; passed Senate with amendments on 
        November 8, 1997.)
          H.R. 499, to designate the facility of the United 
        States Postal Service under construction at 7411 
        Barlite Boulevard in San Antonio, Texas, as the ``Frank 
        M. Tejeda Post Office Building.'' (Passed House 400-0; 
        passed Senate; Public Law 105-4.)
          H.R. 513, to exempt certain contracts entered into by 
        the government of the District of Columbia from review 
        by the Council of the District of Columbia. 
        (Subcommittee on the District of Columbia; passed House 
        under suspension of rules; Roll Call Vote 390-7 on 
        March 6, 1997; received in the Senate and referred to 
        Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs on March 6, 
        1997.)
          H.R. 633, to amend the Foreign Service Act of 1980 to 
        provide that the annuities of certain special agents 
        and security personnel of the Department of State be 
        computed in the same way as applies generally with 
        respect to Federal law enforcement officers, and for 
        other purposes. (Subcommittee on Civil Service; passed 
        House October 5, 1998; passed Senate October 20, 1998; 
        Public Law 105-382.)
          H.R. 852 (H. Res. 88), to amend chapter 35 of Title 
        44, United States Code, popularly known as the 
        Paperwork Reduction Act, to minimize the burden of 
        Federal paperwork demands upon small businesses, 
        educational and nonprofit institutions, Federal 
        contractors, State and local governments, and other 
        persons through the sponsorship and use of alternative 
        information technologies. (Subcommittee on National 
        Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and Regulatory 
        Affairs; H. Rept. 105-7, Pt. 1; passed House; received 
        in the Senate.)
          H.R. 892, to redesignate the Federal building located 
        at 223 Sharkey Street in Clarksdale, Mississippi, as 
        the Aaron Henry United States Post Office. 
        (Subcommittee on Postal Service; rereferred to House 
        Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure April 
        24, 1997.)
          H.R. 1003, to clarify Federal law with respect to 
        restricting the use of Federal funds in support of 
        assisted suicide. (Subcommittee on Human Resources; 
        passed amended; passed Senate; Public Law 105-12.)
          H.R. 1254, to designate the United States Post Office 
        building located at Bennett and Kansas Avenue in 
        Springfield, Missouri, as the ``John N. Griesemer Post 
        Office Building.'' (Subcommittee on the Postal Service; 
        passed House amended September 16, 1997; passed Senate 
        November 13, 1997; Public Law 105-131.)
          H.R. 1585, to allow postal patrons to contribute to 
        funding for breast cancer research through the 
        voluntary purchases of certain specially issued United 
        States postage stamps. (Subcommittee on the Postal 
        Service; passed House amended; passed Senate July 24, 
        1997; Public Law 105-41.)
          H.R. 1778, to reform the Department of Defense. (H. 
        Rept. 105-133, Pt. I.)
          H.R. 2348, to redesignate the Federal building 
        located at 701 South Santa Fe Avenue in Compton, 
        California, and known as the Compton Main Post Office, 
        as the Mervyn Dymally Post Office Building. 
        (Subcommittee on the Postal Service; passed House 
        October 7, 1998; received in Senate October 8, 1998.)
          H.R. 2349, to redesignate the Federal building 
        located at 10301 South Compton Avenue, in Los Angeles, 
        California, and known as the Watts Finance Office, as 
        the Augustus F. Hawkins Post Office Building. 
        (Subcommittee on the Postal Service; passed House 
        October 12, 1998; received in Senate October 13, 1998.)
          H.R. 2366, to transfer to the Secretary of 
        Agriculture the authority to conduct the census of 
        agriculture, and for other purposes. (Subcommittee on 
        National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal 
        Justice; passed House October 21, 1997; passed Senate 
        November 10, 1997; Public Law 105-113.)
          H.R. 2676, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
        to restructure and reform the Internal Revenue Service, 
        and for other purposes.
          H.R. 2977, to amend the Federal Advisory Committee 
        Act to clarify public disclosure requirements that are 
        applicable to the National Academy of Sciences and the 
        National Academy of Public Administration. 
        (Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, 
        and Technology; passed the House November 9, 1997; 
        passed Senate November 13, 1997; Public Law 105-153.)
          H.R. 3025 (H.R. 497), to repeal the Federal charter 
        of Group Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc., 
        and for other purposes. (Subcommittee on the District 
        of Columbia; passed House November 13, 1997; passed 
        Senate November 13, 1997; Public Law 105-149.)
          H.R. 3167, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 297 Larkfield Road in East Northport, New 
        York, as the Jerome Anthony Ambro, Jr. Post Office 
        Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; passed House 
        September 9, 1998; referred to Senate Committee on 
        Governmental affairs September 10, 1998.)
          H.R. 3829, to amend the Central Intelligence Agency 
        Act of 1949 to provide a process for agency employees 
        to submit urgent concerns to Congress, and for other 
        purposes. (Subcommittee on Government Management, 
        Information, and Technology; placed on Union Calendar, 
        Calendar No. 468, October 20, 1998.)
          H.R. 3864, to designate the post office located at 
        203 West Paige Street, in Tompkinsville, Kentucky, as 
        the Tim Lee Carter Post Office Building. (Subcommittee 
        on Postal Service; passed House September 9, 1998; 
        referred to Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs 
        September 10, 1998.)
          H.R. 4237, to amend the District of Columbia 
        Convention Center and Sports Arena Authorization Act of 
        1995 to revise the revenues and activities covered 
        under such Act, and for other purposes. (Discharged 
        July 30, 1998; passed House July 30, 1998; passed 
        Senate July 31, 1998; Public Law 105-227.)
          H.R. 4250, to provide new patient protections under 
        group health plans. (Committee waived jurisdiction July 
        21, 1998; passed House (216-210) July 24, 1998; tabled 
        in Senate (50-47) October 9, 1998.)
          H.R. 4516, to designate the United States Postal 
        Service building located at 11550 Livingston Road, in 
        Oxon Hill, Maryland, as the Jacob Joseph Chestnut Post 
        Office Building. (Subcommittee on Postal Service; 
        passed House October 9, 1998; received in Senate 
        October 10, 1998.)
          H.R. 4550, to provide for programs to facilitate a 
        significant reduction in the incidence and prevalence 
        of substance abuse through reducing the demand for 
        illegal drugs and the inappropriate use of legal drugs. 
        (Subcommittee on National Security, International 
        Affairs, and Criminal Justice; passed House (396-9) 
        September 16, 1998; received in Senate September 17, 
        1998.)
          H.R. 4566, to make technical and clarifying 
        amendments to the National Capital Revitalization and 
        Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997. (Subcommittee 
        on District of Columbia; passed House October 10, 1998; 
        passed Senate October 14, 1998; Public Law 105-274.)
          H.R. 4614, to provide for the conveyance of Federal 
        land in New Castle, New Hampshire, to the town of New 
        Castle, New Hampshire, and to require the release of 
        certain restrictions with respect to land in such town. 
        (Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, 
        and Technology; failed House (230-168) October 5, 
        1998.)
          H.R. 4616, to designate the United States Post Office 
        located at 3813 Main Street in East Chicago, Indiana, 
        as the Corporal Harold Gomez Post Office. (Subcommittee 
        on Postal Service; passed House October 7, 1998; 
        received in Senate October 8, 1998.)
          H.R. 4857, to reduce waste, fraud, and error in 
        Government programs by making improvements with respect 
        to Federal management and debt collection practices, 
        Federal payment systems, Federal benefit programs, and 
        for other purposes. (See H.R. 4243; Committee 
        discharged October 20, 1998; passed House October 20, 
        1998; received in Senate October 21, 1998.)
          H. Res. 183, honoring the life of Betty Shabazz. 
        (Subcommittee on Civil Service; Committee discharged 
        July 31, 1997; agreed to by House July 31, 1998.)
          H. Res. 431, disapproving the manner in which 
        Representative Burton has conducted the Committee on 
        Government Reform and Oversights' investigation of 
        political fund-raising improprieties and possible 
        violations of law. (Considered as privileged matter May 
        14, 1998; tabled by House (223-196) May 14, 1998).
          H. Res. 440, expressing the sense of Congress that 
        the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight should 
        confer immunity from prosecution for information and 
        testimony concerning illegal foreign fundraising 
        activities. (Agreed to by House (402-0) May 19, 1998.)
          H. Res. 447, expressing the sense of the House of 
        Representatives regarding financial management by 
        Federal agencies. (Subcommittee on Government 
        Management, Information, and Technology; agreed to by 
        House (415-0) June 9, 1998.)
          H. Res. 452, expressing the sense of the House of 
        Representatives that the Board of Governors of the 
        United States Postal Service should reject the 
        recommended decision issued by the Postal Rate 
        Commission on May 11, 1998, to the extent that it 
        provides for any increase in postage rates. 
        (Subcommittee on Postal Service; agreed to by House 
        (393-12) June 22, 1998.)
          H. Res. 520, congratulating Mark McGwire of the St. 
        Louis Cardinals for breaking the Major League Baseball 
        single-season home run record. (Committee discharged 
        September 15, 1998; agreed to by House September 15, 
        1998.)
          H. Res. 536, congratulating Sammy Sosa of the Chicago 
        Cubs for tying the current major league record for home 
        runs in one season. (Committee discharged September 15, 
        1998; agreed to by House September 15, 1998.)
          H. Res. 590, recognizing and honoring Hunter Scott 
        for his efforts to honor the memory of the captain and 
        crew of the U.S.S. Indianapolis and for the outstanding 
        example he has set for the young people of the United 
        States. (Subcommittee on Civil Service; agreed to by 
        House October 10, 1998.)
          H. Con. Res. 61, honoring the lifetime achievements 
        of Jackie Robinson. (Subcommittee on the Civil Service; 
        passed House under suspension of rules; passed Senate.)
          H. Con. Res. 95, recognizing and commending American 
        airmen held as political prisoners at the Buchenwald 
        concentration camp during World War II for their 
        service, bravery, and fortitude. (Subcommittee on the 
        Civil Service; passed House on September 16, 1997, 
        under suspension of the rules; received and referred to 
        the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on September 17, 
        1997.)
          H. Con. Res. 102, Expressing the sense of the 
        Congress that the cost of government spending and 
        regulatory programs should be reduced so that American 
        families will be able to keep more of what they earn. 
        (Passed Housed under suspension of rules; Roll Call 
        Vote 386-20; received in the Senate on June 25, 1997.)
          H. Con. Res. 109, recognizing the many talents of the 
        actor Jimmy Stewart and honoring the contributions he 
        made to the Nation. (Passed House on September 16, 
        1997, under suspension of the rules; received and 
        referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on 
        September 17, 1997.)
          H. Con. Res. 302, recognizing the importance of 
        children and families in the United States and 
        expressing support for the goals of National Kids Day 
        and National Family Month. (Subcommittee on Civil 
        Service; passed House October 8, 1998; received in 
        Senate October 9, 1998.)
          S. 314, to provide a process for identifying the 
        functions of the Federal Government that are not 
        inherently governmental functions, and for other 
        purposes. (Subcommittee on Government Management, 
        Information, and Technology; passed House October 5, 
        1998; Public Law 105-270.)
          S. 1364, to eliminate unnecessary and wasteful 
        Federal reports. (Passed House amended (390-19) October 
        13, 1998; passed Senate amended October 21, 1998; 
        Public Law 105-362.)
          S. 1378, to extend the authorization of use of 
        official mail in the location and recovery of missing 
        children, and for other purposes. (Subcommittee on the 
        Postal Service; passed Senate November 5, 1997; passed 
        House on November 12, 1997; Public Law 105-126.)
          S. 2071, to extend a quarterly financial report 
        program administered by the Secretary of Commerce. 
        (Committee discharged September 28, 1998; passed House 
        September 28, 1998; Public Law 105-252.)
          S.J. Res. 58, recognizing the accomplishments of 
        Inspectors General since their creation in 1978 in 
        preventing and detecting waste, fraud, abuse, and 
        mismanagement, and in promoting economy, efficiency, 
        and effectiveness in the Federal Government. 
        (Subcommittee on Civil Service; passed House October 
        10, 1998; Public Law 105-349.)
          S. Con. Res. 83, remembering the life of George 
        Washington and his contributions to the Nation. 
        (Subcommittee on Civil Service; passed House October 
        15, 1998.)

                        C. REORGANIZATION PLANS

    The most recent authority of the President to transmit 
reorganization plans to Congress was reestablished by Public 
Law 98-614. Approved November 8, 1984, this authority expired 
on December 31, 1984. Legislation extending executive 
reorganization authority was not enacted during the 105th 
Congress.

                          D. COMMITTEE PRINTS

    Eight committee prints, resulting from work by the 
committee staff, were issued during the 105th Congress, as 
follows:
          ``Rules of the Committee on Government Reform and 
        Oversight, House of Representatives, Together with 
        Selected Rules of the House of Representatives 
        (Including Clause 2 of House Rule XI) and Selected 
        Statutes of Interest.'' (Full Committee.) (February 
        1997.)
          ``Title 5, United States Code: Government 
        Organization and Employees'' (Subcommittee on Civil 
        Service.) (February 1997.)
          ``Oversight Plans for all House Committees with 
        Accompanying Recommendations by the Committee on 
        Government Reform and Oversight, House of 
        Representatives (Required by Clause 2 of House Rule 
        XI).'' (Full Committee.) (March 1997.)
          ``Rules of the Committee on Government Reform and 
        Oversight, House of Representatives, Together with 
        Selected Rules of the House of Representatives 
        (Including Clause 2 of House Rule XI) and Selected 
        Statutes of Interest.'' (Full Committee.) (June 1997.)
          ``Title 13, United States Code--Census.'' (Full 
        Committee.) (January 1998.)
          ``Interim Report of the Activities of the Committee 
        on Government Reform and Oversight, First Session.'' 
        (Full Committee.) (March 1998.)
          ``Rules of the Committee on Government Reform and 
        Oversight, House of Representatives, Together with 
        Selected Rules of the House of Representatives 
        (Including Clause 2 of House Rule XI) and Selected 
        Statutes of Interest.'' (Full Committee.) (June 1998.)
          ``Title 39, United States Code--U.S. Postal Service 
        and Selected Additional Provisions of Law.'' 
        (Subcommittee on the Postal Service.) (December 1998.)

       E. COMMITTEE ACTION ON REPORTS OF THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL

    Rule X, 4(c)(1)(A), of the rules of the House, imposes the 
duty upon this committee to receive and examine reports of the 
Comptroller General referred to and to make such 
recommendations to the House as it deems necessary or desirable 
in connection with the subject matter of the reports.
    In discharging this responsibility, each report of the 
Comptroller General received by the committee is studied and 
analyzed by the staff and referred to a subcommittee for 
action. Furthermore, in implementation of section 236 of the 
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, the committee regularly 
receives GAO reports that are not addressed to Congress but 
contain recommendations to heads of the Federal agencies. The 
committee received a total of 1,410 such GAO reports to Federal 
agencies or other committees and Members within the legislative 
branch.
    Periodic reports are received from the subcommittees on 
actions taken with respect to individual reports, and monthly 
reports are made to the chairman as to reports received. During 
the session, the committees used the reports to further 
specific investigations and reviews. In most cases, additional 
information concerning the findings and recommendations of the 
Comptroller General was requested and received from the 
administrative agency involved, as well as from the General 
Accounting Office. More specific information on the actions 
taken appears in part two below.
    Complete files are maintained by the committee on all 
Comptroller General's reports received. Detailed records are 
kept showing the subcommittee to which the report is referred, 
the date of referral, and the subsequent action taken.
    The committee will review all of the Comptroller General's 
reports received during the Congress in the light of additional 
information obtained and actions taken by the subcommittees, 
and determinations will be made whether specific 
recommendations to the House are necessary or desirable under 
Rule X.
                PART TWO. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES

                 I. Matters of Interest, Full Committee

                               A. GENERAL

1. Oversight Plans of the Committees of the U.S. House of 
        Representatives.
    The 104th Congress adopted a new Rule that provides for 
each standing committee of the House to formally adopt 
oversight plans at the beginning of each year. Specifically, 
the Rule states in part:

          Rule X, clause (2)(d)(1). Not later than February 15 
        of the first session of a Congress, each standing 
        committee of the House shall, in a meeting that is open 
        to the public and with a quorum present, adopt its 
        oversight plans for that Congress. Such plans shall be 
        submitted simultaneously to the Committee on Government 
        Reform and Oversight and to the Committee on House 
        Oversight.

    On March 31, 1997, Committee Chairman Dan Burton submitted 
the oversight plans of each House committee together with 
recommendations to ensure the most effective coordination of 
such plans.

  RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

             Oversight Plans of the Committees of the House

    Congressional oversight, as envisioned by the majority 
leadership of the House, is ultimately about the public 
interest, the liberty of citizens, and the taxpayers' dollars. 
The ability, and duty, of popularly-elected representatives to 
oversee the executive branch is a fundamental component of the 
system of checks and balances established by the founding 
fathers. The Rules of the House of Representatives ensure 
Congress' responsibility to the public in this regard. Pursuant 
to House Rule X, clause 2(b)(1), each standing committee of the 
House ``shall review and study, on a continuing basis, the 
application, administration, execution, and effectiveness of 
those laws, or parts of laws, the subject matter of which is 
within the jurisdiction of the committee and the organization 
and operation of the Federal agencies and entities having 
responsibilities in or for the administration and execution 
thereof, in order to determine whether such laws and the 
programs thereunder are being implemented and carried out in 
accordance with the intent of the Congress and whether such 
programs should be continued, curtailed, or eliminated.''
    Congressional oversight in the 105th Congress should focus 
on three fundamental efforts:
          (1) Review the implementation by the Executive Branch 
        of recent policy changes enacted by Congress to assess 
        their effectiveness. Congress enacted significant 
        reform legislation in the 104th Congress. These reforms 
        include the termination of 270 useless Federal 
        programs, offices, agencies and projects, and the 
        privatization of four major government programs. Other 
        reform efforts, such as the Unfunded Federal Mandates 
        Reform Act, the Federal Acquisition Reform Act, the 
        Line-Item Veto Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, the 
        Debt Collection Improvement Act, and the Information 
        Technology Management Reform Act, will enhance 
        management practices governmentwide, and help reduce 
        unnecessary burdens placed upon State and local 
        governments. Still other legislative reforms make 
        improvements in specific programs areas. These include 
        the enactment of comprehensive welfare reform, 
        telecommunications reform, and lawsuit abuse reform. 
        Many of these reforms have already resulted in major 
        cost savings and improvements in the efficiency of the 
        Federal Government. But they will need continued 
        monitoring and oversight by the Congress to ensure 
        their success as effective legislative changes. In 
        their oversight plans for the 105th Congress, House 
        committees recognize the importance of their 
        responsibility to oversee the implementation of recent 
        legislative reforms. The Government Reform and 
        Oversight Committee recommends that committees fully 
        utilize the auditing and oversight services of the 
        General Accounting Office, the Congressional Research 
        Service, and agency Inspectors General to augment their 
        efforts to oversee implementation of these critical 
        legislative reforms.
          (2) Review existing Government programs in order to 
        inform the public and build a compelling case for 
        further change and reform. While the legislative 
        successes of the 104th Congress are laudable, many 
        other opportunities for streamlining, improving 
        efficiency, and reducing costs to the American taxpayer 
        exist. The following committee oversight plans reveal 
        priority areas for programmatic and agency reform 
        efforts in the 105th Congress, including: fundamental 
        reform of the tax code; structural reform of the 
        Internal Revenue Service; Medicare reform; reform of 
        the Immigration and Naturalization Service; reform of 
        the General Services Administration; reform/
        restructuring of the Commerce Department, State 
        Department, Labor Department, and Department of Housing 
        and Urban Development; reform of the National Park 
        Service; deregulation of electric utilities; and, 
        reform of the U.S. intelligence community. All but a 
        small handful of House committees have incorporated 
        into their oversight plans their intentions with regard 
        to the GPRA, or Results Act. This important act 
        codifies the fundamental way Congress and the executive 
        branches should be assessing Federal Government 
        missions and activities. The Government Reform and 
        Oversight Committee recommends that each committee take 
        full advantage of the House Leadership's current 
        efforts to coordinate agency and program review as 
        legislated by the Government Performance and Results 
        Act of 1993. This includes reaching out to our minority 
        counterparts as well as the Senate.
          (3) Review Government programs to root out waste, 
        fraud and abuse, thereby maximizing accountability in 
        the Federal Government to the public. The merits of 
        Federal programs and activities are, of course, subject 
        to intense debate--particularly in times of budget 
        deficits and keen competition for limited Federal 
        resources. However, the importance of efficient, 
        effective, and honest management is not a debatable 
        issue. Fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement serve no 
        legitimate constituency or political interest. They 
        cheat both the taxpayers and the intended beneficiaries 
        of the programs and activities they affect. They also 
        undermine the confidence of the American people in the 
        capacity and will of the Federal Government to perform 
        its functions effectively. The Government Reform and 
        Oversight Committee recommends that committees 
        carefully review the findings in (1) the General 
        Accounting Office's ``High Risk List'' of 25 Federal 
        programs at risk for serious fraud, waste, and abuse; 
        (2) agency Inspector General semi-annual and annual 
        reports to Congress; and (3) the Government Reform and 
        Oversight Committee September 1996 Report entitled 
        ``Federal Government Management: Examining Government 
        Performance As We Near the Next Century.'' These 
        documents are an important source of serious problems 
        currently existing in the Federal Government that need 
        immediate attention by Congress.
    Collectively, the committee oversight plans cover a wide 
array of Federal programs and management issues. The challenges 
of dealing with the serious, pervasive problems that continue 
to impede effective management and efficient program delivery 
is formidable.
    A major breakthrough in prospects for improving Federal 
management, as well as congressional oversight of Federal 
programs, has been provided by two recent laws: the Chief 
Financial Officers Act and Government Performance and Results 
Act. Together, these acts provide a framework necessary to help 
achieve improved government accountability and stewardship and 
to lower costs by focusing on results. The Congress framed it 
this way: Set goals, operate programs, and measure results 
using reliable financial and management information.
    While these acts are still in the process of being 
implemented, efforts already completed or underway in response 
to both acts offer committees a valuable source of information 
and insight into the management problems and issues. These 
include issues that impact individual programs, as well as 
those that cut across agency programs and organizational 
boundaries.
    The committees of the House should: (1) conduct oversight 
to ensure that these statutes are being aggressively 
implemented, and (2) use the information produced by the 
implementation of these statutes and the General Accounting 
Office's [GAO] high risk list to assess the management 
weaknesses in the agencies within their jurisdiction.
2. Views and Estimates for Fiscal Year 1999.
    On March 24, 1998, pursuant to section 301(d) of the 
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, as 
amended by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Act of 1985, the committee submitted its views and estimates to 
the Committee on the Budget on matters that were included in 
the President's fiscal year 1999 budget within the committee's 
jurisdiction.
3. Investigations.
    a. Oversight of Implementation of the Government 
Performance and Results Act of 1993.--The Government 
Performance and Results Act (Results Act) is designed to 
provide policymakers and the public with systematic, reliable 
information about where Federal programs and activities are 
going, how they will get there, and how we will know when they 
have arrived. This is to be accomplished through agency reports 
to Congress providing strategic and performance planning. The 
act will only succeed if Congress then uses the information to 
better inform authorizing and budgetary decisionmaking.
    As described in the section on ``Review of Laws Within the 
Committee's Jurisdiction,'' the Government Reform and Oversight 
Committee has worked closely with the House Republican 
leadership during 1997 to educate and involve all congressional 
committees in the successful implementation of the Results Act. 
Part of that educational process has included two full 
committee hearings highlighting the potential of the act as a 
tool for more productive oversight and ultimately, better 
informed policy decisions.
    The first hearing, entitled ``The Government Performance 
and Results Act: Sensible Government for the Next Century,'' 
was held on February 12, and was chaired by Dan Burton. In his 
opening statement, Chairman Burton stressed the practical 
elements of the Act--setting performance goals and linking 
budget to performance--as such elements are often applied in 
private sector businesses. The chairman hoped that the hearing 
would signal to the administration and the American public the 
importance of using the Results Act to make sure citizens are 
getting what they expect and pay for from Federal programs.
    The lead witness, Majority Leader Dick Armey, testified 
regarding the importance the House Republican leadership places 
on the Results Act. He spoke of the opportunity the act 
presents for Democrats, Republicans and those in the executive 
branch to work together to improve the way Washington works--to 
alleviate waste, inefficiencies, ineffectiveness, fraud, and 
bad management. The majority leader stressed that for the act 
to be successful, each congressional committee and each elected 
representative must devote more attention to agencies' major 
plans and objectives, and show a new willingness to reexamine 
pet projects with an ear toward objective, credible information 
about the results of these programs. He concluded his prepared 
testimony by reiterating a point Chairman Burton had made about 
the Results Act's similarity to processes widely used by 
private businesses to enhance efficiency and effectiveness.
    The second panel of witnesses included James Hinchman, 
Acting Comptroller General of the General Accounting Office 
[GAO], and John Koskinen, Deputy Director for Management, 
Office of Management and Budget [OMB]. Mr. Hinchman testified 
that GAO had made three important conclusions as a result of 
examining management issues throughout the Federal Government. 
The first is that the Federal Government is rift with 
management problems. The second is that Congress has put in 
place a sound statutory framework for addressing such 
management problems, including the Chief Financial Officers 
Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Clinger-Cohen Act, and as 
cornerstone, the Results Act. And the third conclusion of the 
GAO is that Congress has an important role to play in the 
implementation of the Results Act, beginning with consultations 
with the agencies on their strategic plans. Mr. Hinchman also 
stressed the important role of congressional oversight hearings 
to improve management in Federal agencies.
    Mr. Koskinen, the last witness for this hearing, testified 
on behalf of OMB that the agencies had been encouraged to 
consult with Congress on their strategic plans for over a year 
(although at the time of the hearing, no consultations had 
occurred). He discussed OMB's guidance which had been issued 18 
months earlier on the preparation and submission of strategic 
plans. He indicated his belief that the draft agency strategic 
plans OMB had reviewed allowed them to conclude that the final 
plans due in the fall of 1997 would be useful and informative 
strategic plans.
    Another Results Act hearing entitled, ``The Results Act: 
Are We Getting Results?'' was held on October 30. Chairman 
Burton opened the hearing by expressing his disappointment in 
the dismal lack of compliance found in the agency draft 
strategic plans, and his greater disappointment that it 
appeared the final plans were only marginally improved over the 
drafts.
    For the second time, the lead witness was Majority Leader 
Armey, who was only able to give part of his testimony before 
being called to vote. His written statement reflected on a year 
of hard work that Congress and the executive branch agencies 
had dedicated to the implementation of the Results Act and the 
lessons we were learning from the experience.
    Others scheduled to testify included Franklin Raines, 
Director, Office of Management and Budget, James Hinchman, 
Acting Comptroller General, General Accounting Office, and the 
Honorable Maurice McTigue, distinguished visiting scholar, 
Center for Market Processes at George Mason University.
    b. Review of the Federal Government's Acquisition Strategy 
Regarding the Federal Telecommunications System 2001 Program.--
The Federal Telecommunications System 2000 [FTS 2000] is the 
Government's current long distance telecommunications service. 
The multi billion dollar program provides telecommunications 
services to approximately 1.7 million users across the Federal 
Government. The FTS program was largely successful leveraging 
the emerging competition in the long distance markets to save 
billions of dollars over the General Services Administration's 
[GSA] prior Federal Telecommunications Service network. The 
current FTS 2000 contracts were awarded in 1988, will expire in 
December 1998, with the awarding of the FTS2001 contracts 
anticipated in December 1998.
    The telecommunications industry has changed dramatically 
since the initial contracts were awarded: the array of 
available commercial services is broader; the number of service 
providers has increased; and the availability and nature of the 
underlying technologies themselves continue to change. The 
Government's needs for communications services has changed as 
well, for more advanced data and video services outdistancing 
growth in basic voice communication services. It is imperative 
that the FTS2001 program embrace an acquisition strategy that 
is based on commercial practices which maximizes the use of 
commercially available services to meet agency needs while 
following an appropriate strategy for managing complex 
Government operations.
    The committee's monitoring the development of the FTS2001 
procurement will ensure that the Federal Government receives 
the most technically effective and cost efficient 
telecommunications services. The Government and more 
importantly the taxpayer will be able to take maximum advantage 
of the economies associated with increasing competition in the 
new telecommunications environment. Through a combination of 
the best prices and excellent service quality the executive 
agencies will be able to do their jobs of serving the citizens 
more efficiently and effectively.
    The General Services Administration worked closely with the 
interagency group and a broad cross section of industry 
preparing an acquisition strategy. Initial proposals failed to 
take full advantage of telecommunications reform along with 
today's rapidly changing landscape of advancing technologies, 
new services, and emerging service providers. Working closely 
with this committee, GSA ultimately developed a proposal that 
addressed many of the issues raised by the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight and others which will enable 
the Government to take full advantage of the rapid changes in 
the telecommunications service environment. This procurement 
will make maximum use of commercial services and practices in 
designing solutions to the Government's requirements. It will 
also enable the Government to leverage its position as the 
country's largest user of telecommunications services to obtain 
the best prices for the taxpayers. GSA is proceeding with this 
FTS2001 acquisition strategy, which should be fully in place by 
the end of the calendar year.
    The committee held two hearings entitled, ``Federal 
Telecommunications System Acquisition Strategy,'' on March 6, 
1997, and ``Federal Telecommunications System Acquisition 
Strategy: An Industry Perspective,'' on March 12, 1997.
    c. The Committee's Investigation of Political Fundraising 
Improprieties and Possible Violations of Law.--At the beginning 
of the 105th Congress, the committee undertook a major 
investigation into political fundraising improprieties and 
possible violations of law relating predominantly to the 1992 
and 1996 elections. In the closing months of the 1996 campaign, 
there were numerous revelations about foreign money coming into 
the U.S. political system. The initial allegations concerned 
possible illegal fundraising conducted by Democratic National 
Committee [DNC] Finance Vice-Chair John Huang and Presidential 
appointee Charlie Trie, both long time friends of President 
Clinton. However, as the committee carried on its 
investigation, it uncovered evidence of serious illegalities in 
the 1992 and 1996 Presidential campaigns that involved a wide 
range of individuals, as well as foreign money from South 
America and Asia. During its investigation, the committee 
issued over 700 subpoenas, deposed over 130 witnesses, and held 
15 hearings. While the committee did uncover evidence of 
serious wrongdoing by a number of individuals involved in the 
1996 campaign, it was frustrated in its efforts to uncover the 
whole truth by persistent stonewalling. One hundred twenty 
witnesses either fled the country, refused to be interviewed, 
or invoked their fifth amendment privileges when contacted by 
the committee. A number of these individuals were close 
associates of the President, such as John Huang, Charlie Trie, 
Mark Middleton, and Webb Hubbell. In addition, the White House 
and DNC attempted to frustrate the committee's investigation 
through delayed responses to the committee's inquiries.
    In October 1998, the committee issued an interim report 
containing its conclusions to date regarding the investigation. 
Due to the unprecedented stonewalling faced by the committee, 
it was unable to complete the investigation and issue a final 
report. While the committee did not make any final conclusions 
about the precise role or actions of senior White House and DNC 
officials, including the President and Vice-President, in the 
campaign finance scandal, it will continue to explore their 
actions. The high level of suspicion surrounding the 
President's actions in the 1996 campaign has been noted by 
others. Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Louis Freeh 
and the former Justice Department Task Force Chief Prosecutor, 
Charles La Bella, already have told the Attorney General that 
the actions of those at the highest levels of the White House 
and DNC necessitate the appointment of an independent counsel 
under the mandatory provisions of the independent counsel law. 
Some have suggested that there might be a larger conspiracy to 
violate numerous election laws which necessitates an 
independent counsel.
    The committee's investigation largely focused on the 
political fundraising activities of John Huang, Yah Lin 
``Charlie'' Trie, Johnny Chung, and the Sioeng family. In the 
case of Ted Sioeng, he gave to Republicans as well as 
Democrats, and these Republican ties were investigated. Each of 
these individuals was involved in contributing or soliciting 
large amounts of money for the Democratic party between 1994 
and 1996. In addition, each had unusual access to the White 
House and to President Clinton personally. The committee 
uncovered millions of dollars worth of illegal or improper 
contributions that were made during the 1996 election. It also 
discovered a disturbing pattern of conduct by which individuals 
giving illegal and improper contributions were rewarded with 
unusual access to the President and the administration by the 
DNC and the Clinton White House.
    The investigation of the campaign finance scandal was 
designed in part to ensure that political parties follow the 
campaign finance laws that are currently in place. Federal 
election laws are designed so that those who are involved in 
the process of funding our election system are citizens or 
residents with a stake in the United States' system of 
democratic government. Federal laws are also designed to 
provide full disclosure to the American people about who is 
funding candidates for public office. U.S. election laws do not 
allow for contributions from foreign sources. When the laws 
governing our elections are broken, the very system designed to 
govern our free elections is threatened. If money is given 
illegally, that can, in and of itself, change the outcome in 
any given election. That is why tracking the huge infusion of 
foreign money from, among other sources, those with Communist 
Chinese Government ties, and determining how and why this was 
done, is so important.
    Masking donations through conduit donors is one way in 
which the true source of funds can be hidden, thereby 
increasing the influence of either a foreign or illegal source 
of money. Using conduit contributions also allows a single 
individual to make more hard dollar contributions than they 
would otherwise be allowed to make under law. An individual can 
give up to $20,000 in ``hard money'' to a party committee. When 
an individual provides conduit funds to a new individual who 
has not previously donated, that first $20,000 contributed by 
that conduit donor will also be counted as ``hard money'' 
donations. It should be noted that throughout the 1996 
campaign, there was a big push to obtain more hard money. Memos 
authored by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Harold Ickes, who 
coordinated the campaign, raised the issue of a shortage of 
``hard money'' throughout the 1996 campaign season.
    The committee has tracked hundreds of thousands of dollars 
in conduit contributions and learned that many illegal conduit 
funds have yet to be returned by the DNC and other Democratic 
entities. Now that it has been clearly established that much of 
the millions of dollars in illegal contributions came from 
foreign bank accounts or conduits, the troubling question 
persists: Were foreign sources of any kind buying access to the 
White House and trying to influence the 1996 elections?
    To date, the President, White House officials and DNC 
officials all claim no prior knowledge of the massive amount of 
illegal foreign money raised by John Huang, Charlie Trie, 
Johnny Chung, their associates and others. However, senior 
White House and DNC officials were all part of a reckless 
fundraising scheme which involved providing extensive 
opportunities for large DNC donors to gain access to the 
President and senior administration officials. White House 
perks such as Lincoln Bedroom overnights, White House coffees, 
Air Force One trips and Kennedy Center tickets, also were 
provided to donors and their friends. A number of the 
individuals who received the perks and White House VIP 
treatment, were later deemed inappropriate. These included 
individuals such as a drug dealer, an arms merchant, and many 
foreign nationals with unknown agendas.
    Over the past 2 years, the millions of dollars in illegal 
foreign money that went to the DNC and other Democratic 
entities have been traced to a small number of key figures, 
namely John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung, and Ted Sioeng. 
These individuals were provided unique access to the White 
House and senior administration officials. They also used their 
access to bring their foreign business associates to the White 
House and DNC functions. Even though many of these foreign 
nationals were not eligible to contribute, they funneled money 
into the coffers of the DNC. As the committee has continued its 
investigation, more information about the foreign ties of key 
DNC fundraisers have come to light. For example, Johnny Chung's 
confession that tens of thousands of dollars which he 
contributed were given to him from a Chinese Government source 
was ultimately not surprising. Indeed, some at the DNC had 
suspected he was doing this. The connections with foreign 
campaign money and foreign business associates also is apparent 
with Charlie Trie and his associate Antonio Pan, John Huang, 
and the Riady family, Ted Sioeng and his foreign associates, as 
well as others. As the committee continues to follow the money 
trail and push for foreign cooperation and an end to the 
stonewalling by dozens of key witnesses, it is very likely more 
foreign ties will be discovered.
    Finally, the committee believes that the House's 
investigation continues to provide additional support to the 
issues as set out by the Senate Governmental Affairs majority 
report on ``The China Plan.'' The illegal foreign money 
solicited by these individuals is doubly suspect because of 
their extensive ties to the People's Republic of China. The 
original--but as yet unidentified--sources of these funds were 
traced to bank accounts in Hong Kong, Macau, and Indonesia. As 
the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Final Report on 
campaign finance noted, ``officials at the highest levels of 
the Chinese government approved of efforts to increase the 
PRC's involvement in the U.S. political process. There are 
indications that the plan or parts of the plan and possibly 
related PRC activities were implemented covertly in this 
country.'' Since the Senate issued its report in March 1998, 
the committee has developed a more extensive record on the key 
fundraising figures and their foreign ties. Finally, in 
addition to the Asian sources of foreign money, the committee 
has also identified South American foreign money that first 
came into the DNC coffers in 1992, as well as funds from a 
German national which were largely ignored by the FEC.
    Throughout the course of the investigation, the committee 
uncovered significant new facts and made that evidence public. 
Frequently, because of the lack of cooperation from witnesses 
who either pled the fifth amendment or fled the country, these 
facts could be uncovered only through bank and telephone 
records. For example the committee uncovered the following 
facts:
         Yah Lin ``Charlie'' Trie carried out a scheme 
        by which he funneled $35,000 of money from Asia into 
        the coffers of the DNC, using his sister and her 
        boyfriend to make illegal conduit contributions.
         Trie also distributed at least $200,000 in 
        travelers checks from Indonesia across the United 
        States. A total of $50,000 of this Indonesian money was 
        used to make illegal contributions to the DNC.
         The committee's interim report determined 
        that, despite having returned $3.4 million in 
        questionable contributions connected to Charlie Trie, 
        John Huang, and Johnny Chung, the DNC had failed to 
        return an additional $1.8 million in clearly illegal 
        and highly-suspect contributions connected to these 
        same individuals.
         The committee released information showing 
        that $45,000 in contributions to the DNC from Lippo 
        Group subsidiaries in 1992, directly from Indonesia.
         One Clinton administration official checked 
        the amount of political contributions made by potential 
        appointees to government boards before allowing their 
        appointment. This same official, who processed Charlie 
        Trie's appointment to a high-level trade commission, 
        stated that Trie was a ``must appointment'' whose name 
        had come ``directly from the highest levels of the 
        White House.''
         The committee immunized witnesses and received 
        testimony that Johnny Chung formed fraudulent 
        partnerships in the United States with Chinese 
        officials to help them obtain visas to come to the 
        United States for DNC fundraisers and to pursue other 
        ventures.
         Chung brought a high-level delegation from a 
        Chinese Government-owned oil company to the Treasury 
        Department to seek low interest government loans.
    d. The Committee's Oversight of the Department of Justice 
Campaign Finance Investigation.--The committee's investigation 
of the campaign finance scandal also led it to conduct vigorous 
oversight of the Justice Department's parallel investigation. 
The committee became troubled in December 1997, when it learned 
that the Director of the FBI had recommended that the Attorney 
General seek the appointment of an independent counsel to 
investigate the campaign finance scandal, and that the Attorney 
General had rejected that advice. The committee sought the 
memorandum in which Director Freeh outlined his views to 
Attorney General Reno, but the Attorney General refused to 
produce the memorandum. In July 1998, the committee learned 
that the Attorney General's hand-picked head of the Justice 
Department task force investigating the campaign finance 
scandal, Charles La Bella, had also recommended that the 
Attorney General appoint an independent counsel. Like she had 
with Director Freeh's recommendation, Ms. Reno ignored the 
advice of Mr. La Bella, and refused to seek an independent 
counsel.
    The committee was troubled to hear that the Attorney 
General had refused to follow the recommendation of her two 
closest advisors regarding the campaign finance scandal. 
Accordingly, the committee decided to see for itself the 
recommendation of those advisors to determine whether Ms. Reno 
was properly carrying out her duties. On July 24, 1998, the 
chairman issued a subpoena to the Attorney General for the 
memoranda prepared by Director Freeh and Mr. La Bella. The 
Attorney General refused to comply with the committee's 
subpoena, and refused to offer any justification for failing to 
produce the memoranda to the committee. Accordingly, on August 
6, 1998, the committee voted to cite the Attorney General for 
Contempt of Congress, and provided to the full House a report 
detailing the Attorney General's failure to produce the 
subpoenaed documents.
Conduit Payments to the Democratic National Committee, October 9, 1997.
    At the committee's first hearing, the committee received 
testimony from three witnesses: Manlin Foung, Joseph Landon, 
and David Wang. These three witnesses offered testimony 
regarding the illegal fundraising activities of Yah Lin 
``Charlie'' Trie, a major fundraiser for the Democratic 
National Committee, and a close friend of President Clinton. 
All three testified that they had been used by Mr. Trie to 
provide conduit contributions to the DNC.
White House Compliance with Committee Subpoenas, November 6-7, 1997.
    The committee received testimony from a number of witnesses 
at the White House Counsel's office regarding the White House's 
failure to comply with committee subpoenas. The committee heard 
from Charles F.C. Ruff, White House Counsel; Cheryl Mills, 
Deputy White House Counsel; Lanny Breuer, Special Counsel; and 
Dimitri Nionakis, Associate White House Counsel. The witnesses 
were questioned regarding the failure of the White House to 
comply with committee subpoenas for records, including the 
videotapes of DNC fundraisers taken by the White House 
Communications Agency.
Johnny Chung: His Unusual Access to the White House, His Political 
        Contributions and Related Matters, November 13-14, 1997.
    At this hearing, the committee received testimony from 
Brooke Darby, executive assistant at the National Security 
Council; Robert Suettinger, former director of Asian Affairs at 
the National Security Council; Nancy Hernreich, Deputy 
Assistant to the President for Appointments and Scheduling; 
Kelly Crawford, former staff assistant to Ms. Hernreich; and 
Carol Khare, the former assistant to the chairman at the DNC. 
These witnesses were questioned about the frequent visits of 
Johnny Chung to the White House, despite the fact that the 
White House staff had been warned that Mr. Chung was viewed as 
a ``hustler.''
    The committee also received testimony from Maggie Williams, 
the former Chief of Staff to the First Lady. Ms. Williams was 
questioned regarding her role in receiving a $50,000 
contribution from Mr. Chung.
The Current Implementation of the Independent Counsel Act, December 9-
        10, 1997.
    In late November 1997, the committee learned that FBI 
Director Louis Freeh had recommended that the Attorney General 
appoint an independent counsel to appoint the campaign 
fundraising scandal. However, Attorney General Reno refused to 
heed the advice of Mr. Freeh. Because of the concern that the 
Attorney General was disregarding the advice of one of her most 
senior advisors, the committee called this hearing. FBI 
Director Freeh and Attorney General Reno were questioned 
regarding the Attorney General's refusal to appoint an 
independent counsel for the campaign finance investigation.
    The committee also explored the implementation of the 
Independent Counsel Act by hearing testimony from Independent 
Counsel Donald Smaltz. Mr. Smaltz offered extensive testimony 
regarding his investigation of former Agriculture Secretary 
Mike Espy, and the troubling ways in which the Department of 
Justice had hindered his investigation.
The Department of Interior's Denial of the Wisconsin Chippewa's Casino 
        Applications, January 21-22, 28-29, 1998.
    During these 4 days of hearings, the committee investigated 
the way in which the Department of Interior handled the 
application of the Wisconsin Chippewa Indians' application to 
open a casino in Hudson, WI. The witnesses called by the 
committee presented evidence that strongly suggested that 
Secretary Babbitt improperly denied the Wisconsin Chippewa's 
application to open a casino. The committee also heard evidence 
suggesting that Secretary Babbitt may have been influenced in 
his decision by political contributions made to the DNC by the 
opponents of the Chippewa application. These allegations are 
currently being investigated in greater detail by Independent 
Counsel Carol Elder Bruce.
FEC Enforcement Actions: Foreign Campaign Contributions and Other FECA 
        Violations, March 31, 1998.
    This hearing allowed the committee to investigate the 
manner in which the Federal Election Commission is enforcing 
Federal election laws. The main area of inquiry at this hearing 
was the FEC investigation of the cases of Thomas Kramer, a 
German national who gave substantial contributions to both 
Republicans and Democrats, and Howard Glicken, a prominent DNC 
fundraiser. Documents indicated that the FEC failed to 
recommend criminal prosecution of Mr. Glicken in part because 
he was a friend of Vice President Gore. The committee asked the 
witnesses, FEC staff responsible for investigating the case, 
why the FEC failed to seek criminal prosecution of the 
witnesses. However, the committee failed to receive any 
extensive assurances that improper factors did not play a role 
in the FEC's decision to treat Mr. Glicken in a lenient 
fashion.
Venezuelan Money and the Presidential Election, April 30, 1998.
    The committee uncovered evidence that the Democratic 
National Committee had received substantial illegal 
contributions from a powerful Venezuelan banking family. At 
this hearing, it heard first from Jorge Castro Barredo, a 
member of the Venezuelan banking family who had been convicted 
for bank fraud. Mr. Castro informed the committee that he and 
his aunt had been directed by Charles Intriago, a prominent 
Democratic fundraiser in Florida, to funnel $50,000 to 
Democratic organizations, using Venezuelan money provided by 
his grandfather.
    A second panel comprised of Joseph Dawson and Richard 
Preiss, two assistant District Attorneys in the Manhattan 
District Attorney's office. Mr. Dawson and Mr. Preiss testified 
regarding the fact that they referred the Castro case to the 
Department of Justice for prosecution. Messrs. Dawson and 
Preiss informed the committee that they viewed the case as a 
clear-cut violation of campaign finance laws, and accordingly, 
that they were surprised when the Department of Justice dropped 
the prosecution of the case.
The Need for an Independent Counsel in the Campaign Finance 
        Investigation, August 4, 1998.
    In late July 1998, the committee learned that the chief of 
the Justice Department task force investigating the campaign 
finance scandal, Charles La Bella, had informed the Attorney 
General that the independent counsel law and the facts of the 
campaign finance investigation required her to appoint an 
independent counsel. However, again, the Attorney General 
refused to do so. Accordingly, the committee held this hearing 
to investigate whether or not Attorney General Reno was 
following the law.
    The committee received testimony from FBI Director Louis 
Freeh, Task Force Chief Prosecutor Charles La Bella, and the 
Task Force's chief investigator, James DeSarno. Each of the 
witnesses informed the committee that they believed that the 
appointment of an independent counsel was required in the 
campaign finance investigation.
    e. Review of the Food and Drug Administration and its 
Regulations and Activities Respecting Terminally Ill Patients 
and their Ability to Access Desired Treatments.--The committee 
initiated an inquiry into issues and problems related to access 
to alternative medical treatment for Americans and into the 
Food and Drug Administration process of allowing access to 
experimental therapies. The current medical model is not 
sufficiently meeting the needs of millions of Americans who 
have serious and life threatening illnesses. Many of these 
patients and their health care providers have sought access to 
complementary and alternative therapies to incorporate 
appropriate therapies into their treatment plan. The Food and 
Drug Administration [FDA] regulates access to experimental 
treatments including those that are considered complementary or 
alternative. The FDA's current system of determining access is 
replete with flaws, creates a culture of intimidation and 
sometimes harassment against those who conduct clinical 
research in complementary and alternative therapies and those 
who wish to access experimental treatments. In testimony and 
evidence presented to the committee, it was learned that there 
still exists a bias within the FDA structure toward 
complementary and alternative medicine research. Clinical 
researchers attempting to work within the FDA guidelines were 
repeatedly presented with bureaucratic roadblocks. Patients who 
wished to participate in existing protocols or who wished to be 
included through the ``Single Patient Use'' or ``Treatment 
IND'' process were often required to mount exhaustive battles 
in order to gain access to therapies that they and their health 
care providers had deemed appropriate. At a time when they are 
dealing with serious and life threatening illnesses, patients 
and family members should be treated with compassion and 
consideration; instead, they often are faced with a daunting 
bureaucracy and road blocks. If a patient does not have the 
financial resources, family support, and the physical energy to 
take a stand and fight the FDA, they are denied access to the 
treatment of their choice and often face serious health 
consequences as a result. In essence, the Federal Government is 
deciding who will receive treatment and who will not--denying 
Americans the most basic of their rights--freedom of choice.
    Developing a treatment plan for someone with a serious or 
life threatening illness is a matter of weighing the benefits 
and risks of various treatments. This process should look at 
the evidence of current treatment options as well as therapies 
currently under investigation. The treatment plan is typically 
an evolving plan, an initial treatment choice may not meet with 
desired results or the patient may not tolerate the side 
effects, thus other treatment options are sought. It has often 
been these patients--those whose treatment plan has exhausted 
the conventional treatment choices--who have faced battles with 
the FDA over access to alternative therapies. And for some 
diseases, including cancers, almost all treatment options are 
experimental. When faced with choosing between highly-toxic 
treatments that may not offer a cure anyway, some patients opt 
for an alternative approach. The ultimate choice of what 
treatment plan to follow should be made by the patient and 
family--not by the Federal Government.
    Benefits.--The American public has clearly shown their 
interest in complementary and alternative therapies. Several 
surveys indicate that at least 30 to 45 percent of Americans 
have adopted an integrated approach to health care--
complementing the conventional medical model with such things 
as manipulative therapies, nutritional approaches to improving 
health including herbal products and dietary supplements, 
spirituality as a part of healing, mind-body approaches, 
homeopathy, acupuncture, Qi gong and other energy medicines. 
Additionally, there are times that Americans chose an 
alternative to the current medical model. The committee's 
investigation into patient access to alternative therapies has 
created an opportunity to lay all the issues involving 
complementary and alternative medicine, research, and patients 
access to care on the table and to move forward in finding 
viable solutions to improving access to therapies under 
investigation for those with serious and life threatening 
illnesses. One potential solution to access issues under 
consideration is H.R. 746, the Access to Medical Treatment Act.
    Hearings.--The committee held 2 days of hearings entitled, 
``Patient Access to Alternative Treatments: Beyond the FDA,'' 
on February 4 and 12, 1998.
    f. Review of the Food and Drug Administrations' Human 
Subject Protection Guidelines, Informed Consent Documents, and 
the Use of Children and Patients with Mental Illness in 
Clinical Trials.--The committee investigated human subject 
protection guidelines for FDA-regulated clinical trials. The 
committee is concerned about the ethics of the ``washout'' 
period and placebo controls in clinical trials for serious and 
life threatening illnesses. Double-blind, placebo controlled 
trials are the gold-standard in clinical research. There is 
growing concern that this approach may not be safe for certain 
illnesses. There is also concern that patients who agree to 
participate in clinical trials are not fully informed, or do 
not fully comprehend the risks involved in participation. There 
is also concern that minor children and patients with mental 
illnesses are participating in clinical trials without adequate 
safeguards in the informed consent process. The committee is 
disturbed by recent reports of minors being used as subjects in 
research projects on fenfluramine--after the FDA banned its use 
because of the risk of heart-valve damage. The FDA appears to 
have failed to ensure the safety of human subjects in these 
protocols by not verifying that their Advisory was implemented 
and research protocols discontinued.
    Benefits.--Dr. Michael Friedman, Acting Commissioner for 
the Food and Drug Administration testified that there are 
clearly a number of situations where a placebo-controlled trial 
is inappropriate and is not ethical. Further investigation into 
the fenfluramine trial was promised. The committee continues to 
look at the risks and benefits of placebo-controlled trials and 
comparative trials in serious and life threatening illnesses. 
The committee also continues to investigate informed consent 
and patient protection in human subject trials.
    Hearings.--The committee held a hearing entitled, 
``Clinical Trial Subjects: Adequate FDA Protections?'' on April 
22, 1998.
    g. Inquiry into Complementary and Alternative Medicine 
Cancer Research at the National Institutes of Health.--In the 
25 years since President Richard Nixon declared the war on 
cancer, cancer has been winning the battles. One in three 
Americans will get cancer and one in four will die from it. 
More than one-half million Americans will die from cancer this 
year. The U.S. Government has poured billions of dollars each 
year into research at the National Cancer Institute to find 
cures for the many forms of cancer that strike our citizens. 
While there have been advances in treating cancer, and more on 
the horizon, the American public has been subjected to 
Government press releases and banner headlines lauding a 
reduction in cancer deaths and treatments that cure cancer. The 
much acclaimed reduction in cancer deaths is actually less than 
1 percent with the leading cause of cancer death (lung cancer) 
on the rise. The anti-angiogensis cancer cure much acclaimed 
and praised by Government leaders is a study in mice that is 
years away from human studies and the NCI has yet to replicate 
these promising results. We, as yet, have no cure for cancer. 
Just as there is more than one type of cancer, there has to be 
more than one type of approach to treating cancer. There are 
several philosophies of medicine, the most predominant in the 
United States currently is allopathic medicine also known as 
conventional or Western medicine. There are other systems or 
philosophies of medicine and healing. They include traditional 
systems such as Native American, Tibetan, Ayurveda, Traditional 
Oriental Medicine, and Unani. Other systems also include 
naturopathy, chiropractics, homeopathy, antrophosophically 
extended medicine, and environmental medicine. In a previous 
hearing, the committee heard sworn testimony from many patients 
about their success with alternative approaches to treating 
cancer. Further inquiry was initiated to determine the amount 
and focus of research currently underway in complementary and 
alternative [CAM] treatments for cancer. Dr. Richard Klausner, 
Director, National Cancer Institute provided testimony to the 
committee in which he stated that the basic tenet at the 
National Institutes of Health is to employ rigorous 
methodologies to research conclusions based on evidence and not 
on belief. He further stated that the NCI is supporting about 
$16 million in CAM-related research in cancer. Currently funded 
projects are examining the effects of dietary interventions and 
treatments in prevention; the therapeutic effects of vitamins 
and minerals; and studies in stress and pain management to 
enhance the quality of life of cancer patients, in addition to 
the question about the length of survival, as well as projects 
to look at the natural inhibitors of carcinogenesis. He stated 
that those committed to eradicating cancer had at least two 
reasons to be open to the evaluation of nontraditional 
therapies: ``First, we will not be successful in alleviating 
cancer unless we are open to new ideas. We have learned through 
history that anecdotes and folk traditions have often guided us 
to real and effective therapies. Second, . . . many people 
avail themselves of complementary and alternative medicine, and 
those people reasonably ask who is providing the evidence as to 
whether they help, whether they do not do any good, or even 
whether they harm.'' He further testified that the relationship 
between the complementary and alternative medicine community 
and the NCI has been ``distant at best,'' but that he felt that 
improvement is being made in this relationship.
    Dr. Wayne Jonas, Director, Office of Alternative Medicine, 
National Institutes of Health testified that cancer is one of 
the most devastating conditions faced by Americans today. He 
stated that unconventional approaches abound and are 
extensively used by the public, but there is very little 
research and few guidelines to assist the public in making 
informed, evidence-based choices about their use. He stated 
that the purpose of the Office of Alternative Medicine was to 
facilitate research for discovering what is safe and effective 
in unconventional medicine and provide that information to the 
public. Further testimony was received from patients who have 
opted for an alternative medicine approach for their cancer, 
from physicians who have incorporated complementary and 
alternative therapies into their practice in treating cancer 
after being dissatisfied with the chemotherapy/radiation 
approach, and from cancer research experts.
    Benefits.--The National Cancer Institute has agreed to 
cooperate with the Office of Alternative Medicine in improving 
complementary and alternative medicine [CAM] research in 
cancer. A Cancer Advisory Panel on Complementary and 
Alternative Medicine is in development, the NCI has appointed 
liaison within their institute to coordinate all complementary 
and alternative medicine research issues, all information on 
alternative medicine was removed from the NCI web site as it 
was deemed overly judgmental; the PDQ editorial review board 
will be supplemented with alternative medicine experts; the NCI 
has promised to quickly develop CAM information that treats 
complementary and alternative medicine dispassionately and 
fairly; and the NCI has promised to quickly offer expanded 
research opportunities for CAM investigators. The Office of 
Alternative Medicine is moving forward with the recommendations 
of the Practice Outcomes Monitoring and Evaluation System in 
developing mechanisms to assist the NIH in evaluating claims of 
efficacy in CAM. Chairman Burton will be drafting legislation 
to require at least one representative of the CAM community on 
the President's Cancer Advisory Panel.
    Hearings.--The committee held a hearing entitled, ``Solving 
the Cancer Crisis: Comprehensive Research, Coordination and 
Care,'' on July 31, 1998.
    h. Review of the Food and Drug Administration's Proposed 
Changes to Structure/Function Rules and Regulations Relating to 
the Dietary Supplements and Health Education Act [DSHEA].--On 
June 22, 1998, the FDA published nine Interim Final Rules. The 
committee has initiated dialog with the FDA regarding these 
proposed rules and DSHEA, which Congress intended to be a 
meaningful alternative to the agency's overly restrictive 
health claims review procedure and standard. The committee has 
concerns that FDA has exceeded its authority by forbidding 
specific health claims that accurately represented published 
statements of Federal Government health agencies as well as 
restricting the flow of information to the public about dietary 
supplements.
    Benefits.--This investigation will continue in the 106th 
Congress and will provide an opportunity to resolve issues with 
the FDA and dietary supplement regulation.
    Hearings.--None.
    i. Elimination of Section 1555 of the Federal Acquisition 
Streamlining Act of 1994 [FASA] (Public Law 103-355).--The 
committee strongly supported the complete repeal of Section 
1555 of FASA. This measure was repealed, as part of the House 
and Senate Treasury Postal Appropriations Conference Report, 
which was signed into law on October 19, 1997.
    The cooperative purchasing program would have allowed State 
and local governments to buy a wide array of goods and services 
off the Federal supply schedule administered by the General 
Services Administration. The committee believes that this is a 
serious threat to the Nation's small business community.
    The committee did seek to craft new legislation, submitting 
legislative language that would have only allowed information 
technology products [IT] to be sold to State and local entities 
off the Federal supply schedule.
    This new legislative language was opposed by many who felt 
that this would somehow set a precedent and allow other goods 
and services to be purchased off the Federal supply schedule as 
a result. However, the narrowly crafted IT language was 
specific to one industry and would not have set a precedent.
    j. Joint Hearing: Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight and the Committee on International Relations 
regarding ``The Sale of Body Parts by the People's Republic of 
China.''--On June 4, 1998, the committees heard testimony from 
witnesses regarding the trafficking of human organs from 
executed Chinese prisoners. Witnesses included: Congresswoman 
Linda Smith; Mr. Harry Wu, the Laogai Research Foundation; Mr. 
Wei Jingsheng, Center for the Study of Human Rights; Dr. 
Tsuyoshi Awaya, Sociology of Medical Law Office, Tokuyama 
University; Dr. Phaibul Jitpraphai, Faculty of Medicine, 
Siriraj Hospital; and Mr. Somporn Lorgeranon, an organ 
transplant recipient.
    Testimony included compelling evidence from witnesses who 
had first-hand knowledge of how the transplantation system 
works. The committees also heard from Congresswoman Linda Smith 
who testified about the administration's failure to act on 
previous reports despite repeated congressional efforts. 
However, the State Department failed to provide a witness for 
the joint hearing to report to the committees on the 
administration's efforts to gather information on this practice 
and explain the administration's position.
    On June 11, 1998, the committees again heard from a number 
of highly credible witnesses who testified about the disturbing 
practice of human organ trafficking of executed Chinese 
prisoners. Witnesses were highlighted by: ``Witness X,'' a 
former Chinese prison official; Mr. Harry Wu, the Laogai 
Research Foundation; John Shattuck, Assistant Secretary of 
State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Bureau; Howard 
Lange, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and China 
Desk Director; Mr. T. Kumar, Amnesty International; and 
Professor David J. Rothman, Columbia University.
    The second joint hearing further examined this disturbing 
practice and heard from new witnesses with first-hand knowledge 
of the organ transplantation system. With the testimony of 
``Witness X,'' the committees broke new ground on this 
investigation as the former Chinese prison official provided 
new evidence of prison practices that he personally observed. 
Finally, the committees were able to question State Department 
officials regarding the Administration's response to these 
issues and ask that they be raised at every appropriate 
opportunity with the People's Republic of China.
4. Legislation.

              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

1. H.R. 1553, A bill to amend the President John F. Kennedy 
        Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 to extend the 
        authorization of the Assassination Records Review Board until 
        September 30, 1998.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report 105-138, Part 1, 
June 19, 1997.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1553 extended for 1 year the 
authorization of the Assassination Records Review Board, in 
order to allow the Board to finish reviewing and publicly 
releasing the Federal Government's records, and other records, 
relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and 
to issue its final report. H.R. 1553 extended the Review 
Board's September 30, 1997, termination date to September 30, 
1998. This legislation authorized $1.6 million in fiscal year 
1998 for the Assassination Records Review Board.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 1553 was introduced by 
Chairman Dan Burton on May 8, 1997, and referred to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. On May 13, 1997, 
H.R. 1553 was referred to the Subcommittee on National 
Security, International Affairs, and Criminal Justice. The 
subcommittee favorably reported H.R. 1553 by voice vote on June 
4, 1997, to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. 
On June 11, 1997, the committee favorably reported H.R. 1553 to 
the House of Representatives by voice vote. The bill passed the 
House under suspension of the rules on June 23, 1997. On June 
25, 1997 the Senate passed H.R. 1553 without amendment by 
unanimous consent. The bill was signed by the President on July 
3, 1997, becoming Public Law 105-25.
    d. Hearings.--The Subcommittee on National Security, 
International Affairs, and Criminal Justice held a hearing on 
H.R. 1553 on June 4, 1997. The following witnesses testified 
before the subcommittee: Representative Louis Stokes; 
Assassination Records Review Board Chair John R. Tunheim; 
Steven D. Tilley, Chief of the Access and Freedom of 
Information Staff and Chief of the John F. Kennedy 
Assassination Records Collection at the National Archives and 
Records Administration; author Max Holland; and Bruce 
Hitchcock, a Government and U.S. History Teacher from 
Noblesville, IN.
    Subcommittee Chairman Dennis Hastert's opening statement 
expressed support for H.R. 1553. Ranking Minority Member Thomas 
Barrett also supported the bill.
    All of the witnesses supported the bill. They said that the 
Review Board needs to finish its task of making the 
government's Kennedy assassination records public, and that 
this would furthermore help to restore citizens' trust in 
government. Review Board Chair John Tunheim said that the 
Review Board needed 1 additional year to finish reviewing 
records from various Federal agencies.
2. H.R. 1836, The Federal Employees Health Care Protection Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report 105-374, November 
4, 1997.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1836 was introduced by Mr. 
Burton to strengthen the integrity and standards of the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program and allow it to maintain its 
reputation as a high quality and cost-effective program. H.R. 
1836 amends chapter 89 of Title 5, United States Code, to 
improve administration of sanctions against unfit health care 
providers under the FEHB program, and for other purposes. 
Section 2 strengthens the Office of Personnel Management's 
ability to bar or sanction unethical health providers. Section 
3 makes technical changes regarding national plans and it 
expands a preemption of State and local authority to regulate 
health care plans that provide coverage under FEHB. Section 4 
allows retired employees of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation and the Federal Reserve Board access to the FEHB 
program. Section 6 establishes the rules under which a health 
care plan sponsored by an employee organization may reenter the 
FEHB program after previously discontinuing its membership. 
Section 7 permits agencies to increase the maximum physicians 
comparability allowance Federal agencies may pay from $20,000 
to $30,000 per year. Section 8 states that plans are allowed to 
permit direct access and payments to licensed health care 
providers, even when such arrangements are not required by law.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 1836 was signed into 
Public Law 105-266 by President Clinton on October 19, 1998.
3. H.R. 3166, the Federal Employee Health Care Freedom of Choice Act.
    a. Report Number and Date.--H.R. 3166 was introduced by 
Congressman Dan Burton and Congressman Bill Archer.
    b. Summary of Measure.--This legislation would require the 
Office of Personnel and Management [OPM] to ensure that high 
deductible plans are available to all FEHB program enrollees, 
including active workers, dependents, and annuitants at the 
beginning of the 1999 FEHB program contract year. OPM would 
also be required to make information available to eligible 
individuals about the availability of and rules regarding 
participation in high deductible health plans available under 
the FEHB program. There is no numerical limitation on the 
number of individuals eligible to enroll in high deductible 
health plans and participate in MSAs.
    Annual deductible limits are identical to those currently 
in law for the private market MSAs: $1,500-$2,250 for 
individual coverage with an annual out-of-pocket cap on 
expenses of $3,000, and $3,000-$4,500 for family coverage with 
an annual out-of-pocket on expenses of no more than $5,500. 
Contributions made to an MSA and any interest on the account 
will build up tax-free.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 3166 was referred to 
the Committee on Government and Oversight and the Committee on 
Ways and Means.
    An improved version of H.R. 3166 was drafted for the 
purposes of inclusion into H.R. 4250, the ``Patient Protection 
Act of 1998.'' This version (Title VI in H.R. 4250) 
incorporates changes made to the Health Insurance Portability 
and Protection Act as it relates to medical savings accounts 
[MSAs] and changes the government and individual contribution 
formulas to the high deductible plans and MSAs. Title VI would 
require OPM to ensure that high deductible plans are available 
at the beginning of the 2000 FEHB program contract year.
    Title VI was not included in the final version of H.R. 
4250, which was passed by the House on July 25, 1998.
4. H.R. 2883, the Government Performance and Results Act Technical 
        Amendments.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-429, March 
10, 1998.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2883 amends the Government 
Performance and Results Act of 1993 to require Federal agencies 
to add details about overlapping programs, major management 
problems, and reliability of data sources to their 5-year 
strategic plans and re-submit them by the end of September 
1998. The bill also requires agency Inspectors General, (or 
comparable officials if the agency has no Inspector General), 
to assess and report to Congress on the reliability and 
integrity of agency performance plans and reports. Under the 
legislation, the Office of Management and Budget must submit 
governmentwide performance reports.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2883 was introduced on 
November 7, 1997 by the chairman of the Government Reform and 
Oversight Committee, the Honorable Dan Burton. The bill was 
referred to the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, and 
by the committee to the Subcommittee on Government Information, 
Management, and Technology. On March 4, 1998, the measure was 
ordered favorably reported to the full committee by a voice 
vote. On March 5, 1998, the full committee met and the bill was 
approved by a vote of 21 to 12. On March 12, 1998, the Whole 
House voted favorably to pass H.R. 2883 by a vote of 242 to 
168. The Senate did not take up the legislation.
    d. Hearings and Committee Actions.--On February 12, 1998, 
the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
Technology held formal hearings on H.R. 2883. Witnesses at the 
hearing were: Chris Mihm, Assistant Director, Federal 
Management and Workforce Issues of the General Government 
Division, U.S. General Accounting Office [GAO]; Professor 
Robert M. Grant, School of Business Administration, Georgetown 
University; the Honorable Maurice P. McTigue, distinguished 
visiting scholar, Center for Market Processes, George Mason 
University; and the honorable G. Edward DeSeve, Acting Deputy 
Director, Office of Management and Budget.
    Chris Mihm testified that, according to GAO's review, the 
agencies' final strategic plans are minimally compliant with 
the six statutory requirements of the Results Act, but are 
sorely deficient in several areas of critical importance. In 
his words:

        . . . [A]lthough agency plans include the basic 
        legislative requirements, I think there can be little 
        argument that substantive challenges remain. In our 
        view, among the most pressing challenges are: first, 
        the need to better articulate a strategic direction; 
        second improve the coordination of crosscutting program 
        efforts; and, third, build reliable data systems and 
        analytic capacity.
        . . . [T]he strategic plans often lacked clear 
        articulations of agencies' strategic directions; in 
        short, a sense of what the agencies were trying to 
        achieve and how they proposed to do it. Many agency 
        goals were not results oriented. The plans often did 
        not show clear linkages among planning elements, such 
        as goals and strategies. And, furthermore, the plans 
        frequently had incomplete and underdeveloped 
        strategies.

    Mr. Grant testified that private sector firms do not do 
strategic planning just for the sake of creating strategic 
plans. ``The reason why companies do it is in order to improve 
the quality of their decision-making and, through that, to 
enhance their performance,'' he stated. He discussed four ways 
in which strategic planning can enhance performance of an 
organization. First, it forces establishing a consensus 
regarding medium and long-term goals and how the goals are to 
be achieved. Second, it forces top management focus on long-
term performance rather than on day-to-day operational issues 
that occupy much of their time. Third, it creates a dialog 
within the organization between people at different levels, 
departments, and divisions of the organization. Finally, 
strategic planning establishes a structure within which 
objectives can be agreed and in which performance can be 
reviewed to the extent objectives are achieved.
    Mr. Grant also spoke about general trends taking place with 
regard to private sector strategic planning. One trend is that 
strategic plans have become less focused on detailed decisions 
about resource allocation, and much more upon establishing the 
overall direction and clear performance targets. He indicated 
that one effect of that close emphasis on linking strategic 
planning with performance targets has been that financial 
planning has become much more closely integrated in the 
strategic planning process. Another trend he said was that 
there is much greater involvement of top management along with 
a recognition that the responsibility for strategic management 
lies with top management.
    Mr. McTigue based his testimony on his experiences having 
been an elected representative of the Parliament of New Zealand 
and having spent a period of time as a cabinet minister in the 
Government of New Zealand during a time when that country was 
undergoing major changes as a result of management reforms 
similar to the Results Act. He said that the major winners of 
the Results Act process are the Members of Congress, whom it 
empowers with information regarding what it is that the 
executive branch is doing and how successfully it is doing 
those things. Without this information, he said, Congress 
cannot exercise the authority that is vested in it to oversee, 
on behalf of taxpayers, the activities of the executive branch.
    With regard to Congress' efforts to ensure quality 
strategic plans, Mr. McTigue stressed that we have to be very 
careful in accepting plans that are not up to standard. The 
risk, he stated, ``is that you set a precedent by a laissez-
faire attitude that will make it acceptable for plans in the 
future to be submitted that don't meet those standards.''
    On behalf of the Office of Management and Budget [OMB], Mr. 
DeSeve testified regarding his opposition to H.R. 2883. His 
concern is that enactment of this legislation could impede 
successful implementation of the performance planning efforts 
under the Results Act. Under the act, agencies are to submit 
annual performance plans which provide much more detail about 
how the agencies plans to meet its mission and goals as stated 
in the strategic plans.
    According to Mr. DeSeve, the requirements of H.R. 2883 
would be too burdensome and the net results of having to 
concurrently prepare revised strategic plans, revised 
performance plans for fiscal year 1999, and initial performance 
plans for fiscal year 2000 ``would be to substantially diminish 
the quality of all three.'' Instead, Mr. DeSeve is not opposed 
to individual agencies deciding on their own to revise their 
plans. ``To be clear,'' he said, ``agencies that believe it is 
advantageous to resubmit their strategic plans can and should 
do so.''
    Asked to respond to the point made by Mr. DeSeve that 
agencies should decide whether to resubmit their plans, Mr. 
McTigue pointed out that he would not advocate this course of 
action. Accountability, he explained, ``means that somebody 
else can look at your actions and decide whether or not they 
meet the standard required.''
    Mr. DeSeve explained that revisions to the act should wait 
until authorizers and appropriators are more engaged in using 
the plans. Representative Sessions, who was chairing the 
subcommittee hearing, then submitted a letter for the record 
addressed to full committee Chairman Dan Burton from the 
following Members of Congress: Majority Leader Armey, Senate 
Republican Policy Chairman Larry Craig, Budget Committee 
Chairman John Kasich, Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde, 
International Relations Chairman Ben Gilman, Science Committee 
Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner, Committee Chairman Tom Bliley, 
Veterans Affairs Chairman Bob Stump, Small Business Committee 
Chairman Jim Talent, and Education and Workforce Committee 
Chairman Bill Goodling. The members in this letter voiced their 
support for agencies to resubmit their strategic plans by 
September 30, 1998, rather than waiting 3 years for improved 
plans.
    Implying again that H.R. 2883's mandate would be too 
burdensome, Mr. DeSeve expressed concern that the directive for 
agencies to revise their strategic plans was too generalized. 
He said that while Congress might intend for agencies to ``look 
at those very specific elements in the plan that are 
troublesome and revise them,'' agencies would not get that same 
message. However, GAO and congressional assessments of the 
agency strategic plans are very specific about the weaknesses 
within each agency plan. H.R. 2883 is also specific about 
requiring agencies to address three fundamental, but not 
statutorily-required elements: longstanding management 
problems, cross-cutting functions, and data capacity and 
integrity.

5. Cost Accounting Standards [CAS] in the Federal Employees Health 
        Benefits Program.

    The Government Reform and Oversight Committee examined the 
application of the Cost Accounting Standards to carrier 
contracts in the Federal Employees Health Benefits [FEHB] 
Program. The committee was concerned that continued application 
of the CAS would run a real risk of increasing costs to the 
FEHB program and would result in program disruption if the 
impracticability of applying the CAS forced the withdrawal of 
plans from the FEHB program.
    After failing to convince the CS Board to grant a delay in 
applying the CAS, the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] 
directed the FEHB experience-rated carriers to commence all 
necessary adjustments to their accounting procedures and 
practices in order to conform to the requirements of 48 CFR 
Part 30 and 48 CFR Chapter 99. This was imposed even though OPM 
informed the committee in a letter dated June 30, 1998 that, as 
a general matter, they are satisfied with the cost accounting 
information provided by the FEHB carriers, and they have 
sufficient regulatory authority to ensure that audits are 
conducted appropriately.
    However, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association [BCBSA], the 
largest carrier in the FEHB program, raised concerns with the 
difficulties of implementation of the CAS on the FEHB program 
plan contracts. Application was deemed to be extremely complex, 
time consuming and economically unfeasible.
    As a result of extensive meetings with BCBSA, OPM, and OMB, 
the committee was convinced that the wisest course for Congress 
was to take legislative action. This would ensure the continued 
stability of the FEHB program and the continued health care 
coverage of Federal employees. Under section 518 of the 
Treasury and General Government Appropriation, 1999, the cost 
accounting standards promulgated under section 28 of the Office 
of Federal Procurement Policy Act shall not apply with respect 
to a contract under the FEHB program. In no way does this 
provision limit or restrict OPM's authorities with respect to 
audits, oversight or program administration. OPM will continue 
to have the regulatory flexibility to adapt certain principles 
of the CAS.
6. S. 1364, The Federal Reports Elimination Act of 1998, Public Law 
        105-362.
    a. Report Number and Date.--Senate Report 105-187, May 11, 
1998 accompanies the bill. A report was not filed with the 
House.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The purpose of S. 1364 is to 
eliminate or modify 187 congressionally mandated Federal agency 
reports that are redundant, obsolete, or otherwise unnecessary.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--S. 1364 was introduced on 
November 4, 1997 by Senators Levin and McCain. The Senate 
Committee on Governmental Affairs marked up the bill on March 
10, 1998 and favorably reported it to the full Senate by voice 
vote. The full Senate passed the bill, as amended, on June 10, 
1998. On October 13, 1998 the House passed the amended bill 
under suspension of the rules. On October 21, 1998, the House 
agreed to the Senate amendment to the House amendment and the 
Senate agreed to the House amendment with amendment. The bill 
was presented to the President on November 4, 1998 and signed 
into law.
    d. Hearings and Committee Actions.--On June 18, 1998, 
Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Dan Burton 
and Ranking Member Henry Waxman circulated the Senate bill to 
all House committee chairmen and ranking members. The committee 
chairs and ranking members were asked to review the reports on 
the list and indicate any objections to elimination or 
modification of the reports under their jurisdiction. One 
hundred percent of committees responded and the Senate list of 
187 reports was reduced to 132 reports.
7. H.R. 1057, A bill to designate the building in Indianapolis, 
        Indiana, which houses the operations of the Indianapolis Main 
        Post Office as the ``Andrew Jacobs, Jr. Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1057 named the Main Post 
Office in Indianapolis, IN, the ``Andrew Jacobs, Jr. Post 
Office Building.'' Andrew Jacobs, Jr., was a Member of Congress 
from Indianapolis, IN, from 1965 to 1973 and from 1975 to 1997.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Signed into law on November 
19, 1997, Public Law 105-90. On March 2, 1998, Chairman Dan 
Burton spoke at the dedication ceremony in Indianapolis, IN, 
for the Andrew Jacobs, Jr., Post Office Building.
    d. Hearings.--None.
8. H.R. 1058, A bill to designate the facility of the U.S. Postal 
        Service under construction at 150 West Margaret Drive in Terre 
        Haute, Indiana, as the ``John T. Myers Post Office Building.''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1058 named the Postal 
Service's new processing and distribution facility at 150 West 
Margaret Drive in Terre Haute, IN, the ``John T. Myers Post 
Office Building.'' This facility was under construction at the 
time that H.R. 1058 was introduced in the House (March 13, 
1997); the facility has since been completed.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 1058 was signed into 
law on November 19, 1997, Public Law 105-91. Chairman Burton 
sent a letter that was read at the October 17, 1998, dedication 
ceremony in Terre Haute, IN, for the John T. Myers Post Office 
Building.
    d. Hearings.--None.
9. H.R. 3630, A bill to designate the facility of the United States 
        Postal Service located at 9719 Candelaria Road N.E. in 
        Albuquerque, New Mexico, and known as the Eldorado Station Post 
        Office, as the ``Steve Schiff Post Office.''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3630 renamed the Eldorado 
Station Post Office at 9719 Candelaria Road N.E. in 
Albuquerque, NM, the ``Steve Schiff Post Office.''
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Signed into law on October 
21, 1998, as part of H.R. 3630, the fiscal year 1999 Omnibus 
Appropriations Act, Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--None.
                           II. Investigations

             A. INVESTIGATIONS RESULTING IN FORMAL REPORTS

              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

                       Hon. Dan Burton, Chairman

1. ``Interim Report on the Investigation of Political Fundraising 
        Improprieties and Possible Violations of Law,'' House Report 
        105-829, November 5, 199, Sixth Report of the Committee on 
        Government Reform and Oversight, together with Additional and 
        Minority Views.
    a. Summary.--Since January 1997, the committee has been 
conducting an investigation of campaign fundraising 
improprieties relating to the 1992 and 1996 Federal elections. 
The committee's investigation has focused on numerous instances 
where foreign money was directed into American political 
campaigns.
    This report detailed the committee's work to date, and 
contained a number of new facts uncovered through the 
committee's work. For example, the report detailed hundreds of 
thousands dollars in illegal contributions made to the 
Democratic National Committee that were still being held and 
used by the DNC. The report contained extensive summaries of 
the committee's investigations of the central figures in the 
campaign finance scandal, including John Huang, Charlie Trie, 
Johnny Chung, and Ted Sioeng. The report also contained 
descriptions of the committee's investigations into the Hudson 
casino matter, FEC oversight of the campaign finance scandal, 
and illegal Venezuelan political contributions.
    b. Benefits.--The committee's investigation into political 
fundraising improprieties uncovered a number of illegal schemes 
to direct illegal political contributions into Federal 
elections. Because of the committee's investigation, 
prosecutors at the Department of Justice and the Office of 
Independent Counsel investigated or pursued criminal charges 
against a number of individuals. The committee's investigation 
also brought much-needed attention to the inadequate manner in 
which many of our existing election laws are enforced.
    c. Hearings.--The committee held the following hearings 
entitled, ``Conduit Payments to the Democratic National 
Committee,'' on October 9, 1997; ``White House Compliance with 
Committee Subpoenas,'' on November 6-7, 1997; ``Johnny Chung: 
His Unusual Access to the White House, His Political 
Contributions and Related Matters,'' on November 13-14, 1997; 
``The Current Implementation of the Independent Counsel Act,'' 
on December 9-10, 1997; ``The Department of Interior's Denial 
of the Wisconsin Chippewa's Casino Applications,'' on January 
21-22, 28-29, 1998; ``FEC Enforcement Actions: Foreign Campaign 
Contributions and Other FECA Violations,'' on March 31, 1998; 
``Venezuelan Money and the Presidential Election,'' on April 
30, 1998; and ``The Need for an Independent Counsel in the 
Campaign Finance Investigation,'' on August 4, 1998.
2. ``Report on Contempt of Congress Regarding the Refusal of Attorney 
        General Janet Reno to Produce Documents Subpoenaed by the 
        Government Reform and Oversight Committee,'' House Report 105-
        728, September 17, 1998.
    a. Summary.--The committee's investigation of the campaign 
finance scandal also led it to conduct vigorous oversight of 
the Justice Department's parallel investigation. The committee 
became troubled in December 1997, when it learned that the 
Director of the FBI had recommended that the Attorney General 
seek the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate 
the campaign finance scandal, and that the Attorney General had 
rejected that advice. The committee sought the memorandum in 
which Director Freeh outlined his views to Attorney General 
Reno, but the Attorney General refused to produce the 
memorandum. In July 1998, the committee learned that the hand-
picked head of the Justice Department task force investigating 
the campaign finance scandal, Charles La Bella, had also 
recommended that the Attorney General appoint an independent 
counsel. Like she had with Director Freeh's recommendation, Ms. 
Reno ignored the advice of Mr. La Bella, and refused to seek an 
independent counsel.
    The committee was troubled to hear that the Attorney 
General had refused to follow the recommendation of her two 
closest advisors regarding the campaign finance scandal. 
Accordingly, the committee decided that, under these 
extraordinary circumstances, it must review this memoranda for 
itself to determine whether Ms. Reno was properly carrying out 
her duties. On July 24, 1998, Chairman Burton issued a subpoena 
to the Attorney General for the memoranda prepared by Director 
Freeh and Mr. La Bella. The Attorney General refused to comply 
with the committee's subpoena, and refused to offer any legal 
justification for failing to produce the memoranda to the 
committee. Accordingly, on August 6, 1998, the committee voted 
to cite the Attorney General for contempt of Congress, and 
provided to the full House a report detailing the Attorney 
General's failure to produce the subpoenaed documents.
    b. Benefits.--The committee's contempt proceedings against 
the Attorney General were a necessary step to enforce a valid 
congressional subpoena.
    c. Hearings.--In addition to addressing the campaign 
finance investigation, the following hearings also addressed 
issues relating to the Contempt proceedings against the 
Attorney General: ``The Current Implementation of the 
Independent Counsel Act,'' on December 9-10, 1997; and, ``The 
Need for an Independent Counsel in the Campaign Finance 
Investigation,'' on August 4, 1998.

   Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology

                      Hon. Stephen Horn, Chairman

1. ``A Citizen's Guide on Using the Freedom of Information Act and The 
        Privacy Act of 1974 to request Government Records,'' House 
        Report No. 105-37, March 20, 1997, First Report by the 
        Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.
    a. Summary.--The Freedom of Information Act [FOIA], enacted 
in 1966, presumes those records of the executive branch of the 
U.S. Government are accessible to the public. The Privacy Act 
of 1974 is a companion to FOIA and regulates Government agency 
record-keeping and disclosure practices. The Freedom of 
Information Act provides that citizens have access to Federal 
Government files with certain restrictions. The Privacy Act 
provides certain safeguards for individuals against an invasion 
of privacy by Federal agencies and permits them to see most 
records pertaining to them maintained by the Federal 
Government.
    A Citizen's Guide on Using the Freedom of Information Act 
and Privacy Act of 1974 to Request Government Records, House 
Report 105-37, dated March 20, 1997, and issued by the House 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, explains how to 
use the two laws and serves as a guide to obtaining information 
from Federal agencies. The complete texts of the Freedom of 
Information Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552), and the Privacy 
Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a), are reprinted in the committee 
report.
    b. Benefits.--Federal agencies use the Citizen's Guide in 
training programs for Government employees who are responsible 
for administering the Freedom of Information Act and the 
Privacy Act of 1974. The Guide enables those who are unfamiliar 
with the laws to understand the process and to make requests. 
In addition, the complete text of each law is included in an 
appendix. The Government Printing Office and Federal agencies 
subject to the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act 
of 1974, distribute this report widely. The availability of 
these acts to all Americans allows executive branch information 
to be widely available.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``The Electronic Freedom of Information Act,'' on June 9, 1998.
2. ``Making the Federal Government Accountable: Enforcing the Mandate 
        for Effective Financial Management,'' House Report No. 105-664, 
        July 31, 1998, Third Report by the Committee on Government 
        Reform and Oversight, Together with Additional Views.
    a. Summary.--In a series of hearings held in 1998, the 
subcommittee highlighted the fact that billions of dollars of 
taxpayer money are lost each year to fraud, waste, abuse, and 
mismanagement in hundreds of Federal programs. One of the root 
causes of this loss is inadequate financial management. 
Financial systems and practices in the executive branch of the 
Federal Government are ineffective and fail to provide 
complete, consistent, reliable, and timely information. On 
March 31, 1998, the General Accounting Office released the 
first-ever audit report on the financial status of the entire 
Federal Government. For the first time, a concise accounting of 
the myriad problems faced by the Federal Government was made 
available.
    With this information in hand, the subcommittee held 
hearings to review the results of the audit of the Federal 
Government's consolidated financial statements. The 
subcommittee's review focused on the inability of the Federal 
Government to provide reliable financial information to the 
Congress, agency decisionmakers, and the American people. The 
hearings also considered actions needed to address financial 
management problems.
    In addition to the hearings, Representative Stephen Horn 
(R-CA) issued an evaluation of the consolidated financial 
statements and agency reports in the form of a report card. The 
evaluation noted that only 2 of the 24 agencies earned a clean 
financial statement. Many financial statements were determined 
by the General Accounting Office to be unauditable. The report 
card illustrated the need for dramatic improvement in Federal 
financial systems.
    On tax day (April 15) 1998, the subcommittee conducted a 
hearing on financial management at the Internal Revenue 
Service. In fiscal year 1997, for the first time since its 
statements were first audited in fiscal year 1992, the IRS 
received a clean opinion on its financial statements covering 
the collection and refunds of taxes. However, from the audit 
report and hearing discussions, the subcommittee discovered 
significant weaknesses in internal controls and areas of 
noncompliance with laws and regulations. The subcommittee 
focused on actions IRS is taking to resolve long standing 
financial management problems and the progress--if any--it has 
made to reform these practices. The scope of the hearing 
included an overview of suggested reform plans made by the 
recently designated Commissioner of IRS, Charles O. Rossotti.
    The subcommittee held a hearing on financial management at 
the Department of Defense on April 16, 1998. The GAO, DOD 
Inspector General, and Defense audit agencies have long 
reported problems in DOD's financial management systems and 
practices. Each year numerous reports are issued with virtually 
the same problems as the prior year. DOD's reported financial 
management problems include inadequate control over assets such 
as real property, capital leases, construction in process, and 
inventories, as well as instances of noncompliance with laws 
and regulations. These problems resulted in the Inspector 
General's inability to render an opinion on DOD's financial 
statements for fiscal year 1997. At the hearing, GAO emphasized 
that it disclaimed an opinion on the Consolidated 
Governmentwide Financial Statements of the Federal Government 
largely due to DOD's inability to provide complete and 
verifiable information on its finances. The subcommittee 
focused on actions DOD is taking to resolve long standing 
problems with their financial management systems. As a result, 
the subcommittee established that action is needed from the top 
management levels at DOD to ensure that the problems are 
resolved.
    The subcommittee also held a hearing focusing on financial 
management at the Social Security Administration. For fiscal 
year 1997, SSA earned an unqualified ``clean'' opinion on its 
financial statements for the fourth consecutive year. The 
auditors reported no material weaknesses in SSA's internal 
controls. The audit report noted, however, two instances of 
noncompliance with laws and regulations. SSA published its 
financial statements and the related audit report in its 
``accountability report'' on November 21, 1997--more than 3 
months early (SSA was one of the few agencies to issue its 
report prior to the March 1, 1998 due date). At the hearing, 
the subcommittee focused on the progressive actions SSA has 
taken to achieve ``clean'' opinions and sought recommendations 
from SSA to share how those successes were achieved. As the 
subcommittee has discovered in oversight hearings on the status 
of the Federal Government's progress dealing with the year 2000 
problem, the Social Security Administration is a top notch 
agency and a leader in tackling management issues.
    The subcommittee held a hearing on financial management at 
the Health Care Financing Administration. The Health Care 
Financing Administration [HCFA], which accounts for more than 
18 percent of all Federal outlays and pays for one third of 
health care throughout the United States, has failed to provide 
timely or reliable financial information. The first financial 
audit of HCFA, covering its fiscal year 1996 financial 
statements, resulted in a disclaimer of opinion. At the 
hearing, witnesses described problems that included 
insufficient documentation maintained by contractors who 
process the payment of Medicare claims for HCFA; material 
weaknesses in internal controls over HCFA operations; and 
material non-compliance with laws and regulations. Excessive 
Medicare payments are estimated at $20.3 billion--or 11 percent 
of fee for service payments made--for fiscal year 1997.
    The subcommittee also held a hearing on proposals to 
improve Federal financial management. At this hearing, the 
subcommittee explored legislative options for improving 
compliance with Federal financial management legislation, 
including the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, the 
Government Management Reform Act of 1994, and the Federal 
Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996. The House of 
Representatives unanimously passed House Resolution 447 to 
express the sense that ``financial management [at] all too many 
Federal agencies ha[s] failed; and therefore, Congress must 
impose consequences on Federal agencies that fail their annual 
financial audits and conduct more vigorous oversight to ensure 
that Federal agencies do not waste the tax dollars of the 
people of the United States.''
    Based on the investigation and oversight hearings conducted 
by the subcommittee, as well as on the governmentwide audit 
conducted by the GAO, the committee approved ``Making the 
Federal Government Accountable: Enforcing the Mandate for 
Effective Financial Management.'' In this report, the Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight issued six findings:
    1. There are material deficiencies in Federal financial 
information. These problems included the Federal Government's 
inability to:
           properly account for and report on billions 
        of dollars of property, equipment, materials, and 
        supplies;
           properly estimate the cost of most Federal 
        credit programs and related loans receivable and loan 
        guarantee liabilities;
           estimate and report material amounts of 
        environmental and disposal liabilities and related 
        costs;
           determine the amount of various reported 
        liabilities, including post-retirement health benefits 
        for military and Federal civilian employees, veterans 
        compensation benefits, accounts payable, and other 
        liabilities;
           accurately report major portions of the net 
        costs of government operations;
           determine the full extent of improper 
        payments that occur in major programs and that are 
        estimated to involve billions of dollars annually;
           properly account for billions of dollars of 
        basic transactions, especially those between government 
        entities;
           ensure that the information in the 
        consolidated financial statements is consistent with 
        agencies' financial statements;
           ensure that all disbursements are properly 
        recorded; and
           effectively reconcile the change in net 
        position reported in the financial statements with 
        budget results.
    2. There are material control weaknesses in Federal 
financial systems.
    3. There is pervasive noncompliance with laws and 
regulations.
    4. The year 2000 computing crisis poses a significant 
threat to Federal financial systems.
    5. The role of the Inspector General in improving Federal 
financial management can be strengthened.
    6. Greater financial management leadership is needed.
    Based on these findings, the committee made four 
recommendations:
    1. Require agencies to be accountable to Congress and the 
President through regular oversight.
    2. Provide incentives to agencies to have effective 
financial management.
    3. Strengthen the ability of the Inspector General to carry 
out their management oversight responsibilities.
    4. Strengthen the President's role as Chief Executive 
Officer of the executive branch by establishing an Office of 
Management.
    b. Benefits.--In response to the series of hearings 
discussed above, House Resolution 447 was introduced on May 21, 
1998. The House resolution expressed the sense of Congress that 
the audit demonstrated serious concerns with financial 
management by the majority of Federal agencies and current 
efforts with respect to financial management at all too many 
Federal agencies had failed and therefore Congress must impose 
consequences on Federal agencies that fail their audits. Prior 
to the unanimous passage of the House resolution on June 9, 
1998, the President issued a May 26, 1998, memorandum to the 
heads of executive departments and agencies outlining actions 
to ``further improved financial management.'' The Presidential 
directive required action to improve Federal financial 
management and stipulated goals and guidelines. In addition, a 
task force was developed by the Chief Financial Officers 
Council, with representation from the Office of Management and 
Budget, the General Accounting Office, as well as the 
Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
Technology, to periodically meet and follow the Federal 
agencies' progress in improving their financial management.
    Consistent with the findings of the oversight hearings and 
the House Resolution, the President's memorandum recognized 
that ``there are several areas in which agencies must focus 
additional attention. Financial auditors reported accounting 
system weaknesses and problems with fundamental accounting 
practices across the Federal Government.'' The memorandum took 
several significant steps toward tightening the 
administration's leadership in correcting the management 
problems that were the subject of the subcommittee's oversight 
hearings. Specifically, the President's memorandum directed:

          1. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall 
        identify agencies subject to reporting under this 
        memorandum and monitor agency progress towards the 
        [administration's] goal of obtaining an unqualified 
        audit opinion in the F[iscal] Y[ear] 1999 consolidated 
        Federal Government financial statements.
          2. The head of each agency identified by the OMB 
        shall submit to the OMB a plan, including milestones, 
        for resolving by September 30, 1999, financial 
        reporting deficiencies identified by the auditors. The 
        initial plan was due to the OMB by July 31, 1998.
          3. The head of each agency submitting a plan shall 
        provide quarterly reports to the OMB, starting on 
        September 30, 1998, describing progress in meeting the 
        milestones in their action plan. The head of each 
        affected agency shall report to the OMB any impediments 
        that would impact the government-wide goal.
          4. The OMB shall provide periodic reports to the Vice 
        President on the agency submissions and government-wide 
        actions taken to obtain an unqualified opinion the 
        Government's F[iscal] Y[ear] 1999 financial statements.

    In addition to the President's memorandum, the 
administration has accelerated the timeframes in which Federal 
agencies are required to submit financial information to the 
Financial Management Service of the Department of the Treasury.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee conducted six oversight 
hearings focusing on the status of financial management in the 
executive branch of the Federal Government: (1) ``Federal 
Consolidated Financial Statements: Can the Federal Government 
Balance It's Books?,'' on April 1, 1998; (2) ``Oversight of the 
Internal Revenue Service: The Commissioner Reports to 
Congress.'' on April 15, 1998; (3) ``Department of Defense 
Financial Management: Serious Problems Still Persist,'' on 
April 16, 1998; (4) ``Oversight of Financial Management 
Practices at the Social Security Administration,'' on April 17, 
1998; and (5) ``Oversight of Financial Management Practices at 
the Health Care Financing Administration,'' on April 24, 1998; 
and (6) ``Making the Federal Government Accountable: 
Legislative Options to Improve Financial Management,'' on June 
18, 1998.
3. ``The Year 2000 Problem,'' House Report No. 105-827, October 26, 
        1998, Fourth Report by the Committee on Government Reform and 
        Oversight, Together with Additional Views.
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee convened an oversight hearing 
on April 16, 1996 to examine whether computers throughout the 
Federal Government, the United States, and the world would be 
able to handle the transition from the year 1999 to the year 
2000. The subcommittee continued this investigation throughout 
the 105th Congress. The committee report is based on the 
subcommittee's investigation.
    The year 2000 problem could result in a stunning array of 
technological failures. Air traffic could be delayed or even 
grounded; telephone service could be interrupted; breakdowns in 
the production and distribution of electricity could bring 
widespread power failures; automatic teller machines might 
malfunction; traffic lights could stop working; timeclocks at 
factories might malfunction. Government payments, including 
checks from the Internal Revenue Service, the Treasury, and the 
Veterans Benefits Administration, could be interrupted; 
military technology, including the Global Positioning Satellite 
System, could malfunction. Closer to home, devices with a 
timing function, including microwave ovens, personal computers, 
video cassette recorders, and climate control systems could all 
falter or even shut down entirely.
    For Federal computers, the year 2000 problem could affect 
everything from Social Security and Veterans' benefit payments 
to missile maintenance systems, from the Federal Aviation 
Administration to the Internal Revenue Service. There are at 
least 7,000 mission critical computer systems (those systems 
essential to the performance of important governmental 
functions) in the executive branch of the Federal Government.
    The committee report contained nine major oversight 
findings:
    1. The Federal Government is not on track to complete 
necessary year 2000 preparations before January 1, 2000.
    2. Some State and local governments are lagging in year 
2000 repairs and in many cases lack reliable information on 
their year 2000 status.
    3. The year 2000 status of basic infrastructure services, 
including electricity, telecommunications, and water, is 
largely unknown.
    4. Embedded microchips are difficult to find, difficult to 
test, and can lead to unforeseen failures.
    5. Strong leadership from senior management is necessary to 
address the year 2000 problem.
    6. Organizations are dependent on the year 2000 
preparedness of their data exchange partners.
    7. Data exchanges, testing, and contingency planning have 
received far too little attention.
    8. Fear of legal liability has made some organizations 
reluctant to share the year 2000 status of their products and 
internal systems with other businesses and data exchange 
partners.
    9. Resource problems center around hiring and retaining 
skilled workers and attaining the needed funding to perform the 
year 2000 fixes.
    Based on these findings, the committee made five 
recommendations:
    1. The President and the executive branch of the U.S. 
Government must approach the year 2000 problem with greater 
urgency.
    2. Public and private organizations as well as Federal, 
State, and local governments must all work in partnership to 
prepare for the date change.
    3. Congress and the President should establish Federal 
liability protection for organizations that share information 
in order to facilitate year 2000 repairs.
    4. Year 2000 problem managers should develop goals that are 
linked to readiness measures.
    5. Citizens should demand information on year 2000 
readiness from their State and local governments, their utility 
companies, and other organizations upon which they are 
dependent.
    As Chief Executive, the President must play an active 
leadership role in moving the Nation forward on the year 2000 
problem. In July 1997, the chairman and ranking member of the 
subcommittee, together with the chairwoman and ranking member 
of the Technology Subcommittee of the House Committee on 
Science, formally asked the President to use the ``bully 
pulpit,'' as Theodore Roosevelt called it, to explain the 
problem to the American people. They also recommended that he 
appoint a senior administration official as coordinator for the 
national year 2000 effort.
    The President has still not implemented the first 
recommendation: to explain the year 2000 problem to the 
American people. In July 1998, he addressed some of the members 
of the National Academy of Sciences, but this issue calls for 
high-profile leadership. The President has been urged to speak 
in a ``fireside chat'' environment, similar to the approach of 
President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930's. The appointment 
of a full-time coordinator to pull together the pieces of the 
administration's effort took place in February 1998, when he 
designated John Koskinen, a retired Office of Management and 
Budget official, as Assistant to the President. Mr. Koskinen 
did not take office until March 1998.
    Despite this belated step in the right direction, many 
Federal agencies are simply not moving quickly enough to be 
year 2000 compliant by January 1, 2000. As noted above, the 
subcommittee has prodded executive branch agencies to action by 
grading them on their year 2000 efforts. The grades are based 
on an analysis of the quarterly reports from the agencies 
themselves as well as follow-up investigative work by the staff 
of the subcommittee and the General Accounting Office, the 
fiscal and program auditors for the legislative branch. Each 
report card has revealed a disturbing lack of progress within 
the executive branch. Overall, the Administration has received 
a grade of ``F'' and ``D'' in the last two quarters, 
respectively.
    The subcommittee has concentrated not just on Federal 
computer systems and the effect their failure would have on the 
delivery of services, but also on the leadership role that the 
Government plays throughout society. For example, the 
Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal 
Communications Commission have important oversight and 
leadership functions in segments of the private sector. At a 
higher level, the President can voice priorities for society as 
a whole. Oversight of this leadership element of the Federal 
year 2000 effort is central to the subcommittee's investigation 
and to this report.
    b. Benefits.--This committee report and all of the 
activities on which it is based were directed at gathering and 
disseminating information on the year 2000 problem. The benefit 
of inspiring organizations to learn about the problem and to 
take it seriously is self-evident: more repairs will be done, 
fewer failures after January 1, 2000 will result. Furthermore, 
serious action now, including serious attention from Federal 
officials, will serve to reduce the panic that this problem 
encourages.
    The key to fixing the year 2000 problem is leadership. The 
year 2000 problem requires one of the most massive and 
coordinated repair efforts in human history. Progress has been 
made, but much remains to be done. Urgency is required to get 
the job done on time. Priorities must be set and resources must 
be allocated. This can be done only if top management (in 
government, the private sector, and non-profit organizations 
alike) is fully informed and willing to make the tough choices 
necessary.
    Furthermore, the year 2000 problem is going to be expensive 
to the taxpayers, but how expensive depends on how quickly 
officials step up to the problem. Administration cost estimates 
have reached $5.4 billion, and figures in this range have been 
deemed far too low by a variety of experts. The ultimate cost 
depends to a great extent on how early and how efficiently the 
Government can address the problem. The costs associated with 
fixing this labor-intensive problem will rise significantly as 
the date change nears. Furthermore, failure to repair computers 
before the date change will bring a variety of costs of untold 
proportions. It is therefore critical that the fixes are made 
and made early. Effective efforts to expedite this process will 
save the taxpayers considerable amounts of money.
    Potentially even more significant than the financial toll 
of a delayed response to the year 2000 problem is the danger of 
failure. It is very difficult to determine the exact 
consequences of inaccurate date computations in most computer 
programs. Despite this, or perhaps because of it, preparations 
for the date change are crucial. Failure to make the necessary 
fixes puts citizens at risk of everything from late Social 
Security checks to unsafe travel conditions.
    c. Hearings.--The Subcommittee on Government Management, 
Information, and Technology held 16 hearings on the Year 2000 
problem in the 105th Congress: (1) ``Will Federal Computers Be 
Ready for the Year 2000?'' February 24, 1997; (2) ``Year 2000 
Risks: What Are the Consequences of Information Technology 
Failure?'' March 20, 1997, held jointly with the House Science 
Subcommittee on Technology; (3) ``Will Federal Government 
Computers be Ready for the Year 2000?'' July 10, 1997, held 
jointly with the House Science Subcommittee on Technology; (4) 
``Russia's Year 2000 Problem,'' held in Beverly Hills, CA on 
October 17, 1997; (5) ``FAA at Risk: Year 2000 Impact on the 
Air Traffic Control System,'' held jointly with the House 
Science Subcommittee on Technology on February 4, 1998; (6) 
``Oversight of the Federal Government's Year 2000 Efforts,'' 
held jointly with the House Science Subcommittee on Technology 
on March 18, 1998; (7) ``Status Update on the Year 2000 
Problem,'' June 10, 1998; (8) ``Year 2000: Biggest Problems and 
Proposed Solutions,'' June 22, 1998; (9) ``Oversight of the 
Year 2000 Problem: Lessons to Be Learned from State and Local 
Experiences,'' field hearing in New York, NY on August 13, 
1998; (10) ``Oversight of the Year 2000 Problem: Lessons to Be 
Learned from State and Local Experiences,'' field hearing in 
Mesquite, TX (a suburb of Dallas) on August 17, 1998; (11) 
``Oversight of the Year 2000 Problem: Lessons to Be Learned 
from State and Local Experiences,'' field hearing in New 
Orleans, LA on August 19, 1998; (12) ``Oversight of the Year 
2000 Problem: Lessons to Be Learned from State and Local 
Experiences,'' field hearing in Lakewood, OH (a suburb of 
Cleveland) on September 1, 1998; (13) ``Oversight of the Year 
2000 Problem: Lessons to Be Learned from State and Local 
Experiences,'' field hearing in Indianapolis, IN on September 
2, 1998; (14) ``Oversight of the Year 2000 Problem: Lessons to 
Be Learned from State and Local Experiences,'' field hearing in 
Palatine, IL (a suburb of Chicago) on September 3, 1998; (15) 
``Y2K: What Every Consumer Should Know to Prepare for the Year 
2000 Problem,'' held jointly with the House Science 
Subcommittee on Technology on September 24, 1998; (16) ``Y2K: 
Will We Get There On Time?'' held jointly with the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure and the House Science 
Subcommittee on Technology on September 29, 1998.

                    Subcommittee on Human Resources

                    Hon. Christopher Shays, Chairman

1. ``Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses: VA, DOD Continue to Resist Strong 
        Evidence Linking Toxic Causes to Chronic Health Effects,'' 
        House Report 105-388. November 7, 1997. Second Report by the 
        Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, Together with 
        Additional Views.
    a. Summary.--Since February 1996, the Subcommittee on Human 
Resources has been conducting an oversight investigation into 
the illnesses reported by an estimated 100,000 Gulf war 
veterans, and the response to veterans' health complaints by 
the departments of Veterans Affairs [VA] and Defense [DOD]. The 
investigation resulted in a report approved by the subcommittee 
on October 31, 1997, and the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on November 7, 1997.
    Responding to requests of veterans, the subcommittee 
initiated a far-reaching oversight investigation into the 
clusters of symptoms and debilitating maladies known 
collectively as the ``Gulf War Syndrome.'' The subcommittee 
sought to ensure sick Gulf war veterans were being properly 
diagnosed, treated, and compensated for service-connected 
disabilities, despite official denials and scientific 
uncertainty regarding the exact causes of their ailments. The 
subcommittee also sought to determine whether the Gulf war 
research agenda was properly focused on the most likely, not 
just the most convenient, hypotheses to explain Gulf war 
illnesses.
    The subcommittee investigation and hearings found that the 
VA and DOD had not listened to veterans since the Gulf war 
ended in 1991. Veterans suspected and reported exposure to 
toxic agents in the Gulf war theater--to chemical and 
biological warfare agents, environmental hazards, and 
experimental drugs and vaccines. Any one, or any combination, 
of these toxins may have produced the illnesses among some 
veterans. Yet, the VA and DOD ignored veterans' concerns, 
continued to maintain there were no toxic exposures and 
therefore no health effects, and attributed any illnesses to 
battlefield stress.
    It was the consistent pressure from this subcommittee, and 
other House and Senate panels, that forced the Pentagon to 
acknowledge a ``watershed event''--the probable exposure to 
United States troops to chemical weapons fallout at Khamisiyah, 
Iraq. With that first admission, the three pillars of 
Government denial--no credible detections, no exposures, no 
health effects--began to crumble. The number of U.S. troops 
presumed exposed grew rapidly from the 400 announced in June 
1996 to nearly 100,000 announced in July 1997.
    This revelation and other credible chemical detections, 
along with private research which probed the parallels between 
Gulf war illnesses and known effects of chemical poisoning, 
suggested a significant role for toxins in causing, triggering 
or amplifying neurological damage and producing delayed and/or 
chronic symptoms in many veterans.
    The subcommittee believes current approaches by the VA and 
DOD to research, diagnosis and treatment of Gulf veterans are 
flawed and unlikely to yield answers to veterans' ailments in 
the foreseeable, or even far distant, future.
    Six years and hundreds of millions of dollars have been 
spent by the VA and DOD in an effort to determine the causes of 
the illnesses besetting Gulf war veterans. When asked what 
progress has been made healing sick Gulf veterans, VA and DOD 
cannot respond. When asked, are sick veterans any better off 
today than when they were first examined, VA and DOD are 
silent. Millions of research dollars have been thrown at the 
problem without answers or accountability.
    Government delays and denials for 6 years are symptomatic 
of a system content to presume the Gulf war produced no delayed 
casualties, and determined to shift the burden of proof onto 
sick veterans to overcome that presumption. That task has been 
made difficult, if not impossible, because most of the medical 
records needed to prove toxic causation are missing, destroyed 
or inadequate. Nevertheless, VA and DOD insist upon reaping the 
benefit of any doubts created by the absence of those records.
    The subcommittee believes the current presumptions about 
neurotoxic causes and effects should be reversed and the 
benefit of any doubt should inure to the sick veteran.
    Finally, the subcommittee reluctantly concluded that 
responsibility for Gulf war illnesses, especially the research 
agenda, must be placed in more responsive and expert hands, 
independent of the VA and DOD.
    The committee report contained 18 major oversight findings:
Diagnosis
    1. VA and DOD did not listen to sick Gulf war veterans as 
to possible causes of their illnesses.
    2. The presence of a variety of toxic agents in the Gulf 
war theater strongly suggests exposures have a role in causing, 
triggering or amplifying subsequent service-connected 
illnesses.
    3. Gulf war troops were not trained to protect themselves 
from the effects of exposure to depleted uranium dust and 
particles.
    4. Pyridostigmine bromide [PB] can have serious side 
effects and interactions when taken in combination with other 
drugs, vaccines, chemical exposures, heat and/or exercise.
    5. VA and DOD health registry diagnostic protocols relied 
on the unfounded conclusion there were no chemical, biological 
or other toxic exposures to United States troops in the Gulf 
war theater.
    6. VA and DOD health registry diagnosis protocols continue 
to be based on the unwarranted conclusion that, unless there is 
an immediate and acute reaction, exposures to chemical weapons 
and other toxins do not cause delayed or chronic symptoms.
    7. Prematurely ruling out toxic exposures as causative, VA 
and DOD doctors relied on diagnoses of somatoform disorder and 
Post-Traumatic-Stress-Disorder [PTSD] to explain Gulf war 
veterans' illnesses.
    8. There is no credible evidence that stress or PTSD causes 
the illnesses reported by many Gulf war veterans.
    9. Accurate diagnosis of veterans' illnesses remains 
difficult due to inadequate or missing personal medical 
records, missing toxic detection logs, and unreleased 
classified documents.
    10. Accurate diagnosis of veterans' illnesses was also 
hampered by the VA's lack of medical expertise in toxicology 
and environmental medicine.
    11. Exposures to low levels of chemical warfare agents and 
other toxins can cause delayed, chronic health effects.
Treatment
    12. Neither the VA nor the DOD has systematically attempted 
to determine whether sick Gulf war veterans are any better or 
worse today than when they first reported symptoms.
    13. Treatment of sick Gulf war veterans by VA and DOD to 
date has largely focused on stress and PTSD.
Compensation
    14. Compensation ratings for sick veterans are minimized 
due to inadequate personal medical records, missing toxic 
detection logs, and unreleased classified documents which could 
help veterans establish service-connection of post-war 
disabilities.
    15. Compensation ratings are also minimized by over-
reliance on somatoform disorder and PTSD as the basis of 
disability claims.
Research
    16. Federal research strategy has been blind to promising 
hypotheses due to reliance on unfounded DOD conclusions 
regarding chemical exposures.
    17. Institutional and methodological constraints make it 
unlikely the current research structure will find the causes 
and effective treatments for Gulf war veterans' illnesses in 
the short term.
    18. The FDA was passive in granting and failing to enforce 
the conditions of waiver to permit use of PB by DOD.
    Based upon the subcommittee investigation and findings, the 
report made the following detailed recommendations:
Diagnosis
    1. Congress should enact a Gulf war toxic exposure act 
establishing the presumption, as a matter of law, that veterans 
were exposed to hazardous materials known to have been present 
in the Gulf war theater.
    2. The VA should contract with an independent scientific 
body composed of non-government scientific experts 
representing, at a minimum, the disciplines of toxicology, 
immunology, microbiology, molecular biology, genetics, 
biochemistry, chemistry, epidemiology, medicine and public 
health for the purpose of identifying those diseases and 
illnesses associated in peer-reviewed literature with singular, 
sustained, or combined exposures to the hazardous materials to 
which Gulf war veterans are presumed to have been exposed.
    3. The VA Gulf War Registry and the DOD Comprehensive 
Clinical Evaluation Program should be re-evaluated by an 
independent scientific body which shall make specific 
recommendations to change both programs from crude research 
tools into effective clinical diagnosis and outcomes monitoring 
efforts.
    4. The VA should refer all Phase II Registry examinations 
to Gulf war referral centers.
    5. The VA should add toxicological and environmental 
medicine expertise to the staff resources dedicated to Gulf war 
illnesses.
    6. DOD and VA should make every effort to find, and where 
necessary re-create through veterans' testimony, individual 
Gulf war medical records to reflect vaccines administered, PB 
use, and exposure to DU, pesticides and other hazardous 
materials.
    7. The President should order an intensified effort to 
declassify Gulf war documents in any way related to Gulf war 
veterans' illnesses and should personally certify to the 
appropriate committees of Congress when he deems 
declassification of such documents to be against the national 
interest.
    8. DOD failure to adhere to recordkeeping requirements or 
clinical protocols under an informed consent waiver should 
result in the presumption of service-connection for any 
subsequent illness(es) suffered by service personnel to whom 
the drug or protocol was administered.
Treatment
    9. VA and DOD should systematically and effectively monitor 
the clinical progress of Gulf war veterans to determine the 
most effective treatments.
    10. VA and DOD clinicians should be encouraged to pursue, 
and be trained in, new treatment approaches to suspected 
neurotoxic exposure effects.
    11. The diagnoses for somatoform disorders and Post-
Traumatic-Stress-Disorder [PTSD] should be refined to insure 
that physiological causes are not overlooked.
Compensation
    12. Denials of Gulf war veterans' compensation claims 
attributable in any way to missing medical records should be 
reviewed and veterans given the benefit of any doubt regarding 
the presumptive role of toxic exposure in causing post-war 
illnesses and disability.
    13. For purposes of compensation determinations, 
disabilities associated with presumed exposures should be 
deemed service-connected without any limitation as to time.
Research
    14. Congress should create or designate an agency 
independent from the departments of Defense and Veterans 
Affairs as the lead Federal agency responsible for coordination 
of all research into Gulf war veterans' illnesses and 
allocation of all research funds.
    15. The lead Federal agency on Gulf war veterans' illnesses 
should focus research on the evaluation and treatment of the 
common spectrum of neuroimmunological disorders known as Gulf 
War Syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, chronic fatigue 
syndrome and fibromyalgia.
    16. DOD and VA medical systems should augment research and 
clinical capabilities with regard to women's health issues and 
the health effects of combat service on women's health.
    17. VA, in collaboration with NIH, CDC, FDA and other 
public health agencies should establish an interdisciplinary 
research and clinical program on the identification, prevention 
and treatment of environmentally induced neuropathies.
    18. FDA should grant a waiver of informed consent 
requirements for the use of experimental or investigational 
drugs by DOD only upon receipt of a Presidential finding of 
efficacy and need.
    b. Benefits.--Recommendations based on the subcommittee's 
investigation into Gulf war veterans' illnesses, if 
implemented, should help veterans receive the answers they 
deserve as to why they are sick and what can be done to make 
them healthy again. Such a successful effort could return 
veterans to full and productive lives, enabling them to better 
support themselves and their families. These veterans, a 
product of the all-volunteer U.S. military, put their lives on 
the line while serving their country in time of war. Failure to 
care for these veterans could have serious implications for 
military recruitment programs in the future. Recommendations, 
if implemented, would also provide: greater focus and better 
coordination of research into Gulf war illnesses; faster and 
more meaningful research results with available dollars; a 
stronger sense of urgency and responsibility by the Federal 
Government to meet the medical and compensation needs of Gulf 
war veterans.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee convened the following 
oversight hearings on Gulf war veterans' illnesses in 1997: 
``Gulf War Syndrome: To Examine New Studies Suggesting Links 
Between Gulf Service and Higher Rates of Illnesses,'' January 
21, 1997; ``Status of the Department of Veterans Affairs to 
Identify Gulf War Syndrome,'' April 24, 1997; ``Oversight of 
NIH and FDA: Bioethics and the Adequacy of Informed Consent,'' 
May 8, 1997; ``Status of Efforts to Identify Persian Gulf War 
Syndrome: Recent GAO Findings,'' June 24, 1997; and ``Gulf War 
Syndrome: Multiple Toxic Exposures,'' June 26, 1997. (In the 
104th Congress, the subcommittee convened the following 
hearings: ``The Status of Efforts of Identify Persian Gulf War 
Syndrome,'' March 11 and 28, June 25, and September 19, 1996; 
and ``Persian Gulf Veterans' Illnesses,'' December 10 and 11, 
1996.)
    Witnesses at these hearings included: Gulf war veterans; 
representatives from veterans service organization; officials 
from the VA, DOD, CIA, FDA, NIH, EPA and Presidential Advisory 
Committee on GW Veterans' Illnesses; GAO investigators; 
physicians; private researchers from neurology, pharmacology, 
toxicology, psychiatry, microbiology, molecular biology, 
environmental medicine, biochemistry, physics, nuclear 
medicine, immunology, epidemiology, and bioethics; and chemical 
and biological weapons experts.
2. ``Hepatitis C: Silent Epidemic, Mute Public Health Response,'' House 
        Report No. 105-820, October 15, 1998, Seventh Report by the 
        Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.
    a. Summary.--According to the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention [CDC], more than 4 million people in the United 
States are infected by Hepatitis C virus [HCV], and many are 
unaware of their illness. HCV is responsible for an estimated 
8,000 to 10,000 U.S. deaths annually. That number is expected 
to triple in the next 10 to 20 years unless more effective 
prevention and treatment programs are developed. HCV is now the 
leading reason for liver transplants in the United States.
    People at risk include: everyone who had a blood 
transfusion, or used plasma derived therapies prior to 1990; 
intravenous drug users; hemodialysis patients; people with 
tattoos; and those with multiple sexual partners.
    HCV, discovered in the early 1970's, causes inflammation of 
the liver, cirrhosis, and is linked to increases in hepatic 
cancers. It was 1990 before a test for specific antibodies to 
HCV became available. Most people infected by HCV do not have 
symptoms. If symptoms are present, they may be mild and flu-
like, including nausea, fatigue, loss of appetite, fever, 
headaches, and abdominal pain.
    In testimony before the subcommittee in 1995 on blood 
safety, HHS Secretary Donna Shalala stated the Department's 
Blood Safety Committee would give the highest priority to the 
issue of notification to those exposed to HCV through blood and 
blood products prior to 1990. However, in testimony before the 
subcommittee on September 9, 1998, the Acting Commissioner of 
the Food and Drug Administration testified that not one 
recipient (of the more than 1.1 million individuals at risk) 
has received a letter informing him or her of possible 
infection.
    To date, public education on prevention and treatment of 
HCV has been undertaken by private organizations, not by HHS.
    The subcommittee report found: that the Federal response to 
the Hepatitis C epidemic has lacked focus and energy, that the 
proposed HCV lookback is too limited, and that private 
organizations, with some Federal assistance, have taken the 
lead in HCV public education efforts.
    The subcommittee report recommended: that the Secretary of 
HHS take the lead in coordinating the Federal public health 
response to the Hepatitis C epidemic, including implementation 
of a research plan; that the Department of Defense test 
recruits, active duty personnel and those about to be 
discharged for Hepatitis C infection; that the Department of 
Veterans Affairs conduct additional studies of the prevalence 
of HCV in veterans populations and that Federal educational 
campaigns on HCV infection should be launched immediately.
    b. Benefits.--To ensure that HHS undertakes public 
education campaigns to make 4 million Americans aware of their 
infection with HCV and to ensure that HHS oversees ``lookback'' 
notification efforts to reach 1.1 million Americans who 
received potentially HCV-infected blood and blood products.
    c. Hearings.--``Public Health 2000: Hepatitis C--The Silent 
Epidemic,'' March 5, 1998.
3. ``Medicare Home Health Services: No Surety in the Fight Against 
        Fraud and Waste,'' House Report No. 105-821, October 15, 1998, 
        Eighth Report by the Committee on Government Reform and 
        Oversight.
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee report found that recent 
actions by the Health Care Financing Administration [HCFA] to 
address well documented problems of fraud and abuse in the 
Medicare home health program have been flawed. Despite a 4 
month moratorium on enrollment of new home health providers, 
and the unanticipated postponement of the surety bond 
requirement, there has been little progress in implementing 
legislative or regulatory solutions to address the program's 
longstanding vulnerabilities.
    b. Benefits.--The report documents the subcommittee's 
recommendations that HCFA focus existing resources on 
established program integrity efforts, and use existing 
statutory and regulatory authority to require surety bonds or 
other limited financial guarantees from providers who pose a 
threat to the Medicare program. Greater focus by HCFA on the 
program's vulnerabilities will strengthen the program, help 
curtail inappropriate payments and contribute to the long-term 
preservation of the Medicare Trust Fund.
    c. Hearings.--``Medicare Home Health Agencies: Still No 
Surety Against Fraud and Abuse,'' July 22, 1998.

   Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
                           Regulatory Affairs

                    Hon. David M. McIntosh, Chairman

1. ``Investigation of the Conversion of the $1.7 Million Centralized 
        White House Computer System, Known as the White House Database, 
        and Related Matters,'' House Report 105-828, October 30, 1998, 
        Fifth Report by the Committee on Government Reform and 
        Oversight, Together with Minority and Supplemental Views.
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee completed its investigation 
of the misuse of the White House Database for unauthorized 
purposes. This investigation was a part of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight's investigation of campaign 
fundraising abuses. Chairman William F. Clinger originally 
referred this matter to the subcommittee in June 1996 during 
the 104th Congress. That referral was reaffirmed by Chairman 
Dan Burton at the beginning of the 105th Congress and later 
ratified in writing on July 17, 1997.
    After a review of more than 40,000 documents and 
interviewing more than 40 witnesses, the subcommittee uncovered 
evidence that White House staff knowingly and willfully 
provided fundraisers at the Democratic National Committee [DNC] 
with proprietary data from the White House Database to assist 
them in their fundraising. The subcommittee found that DNC 
fundraisers called staff in the White House Social Office and 
Political Affairs Office for information on prior attendance by 
DNC contributors to ensure that contributors did not receive 
excess White House invitations. By knowing whether a person had 
recently attended a White House event, the fundraisers were 
able to identify other contributors to reward with such 
invitations. This scheme was devised in a meeting in March 1995 
among DNC Finance Chairman Truman Arnold, then-Deputy Chief of 
Staff Erskine Bowles, and Social Secretary Ann Stock. This 
sharing of information with the DNC is not only contrary to 
White House policy but also represents the conversion of 
government property to the benefit of the DNC in violation of 
18 U.S.C. Sec. 641.
    The subcommittee also found evidence that the White House 
Database and other resources were converted to the use of the 
DNC and the Clinton/Gore campaign. Deputy Director and Chief of 
Staff of Presidential Personnel Marsha Scott wrote several 
memoranda in which she announced her plans to help the DNC 
develop its databases using official resources, including data 
from the White House Database, her plans to help manage the 
Clinton/Gore campaign's data clean-up from the White House, and 
her efforts to use the White House Database to ``recreate the 
campaign structure'' and identify the potential financial and 
political leaders for the 1996 campaign. The use of the 
Database in this manner also represents an unlawful conversion 
of government property.
    The subcommittee found evidence that the President and the 
First Lady were aware of and involved in these efforts. There 
were numerous documents showing that the President and the 
First Lady had asked Marsha Scott to create the Database. The 
First Lady had received a hands-on demonstration of the 
Database. According to some documents, the President and the 
First Lady intended to view data on a regular basis. Most 
significantly, one document expressly indicated that the 
President wanted to integrate the White House Database with the 
DNC database. The evidence clearly documents a close connection 
between the President and the Database.
    The subcommittee also uncovered evidence that White House 
staff provided other lists of names and addresses to the DNC 
and the Clinton/Gore campaign. These lists included White House 
Calligraphers' lists for various White House events in December 
1994, which also included the President's Yale Dinner. The 
White House withheld from the subcommittee the attendance lists 
from that event, claiming that the event was the personal 
private event of the President. White House staff also 
transmitted the entire 1994 White House Holiday Card list to 
the DNC and the 1993 White House Holiday Card list to the 
Clinton/Gore campaign. The knowing transfer of these lists to 
the DNC and the Clinton/Gore campaign also constitutes a 
conversion of government property in violation of 18 U.S.C. 
Sec. 641.
    Finally, the subcommittee found substantial and credible 
evidence that the Deputy Counsel to the President Cheryl Mills 
lied to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight in 
November 1997 regarding the decision in September 1996 to 
withhold documents responsive to the subcommittee's requests 
for documents. That decision, involving both Ms. Mills and 
then-White House Counsel Jack Quinn, was made 6 weeks before 
the 1996 election and resulted in the withholding of documents 
that implicated the President and the First Lady in wrongdoing. 
Every witness in a position to know the nature of the documents 
contradicted Ms. Mills's testimony that the documents were not 
responsive. On September 17, 1998, Chairman McIntosh referred 
the subcommittee's evidence regarding these matters to the 
Department of Justice for further investigation and appropriate 
prosecution.
    b. Benefits.--The theft of government property is a serious 
matter. The subcommittee's investigation found that the 
taxpayers contributed $1.7 million to pay for the development 
of the White House Database. The use of the database to benefit 
the DNC and the Clinton/Gore campaign represents a conversion 
of at least some portion of that $1.7 million to the DNC and 
the Clinton/Gore campaign. Moreover, those organizations 
received valuable property of the government--lists of the 
names and addresses of individuals that were important to the 
President. The exposure of this evidence and the possible 
prosecution for theft or for perjury and obstruction of the 
investigation of such a theft should act as a deterrent to 
future similar conduct.
    c. Hearings.--On November 6 and 7, 1997, the subcommittee's 
investigation figured prominently in the hearings of the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. The hearing was 
entitled, ``White House Compliance With Committee Subpoenas,'' 
Hearings Before the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight, 105th Congress, 1st Session (1997).
    On April 1, 1998, the subcommittee also held a hearing in 
Executive Session to receive the testimony of Marsha Scott, 
following her refusal to answer questions under oath in a staff 
deposition pursuant to a lawful subpoena.
    On September 10, 1996, during the 104th Congress, the 
subcommittee held a hearing entitled, ``The Propriety of the 
Taxpayer-Funded White House Data Base,'' Hearing before the 
Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, 
and Regulatory Affairs, 104th Congress, 2nd Session (1996).

                        B. OTHER INVESTIGATIONS

                       Subcommittee on the Census

1. Reviewing the Short and Long Form Questionnaires.

    a. Summary.--Large amounts of Federal money are distributed 
on the basis of information gathered by the Census Bureau in 
the decennial census. The Census Bureau collects this 
information through the short and long form questionnaires in a 
decennial census. The short form questionnaire consists of 
seven questions and is distributed to every household in the 
United States. The long form questionnaire consists of 52 
questions and is distributed to 1 out of 6 city style addresses 
and approximately 1 out of every 2 rural style addresses. There 
have been serious concerns raised about the long form 
questionnaire. Some of the concerns surrounding the long form 
questionnaire center around the length of the questionnaire, 
the intrusiveness and the effect it has on response rates. The 
Bureau itself is researching replacing the long form 
questionnaire with the American Community Survey for the 2010 
census.
    b. Benefits.--This oversight provided the subcommittee with 
extensive information about the beliefs of various groups with 
regard to the census long form questionnaire. The groups 
represented were given the forum necessary to express their 
views and interest in the collection of information they deemed 
vital to their cause. The subcommittee decided to hold a panel 
discussion to provide a forum for various groups to discuss the 
advantages and disadvantages of the long form questionnaire.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled ``Oversight of the 2000 
Census: Reviewing the Long and Short Form Questionnaires'' was 
held on May 21, 1998. Witnesses included: Hon. Constance A. 
Morella; Hon. Charles T. Canady; Mr. James B. Hubbard, director 
of economics, American Legion; Professor Wen Yen Chen, 
president, Formosan Association for Public Affairs; Mr. David 
Clawson, program director, American Association of State 
Highway and Transportation Officials; Mr. Marlo Lewis, vice 
president for policy, Competitive Enterprise Institute; Ms. 
Helen Samhan, vice president, Arab American Institute and Mr. 
David Crowe, staff vice president, Housing Policy, National 
Association of Home Builders.
    Subcommittee Chairman Miller expressed the concerns 
surrounding the use of the long form questionnaire. These 
concerns center around the intrusive nature of the long form as 
well as the impact on response rates. The difference in 
response rates between the short form and long form in 1990 
grew to 4\1/2\ percent. Chairman Miller reported that response 
rates are critical in order to achieve the most accurate census 
possible.
    Mrs. Maloney stated that according to the Congressional 
Research Service, some $200 billion are distributed each year 
based on information gathered by the Census Bureau. Mrs. 
Maloney also stated that the census gives us the data we need 
for planning and providing for the needs of our country.
    Mrs. Morella discussed some of the uses of information 
gathered by the long form questionnaire and that second to the 
national government, local governments are the biggest users of 
this information. Mrs. Morella also highlighted the fact that 
in addition to the public sector, the private sector is a 
definite beneficiary of information gathered from the long form 
census questionnaire; and stated that the private sector could 
not replicate the information gathered by the long form 
questionnaire. Congresswoman Morella reported that the long 
form census questionnaire planned for the 2000 decennial census 
has been streamlined and is shorter than the form in the 1980 
and 1990 census. Mrs. Morella also discussed her proposed 
legislation, House Concurrent Resolution 246, which would 
express the sense of Congress that socioeconomic and 
demographic data should be collected by the Census Bureau 
through the long form questionnaire in the 2000 decennial 
census.
    Congressman Canady discussed in detail the provisions of 
his proposed legislation, H.R. 2081, known as the Family 
Caregiver's Enumeration Act. This legislation would require the 
Census Bureau to identify family caregivers in 2000 through the 
long form questionnaire. Mr. Canady explained that caregivers 
are individuals who provide care for chronically ill or 
disabled loved ones free of charge. Mr. Canady told the 
subcommittee that nearly 2 percent of our Nation needs help in 
performing activities daily, and that caregiver's perform this 
essential assistance. Mr. Canady reported that this information 
is necessary to provide the services needed by caregivers.
    Mr. Hubbard, Director of Economics, American Legion, 
reported the Department of Veterans Affairs budget is 
approximately $43 billion. Mr. Hubbard also stated that 
virtually all of these moneys are allocated based on where 
American veterans live. The only way the Federal Government 
collects this information is through the census long form 
questionnaire. In addition, hospitals and other veteran 
services are allocated based on the population of veterans in 
each State. Mr. Hubbard informed the subcommittee that the 
American Legion is committed to assisting the Census Bureau in 
its efforts to complete a full and accurate count of the 
population in the 2000 decennial census.
    Mr. Chen, president, Formosan Association for Public 
Affairs, reported that there are between 400,000 and 500,000 
people of Taiwanese decent living in the United States. Mr. 
Chen explained that his campaign is directed at convincing the 
Census Bureau to include Taiwanese as an option under the race 
question for the 2000 decennial census. The Census Bureau 
provided Mr. Chen with 3 reasons for not including Taiwanese as 
a race: Department of State requested Taiwanese not be included 
as a race in fear it may cause diplomatic problems with the 
People's Republic of China; space constraints; and may confuse 
respondents. Mr. Chen disputed all of these reasons in his 
testimony.
    Mr. David Clawson, program director, American Association 
of State Highway and Transportation Officials, testified at the 
hearing that information gathered by the Census Bureau on the 
long form census questionnaire is very useful to the State 
Highway and Transportation Departments. Such information 
gathered provides information on place of work, means of travel 
to and from work, time of departure, et cetera. Mr. Clawson 
stated that this information is a major resource in identifying 
commuting patterns in our country. Mr. Clawson further 
testified that without this information collected on the long 
form questionnaire, the country would suffer a significant loss 
of data that would affect compliance with various Federal 
legislation.
    Mr. Marlo Lewis, vice president for policy, Competitive 
Enterprise Institute, stated that he believes the long form 
questionnaire should be phased out by the year 2010. He 
believes the Census Bureau should return to the constitutional 
purpose of the census, which is counting the citizens of this 
country for the apportionment of the House of Representatives. 
Mr. Lewis stated that the long form questionnaire is intrusive 
and violates a person's privacy. Mr. Lewis also stated that 
people have grown increasingly unwilling to complete census 
questionnaires. Mr. Lewis also stated that the long form 
questionnaire encourages government intervention into the 
economy of this Nation.
    Ms. Helen Samhan, vice president, Arab American Institute, 
discussed her support for the continued measurement of 
ethnicity in the decennial census. Ms. Samhan stated that 
school systems, social service agencies, as well as local 
governments rely on data on ancestry gathered by the Census 
Bureau. Ms. Samhan also stated that Federal courts require 
collection of ancestry data to battle cases of discrimination 
based on national origin.
    Mr. David Crowe, staff vice president for the National 
Association of Home Builders, stated his support and the 
support of the organizations he represents of the collection of 
information by the census long form questionnaire. Mr. Crowe 
stated that the decennial census is the most cost effective way 
to collect socioeconomic and demographic information. Mr. Crowe 
reported that approximately $170 billion is distributed based 
on information gathered by the decennial census. Mr. Crowe also 
reported that there is presently no other reliable means of 
collecting such information.

2. Statistical Issues in Conducting and Adjusting the Decennial Census.

    a. Summary.--We continue to investigate problems associated 
with the statistical process of adjusting the decennial census. 
Given the failed attempt to adjust the 1990 decennial census, 
there is much to be concerned about regarding a statistically 
adjusted census in the year 2000. The statistical plan for 
adjusting the population counts in the 2000 census largely 
mirror the ineffective technique used in 1990. Given the stakes 
related to the outcome of the census (apportionment of seats in 
the House of Representatives, number of Electoral College 
votes, and the distribution of Federal dollars) ensuring a fair 
and accurate census is of critical importance.
    b. Benefits.--This oversight provided by the subcommittee 
is critical to a full understanding of the complexities 
inherent in both conducting and adjusting the decennial census.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled ``Oversight of the 2000 
Census: Serious Problems With Statistical Adjustment Remain,'' 
was held on September 17, 1998. The witnesses were: Dr. Leo 
Breiman, professor of statistics, University of California, 
Berkeley; Dr. Donald Ylvisaker, professor of statistics, 
University of California, Los Angeles; Dr. Larry Brown, 
professor of statistics, Wharton School of Business, University 
of Pennsylvania; Dr. Robert Koyak, assistant professor of 
operations research, Naval Postgraduate School; Dr. Martin 
Wells, professor of economic and social statistics, Cornell 
University; Dr. Steven Fienberg, professor of statistics, 
Carnegie Mellon University; Dr. Eugene Ericksen, professor of 
statistics, Temple University; Dr. Barbara Everett Bryant, 
adjunct research scientists, University of Michigan.
    Chairman Miller opened the hearing by expressing concern 
regarding the plan to undertake the largest statistical 
experiment in history to conduct our 2000 census. He pointed 
out that the census is an extremely complicated process with 
3,600 parts. A failure in one of these parts could spell 
disaster for the entire process. Mr. Miller also pointed out 
that the professional associations, like the American 
Statistical Association, have not endorsed the specific 
sampling plan as proposed by the Census Bureau. Rather, they 
have endorsed the concept of sampling and its general 
usefulness. This is a far cry from endorsing the specific plan. 
The chairman urged more testing and design specification for 
the census. Just like we test drugs before they are made 
publicly available, or test new designs before building them 
into airplanes, we need further testing and research on 
improving the census.
    Mrs. Maloney opened her statement by urging Chairman Miller 
to hold additional hearings on alternative counting 
methodologies for the census. She felt the subcommittee should 
reach out to organizations like La Raza, the National League of 
Cities, and the NAACP in order to better understand the 
problems associated with the undercount.
    Professor Leo Breiman undertook an indepth study of the 
1990 statistical adjustment process. He concluded that at least 
70 percent of the initial estimate of the national undercount 
was due to data errors. The Census Bureau, according to 
Professor Breiman, reduced their undercount estimates from 5.3 
million people to 2.3 million people--a reduction of 57 
percent. He concluded that there are too many errors and the 
particular method used in both 1990 and proposed for 2000 are 
too prone to error to successfully correct the undercount.
    Professor Donald Ylvisaker also pointed out the problems 
associated with the 1990 census adjustment, and he too felt 
that the plan for the year 2000 will be susceptible to those 
negative outcomes.'' Although the sample size nationwide for 
the 2000 census is considerably larger than 1990, the fact that 
each State and the District of Columbia must be estimated 
separately, severely restricts the ability of the Census Bureau 
to make accurate adjustments. He is also concerned with the 
fact that both the census and the follow-up survey will miss 
people. In statistical terms, this is called ``correlation 
bias''; in real terms it means that the plan cannot and will 
not count or be able to estimate each person in the country.
    Professor Robert Koyak called the plan for census 2000 a 
``risky gambit.'' He testified that the survey portion of the 
plan (the ICM or Integrated Coverage Measurement) will reflect 
errors in the process itself as opposed to the number of people 
missed by the census. He also addressed the problems inherent 
to the adjustment process. The ``sampling plan'' is not simply 
a matter of selecting a random sample and counting who lives 
there. The plan is complicated by many different variables. For 
instance, thousands of families move between the time the 
census is taken and the time the coverage survey takes place. 
It is very difficult to handle these cases. Any errors made in 
the coverage survey are magnified to the national level. He 
concluded that there is no evidence that the problems 
associated with the 1990 plan are resolved in terms of what is 
being planned for census 2000.
    Professor Larry Brown pointed out that the statistical 
adjustment process that the Census Bureau attempted in 1990 and 
has plans for in the year 2000 are trying to correct extremely 
small errors. The median change in terms of the proportional 
share between States was 0.008--extremely small. He also 
expressed concern about the lack of completeness of the plans 
for census 2000. The dress rehearsals are not simply a last 
minute test of the procedure, rather they serve as a dry run 
for some of the untested or undecided portions of the plan. He 
concluded by urging the Census Bureau to use the remaining 18 
months before the census to concentrate on methods of counting 
100 percent of the population.
    Professor Marty Wells also testified with regard to the 
problems associated with a statistically adjusted census count. 
He reiterated the point that it is not the census counts that 
are important in terms of dividing up seats in the House of 
Representatives and Federal dollars, rather the proportional 
share of the population is the key. Like the other experts, 
Professor Wells also pointed to the experience with the 1990 
adjustment process and the errors encountered by the Census 
Bureau. Processing errors in the 1990 PES accounted for 
millions of errors in the final estimates. The plan for 2000 
does not correct for this problem, indeed the Bureau made the 
survey 5 times as large and they plan to do it in a fraction of 
the time. Thus, processing errors will likely be more 
significant in the 2000 census. Professor Wells also addressed 
the misconception that the American Statistical Association had 
given its ``stamp of approval'' on the plan for adjusting the 
census. Rather, the Association defended the use of statistical 
sampling in a generic sense. The ASA even acknowledges that it 
takes no position one way or the other in terms of the specific 
plan for statistically adjusting the census.
    Dr. Barbara Bryant testified that the censuses of 1980 and 
1990 pushed the envelope in terms of counting the number of 
people in a traditional headcount census. She felt that a 
statistically adjusted census would solve the differential 
undercount. She also felt that spending more money on a 
traditional headcount would not solve the problems inherent 
with this method. She stressed the idea that small errors in a 
survey type coverage measurement cancel out at higher levels of 
geography.
    Dr. Ericksen also argued that using statistical techniques 
is an appropriate method for taking a census in the modern age. 
The lack of response, high levels of mobility, and numerous 
non-traditional living arrangements all make it difficult to 
count each and every person in the country. Census Bureau 
statisticians are among the most competent in the Nation and 
they are able to use the sampling technique to provide better 
counts of the population. He concluded that a census with a 
statistical correction (the ICM) would be more accurate than 
one without.
    Dr. Fienberg testified that the Census Bureau staff is well 
suited to conduct a census with statistical sampling. He 
stressed the idea that a traditional headcount can do no better 
than it did in 1980 or 1990. There were millions of errors in 
both of those censuses. He felt that using a coverage survey 
provided a reasonable method of correcting errors in the 
census. He conceded that there are many methodological issues 
that need to be resolved, but he also felt the basis on which 
these methods rest were scientifically sound.

3. Examining the Dress Rehearsals with Regard to Oversight of the 2000 
        Census.

    a. Summary.--The Census Bureau is charged with conducting 
the decennial census, which is one of the most extensive data 
collection programs in the Nation. The information gathered 
during a census is used not only to determine the population 
count, but is used for allocating seats in the House of 
Representatives, distributing billions of dollars in Federal 
funding, redistricting within the States, and providing the 
base figures for many other statistical measurements which 
reflect the composition of our country. Because of the volume 
and critical nature of a census, a dress rehearsal of the 
entire operation precedes the official census-taking activities 
to review the methodologies. Since the 1930s, the Census Bureau 
has been selecting cities which reflect the various demographic 
compositions around the country, usually including a 
combination of heavily populated and rural areas. While 
examining the operational plan in motion, a dress rehearsal 
provides an opportunity for the Census Bureau to correct any 
flaws and assess major risks which may be detrimental to the 
successful execution of the overall proposed plan. In the 
context of a census, the dress rehearsal is a demonstration 
which may indicate areas that require extra attention.
    The Census Bureau's plan for the 2000 census includes the 
use of sampling and statistical estimation, which was initially 
proposed to be tested at each dress rehearsal site. Since 
preparations for the 2000 census began, sampling was to be used 
on a Nationwide basis. In December 1997, this caused major 
congressional concern after a report from the Commerce 
Department Inspector General's Office was issued which raised 
serious questions about the timeliness and efficiency of the 
2000 census design. Adding to this apprehension was a report 
submitted by the GAO in July 1997, which stated that the 2000 
census was at risk of failure. The basis of the report was 
formulated from observing the Bureau's plans and procedures for 
the dress rehearsals, and interviewing Bureau headquarters and 
regional offices located at the selected rehearsal sites. Based 
on these reports and the fundamental question of the legality 
of the Bureau's initial 2000 operational plan, a compromise 
between the administration and Congress was reached in the 
fiscal year 1998 Appropriations, Public Law 105-119, 111 Stat. 
2483, Sec. 209 (j), which provided for dual-track testing at 
the dress rehearsal sites. It was agreed that the Bureau would 
use sampling and statistical estimation methods in only one 
city, Sacramento, CA. At the second site, Menominee, WI, 
including the Menominee American Indian Reservation, the Bureau 
would conduct a full enumeration with sampling used only to 
improve the accuracy of the final population count. At the 
third and final site, Columbia, SC, the Bureau was to hire 
enumerators to follow up on all non-responding households, in 
the tradition of a full enumeration as they did in 1990. In 
March 1998, the GAO issued another report which reviewed the 
progress of the dress rehearsals entitled ``2000 Census: 
Preparations for Dress Rehearsal Leave Many Unanswered 
Questions.''
    b. Benefits.--The execution of the dress rehearsals is 
directly related to the level of preparation that the Bureau 
has attained for the 2000 census. Whether or not they manage to 
perform the basic fundamental procedures that are associated 
with the decennial is vital to the ultimate success of accurate 
counts in 2000. Locating serious problems in the dress 
rehearsals provides an advantage for the Bureau in that they 
may make any corrections before the actual census is taken. 
Together with GAO evaluations and subcommittee oversight, the 
risk of a failed census can be avoided.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled ``Oversight of the 2000 
Census: Putting the Dress Rehearsals in Perspective'' was held 
on March 26, 1998. This oversight inquiry into the progress of 
the dress rehearsals opened with Chairman Miller who expressed 
concern that the Census Bureau and the Department of Commerce 
have repeatedly ignored warnings from the Office of the 
Inspector General and the GAO that the census plan is in 
disarray, and headed toward failure. The chairman stated that 
Congress is not to blame for any problems the dress rehearsals 
may have had due to funding delays, rather, the real problems 
are with the operational designs developed by the Bureau. Mr. 
Miller explained five key questions that the subcommittee would 
be focusing on to guide their oversight responsibilities, and 
expects that the dress rehearsals will answer: (1) Has the 
census design been properly researched and evaluated, (2) can 
the newly developed academic theories be adequately tested in 
real-world conditions with convincing results, (3) can they be 
executed in an extremely tight timeframe under the unforeseen 
difficulties, (4) is the public aware of all procedures planned 
for the decennial, and (5) what will be done to correct major 
problems that are discovered?
    Mrs. Maloney, the ranking minority member, purported that 
the dress rehearsals encountered problems due to funding 
constraints which caused a 14 day delay. She also stated that 
it is time for the GAO to stop assessing the risks involved 
with the census design and work on offering solutions.
    Testifying before the subcommittee was L. Nye Stevens, 
Director, Federal Management and Workforce Issues, General 
Government Division, who was accompanied by J. Christopher 
Mihm, Associate Director, Federal Management and Workforce 
Issues, and James Burow, Assistant Director.
    In order to address the issues raised by the GAO report, 
officials from the Census Bureau also testified. These 
officials included James F. Holmes, Acting Director, Bureau of 
the Census, who was accompanied by John H. Thompson, Associate 
Director for the Decennial Census, Bureau of the Census, and 
Paula J. Schneider, Principal Associate Director for Programs, 
Bureau of the Census.
    Mr. Stevens testified that the dress rehearsals, which were 
originally intended to demonstrate and fine-tune census 
operations, left a large number of questions unresolved. The 
address lists that were developed for the dress rehearsals 
contained a large number of errors, and were not an improvement 
over 1990. The Master Address File [MAF] is the cornerstone of 
an accurate census, regardless if it is one using sampling and 
statistical estimation or not. Mr. Stevens noted that the 
address list development including lists from the Postal 
Service combined with lists from the 1990 census, and then 
reviewed by local governments for verification, was not 
successful in completing accurate final lists. The Bureau 
decided to change the sequence of completing address lists for 
the 2000 census by physically canvassing areas of the country 
to try and achieve the 99 percent accuracy that they need, a 
process that would not be tested in the dress rehearsal. Mr. 
Burow noted that after the initial combination of the two lists 
and local communities reviewed the outcome, the significant 
amount of errors motivated re-engineering the sequence.
    Mr. Stevens contended that problems with local partnership 
programs stemmed from the Bureau policy that local promotion 
efforts were not eligible for funding. One key problem was 
noted with the Complete Count Committees [CCC], which consist 
of elected business, community, social service, and religious 
leaders. Many of these committees had not been set up in 
jurisdictions where the dress rehearsals were being held. Those 
committees that were set up felt that the Bureau did not set 
clear expectations, nor provided adequate guidance. Further 
problems associated with the dress rehearsals included 
staffing, and implementation of sampling and statistical 
estimation. The GAO was also seriously concerned with potential 
time constraints where insufficient time was allotted to 
complete the Integrated Coverage Measurement [ICM] operation.
    Mr. Holmes testified that the dual-track agreement from 
fiscal year 1998 appropriations added complications in the 
dress rehearsal plans. To accommodate this agreement, the 
Bureau chose three comprehensive sites to conduct the dress 
rehearsals. Mr. Holmes noted delays in the dress rehearsals 
because of moving the start date from April 4 to April 18. Mr. 
Holmes also attributed the delays to problems with the address 
list, and the late delivery of local lists and maps. The 
newness of the automated systems which are still being 
developed was a significant problem in accomplishing an 
accurate address list. Mr. Holmes dually noted that the three 
sites were not a test between different methodologies, rather a 
demonstration of how each census design will perform.

4. Reviewing the 1990 Census to Improve the 2000 Census.

    a. Summary.--The 1990 census had a slightly higher 
undercount rate than the 1980 census. A Post-Enumeration Survey 
[PES] was conducted in an attempt to provide data to correct 
this undercount. However, the Secretary of Commerce decided 
that the numbers provided by the PES were not accurate enough 
to be used to adjust the census. In an attempt to contain costs 
and increase accuracy in the 2000 census, the Census Bureau 
designed a plan including statistical sampling. Proponents of 
the plan argue it is the only way to reduce an undercount, 
while opponents claim that the results of the sampling plan 
will be as inaccurate as the numbers rejected following the 
1990 census.
    b. Benefits.--The hearing was an effort to study the 
complexities surrounding the taking of the 1990 census, and the 
reasons why a statistical adjustment was not made following the 
1990 census. The hearing highlighted the problems surrounding 
the 1990 census. It also provided a forum to discuss the 
statistical problems inherent with trying to adjust the census 
number to reduce the undercount.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled ``Oversight of the 2000 
Census: Revisiting the 1990 Census,'' was held on May 5, 1998. 
The subcommittee heard from six witnesses. The first panel 
consisted of Hon. Thomas C. Sawyer, and Hon. Thomas E. Petri. 
Representatives Sawyer and Petri discussed their involvement in 
the 1990 census as members of the Subcommittee on the Census. 
The second panel consisted of Philip Stark, professor of 
statistics, University of California, Berkeley; Kenneth Darga, 
Ph.D., demographer, Department of Management and Budget, State 
of Michigan; and Jerry Coffey, Ph.D., mathematical 
statistician. Wade Henderson, executive director of the 
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights was on the third panel. 
The statisticians on the second panel concentrated on the 
statistical complexities of conducting a survey to adjust 
census numbers, while the final witness emphasized the 
importance of using sampling to reduce the undercount.
    Chairman Miller opened the hearing by warning that the 
sampling plan proposed by the Census Bureau for 2000 is a risky 
endeavor and one that is heading toward failure. He noted that 
the General Accounting Office has provided reports that the 
risk of a failed census has increased. The chairman stressed 
that the census is fundamental to our elected, democratic form 
of government and if the census cannot be trusted, skepticism 
would increase. Mr. Miller pointed out that the adjustment 
proposed for 1990 was too inaccurate to be implemented and he 
was concerned that the Bureau's decision to count only 90 
percent of the population would leave the American people with 
no fall back position. He recognized that there were problems 
in 1990 and that it is important to address those problems and 
do a better job in 2000.
    Chairman Miller discussed the guidelines used by Secretary 
Mosbacher following the 1990 census to evaluate whether 
adjustment should have been implemented and the chairman stated 
that those guidelines should be used again in 2000. 
Specifically, Mr. Miller was concerned that like 1990, the 
adjusted numbers may not be proven to be more accurate at the 
national, State and local levels than the original numbers, and 
that an adjustment could have a negative effect on future 
censuses by reducing participation. Furthermore, he was 
concerned that after an individual takes the time to return a 
census questionnaire, statistics may require that person's 
count to be deleted.
    Ranking Member Carolyn Maloney asked the witnesses to 
address how Congress can make sure that the same mistakes from 
1990 are not made again in 2000. She felt that the actual 
headcount, without the use of statistical sampling, could not 
be reflective of the actual population of the United States. 
Mrs. Maloney was concerned that people seemed to be saying that 
since the plan to adjust the census in 1990 was not perfect, 
that nothing should be done in 2000. She said an inaccurate 
census would be an embarrassment for Congress and a travesty 
for the country. Mrs. Maloney noted that the National Academy 
Sciences and the Census Bureau claimed sampling was more 
accurate and less costly than an actual headcount of the 
population.
    Representative Sawyer discussed the problems with the 1990 
census that he observed as the former chairman of the 
Subcommittee on the Census. He noted the mail response rate was 
65 percent instead of the estimated 70 percent. Mr. Sawyer said 
that this higher work load for door-to-door follow-up resulted 
in a follow-up period that was over budget and twice as long as 
planned. It created problems maintaining a qualified workforce 
and resulted in poorer quality data and a high undercount rate. 
Mr. Sawyer felt that the 1990 census problems were a result of 
using an outmoded design and that there was no choice but to 
turn to a sampling plan to reduce the undercount. He ended by 
stating that he hoped the subcommittee would work together with 
the Census Bureau to ensure an accurate count.
    Representative Petri voiced his concern that the Bureau's 
sampling plan could be found to be unconstitutional, thereby 
causing chaos for the country because there would be no census 
number to use for reapportionment. He also felt that the use of 
sampling would cause individual participation to plummet. Mr. 
Petri felt that if the Bureau insisted on using sampling, then 
it was necessary to conduct a complete census before 
adjustment, so there would be a census to count on in case of a 
court challenge. He emphasized the importance of counting 
everyone, including Americans who live outside the United 
States. Mr. Petri pointed out that his State of Wisconsin had 
the highest participation in 1990 and he felt that many of the 
efforts made by State and local governments in Wisconsin to 
promote the census could be used in 2000.
    Philip Stark testified that adjusting the 1990 census using 
sampling did not work because of statistical bias. Statistical 
bias is not an intentional skewing of results, but errors 
resulting naturally from bad data, processing errors and wrong 
assumptions. Mr. Stark stated that since both the 1990 model 
and the 2000 model are based on the same statistical methods, 
the problems of 1990 would be repeated in 2000. In fact, he 
noted that taking a bigger sample, as proposed for the 2000 
census, could make bias even worse.
    Kenneth Darga testified that the Post-Enumeration Survey 
[PES], which was designed to identify the undercount in 1990 
was not effective. He stated that while this method seemed to 
identify individuals missed by the original census count, it 
did not because the Bureau's effort to measure a small 
component of the population--such as people missed by the 
census--is very sensitive to extremely small sources of 
measurement error. He stated the Census Bureau's proposed 
adjustment for undercount reflected these measurement errors, 
including survey matching errors, misreporting of usual 
residence, and unreliable interviews more than the actual 
undercount. Mr. Darga testified that, as a result, the Bureau's 
effort to solve an undercount of 2 percent of the population 
would destroy the reliability of the census for every user of 
census data.
    Mr. Coffey testified regarding both the failed attempt to 
adjust the population counts in the 1990 census and the 
similarities between the failed 1990 plan and the current plan 
for census 2000. A great deal of research, from both inside and 
outside the Census Bureau, concentrated on the attempted 
adjustment in 1990. All who looked at the results agreed that a 
significant portion of the measured undercount from the Post 
Enumeration Survey [PES] was attributable to statistical bias 
which comes from bad data, processing errors, et cetera. Mr. 
Coffey also expressed a great deal of concern regarding the 
plan to only count 90 percent of the population. He felt that 
this would be detrimental both in terms of the accuracy of the 
census and for continuity of the quality of data from the 
Census Bureau. Mr. Coffey concluded that while the Census 
Bureau may have made some improvements on the statistical 
methods utilized in 1990, the basic plan for statistical 
adjustment remains the same. That is, there will be errors, 
mismeasurement, and bias.
    Wade Henderson, executive director, Leadership Conference 
on Civil Rights, stated that the census was one of the highest 
priorities of the civil rights community. He felt that an 
accurate census ensures equal representation and equal access 
to governmental resources. Mr. Henderson was disturbed by the 
high differential undercount rates for racial and ethnic 
minorities, and particularly worried about the undercount of 
children. He felt that the American population has become too 
diverse to accurately count with a traditional method. Mr. 
Henderson strongly supports the Census Bureau's statistical 
methodology for 2000, and recommends that it complement methods 
to count everyone directly.

5. Status of Dual Track Preparations for the 2000 Census.

    a. Summary.--The U.S. District Court for the District of 
Columbia held that the Census Bureau's statistical sampling 
plan violates the Census Act, 13 U.S.C. Sec. 195. The court 
ordered, ``that the defendants are permanently enjoined from 
using any form of statistical sampling, including their program 
for nonresponse follow-up and Integrated Coverage Measurement, 
to determine the population for purposes of congressional 
apportionment.''
    In light of this court decision, it is more important than 
ever that the Census Bureau be prepared to conduct the census 
without the use of statistical sampling. Because the Commerce 
Department indicated that it would continue to prepare for a 
sampled census, the subcommittee continues to be concerned that 
the Census Bureau has not been preparing adequately for a 
traditional full enumeration.
    b. Benefits.--The hearing offered a forum for the 
subcommittee to express its concern that the Bureau did not 
seem to be preparing for a census without sampling. It allowed 
the subcommittee to receive a commitment from the Department of 
Commerce and the Census Bureau that it will be prepared to 
conduct a non-sampled census, should the Supreme Court agree 
with the lower court's ruling that sampled numbers cannot be 
used for congressional apportionment.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing titled: ``Oversight of the 2000 
Census: Review of Census Bureau Planning and Preparations in 
Response to the Federal Court Ruling that Sampling Is 
Illegal,'' was held on September 9, 1998. The subcommittee 
heard from Robert J. Shapiro, Undersecretary for Economic 
Affairs, U.S. Department of Commerce, and James F. Holmes, 
Acting Director, U.S. Bureau of the Census regarding the Census 
Bureau's plan for the 2000 census.
    Chairman Miller stressed that the 2000 census is still at 
serious risk because the administration is still preparing for 
a sampled census, despite Congress' objections and a Federal 
three-judge panel which held the plan to be illegal. Mr. Miller 
noted that he hoped that the hearing would mark the beginning 
of a new commitment by all parties to work together to reduce 
the undercount. He encouraged the administration to show how it 
has been preparing to conduct a full count census and 
demonstrate a commitment to a legal census.
    Ranking Member Maloney stated her concern that there are 
not viable alternatives to a sampled census. She did not 
support using the Postal Service to play a larger role in the 
census or the use of administrative records. Mrs. Maloney was 
concerned that the hearing would focus too much on unviable 
suggestions, instead of ideas to improve the census.
    Undersecretary Shapiro stated the commitment of the 
Commerce Department and the Census Bureau was to conduct an 
accurate, fair and cost-effective census in 2000. He noted that 
he believes that a sampled census is needed for the 2000 
census. Mr. Shapiro stated that the Department of Commerce may 
ask the administration to request a supplemental appropriation 
to cover additional fiscal year 1999 costs if the Bureau has to 
use a traditional design for the 2000 census. He stated that 
any interruption in funding would put the census at grave risk 
and a continuing resolution would undermine the viability of 
the census, whichever method is used.
    Mr. Holmes opened by assuring the subcommittee that the 
Bureau is on track to conduct a census without sampling, 
despite his belief that a sampled census would be more 
accurate. He pointed out that many of the planning activities 
are components of either a census with or without sampling. Mr. 
Holmes stated that the Bureau has 20 chartered groups to 
address the issues concerning programs and operations that 
might be components of a census without sampling. He said that 
these groups would prepare operational analysis between mid-
September and mid-October. These analysis would be used to 
prepare a complete development plan for a non-sampled census by 
November. Mr. Holmes also stressed that any delay in funding 
for fiscal year 1999 would put the census at risk.

6. Community Based Approaches for a Better Enumeration.

    a. Summary.--In order to achieve the best enumeration 
possible, local officials and community leaders must work in 
conjunction with the Census Bureau in order to locate each 
person to be counted in the 2000 census. The Census Bureau 
currently has partnership programs which link local Bureau 
liaisons with community organizations and officials who strive 
to target areas in their communities which have a history of 
being undercounted. There are specific programs which are 
presented nationwide, where each will be implemented in cities 
across the country. The ``Be Counted'' National campaign will 
provide questionnaires at sites such as community centers, 
large apartment buildings, post offices, grocery stores, etc. 
At these public centers, the questionnaires will be available 
in a myriad of languages: Spanish, Cantonese, Mien, Vietnamese, 
Russian, and Chinese. Along with this program, the Bureau will 
provide Questionnaire Assistance Centers [QAC] to help 
residents fill out their questionnaires.
    Another program vital to the promotion and outreach 
conducted by the Bureau includes the Complete Count Committees 
[CCC]. A CCC is a voluntary working group composed of 
influential governmental officials, community, business, media, 
and religious leaders. One of their main functions is to create 
public awareness of how important it is to be counted in the 
census, as well as a civic duty to return questionnaires. These 
individuals will work together in their specific communities to 
try and reach every person so that they may be counted in the 
census.
    The Bureau has also invited local and tribal governments to 
participate in Local Update of Census Addresses [LUCA]. LUCA is 
a partnership program which provides an opportunity for local 
governments to review lists from the Master Address File [MAF]. 
A local representative will then have the chance to input 
regarding the completeness and accuracy of the MAF. 
Participation in LUCA is on a local voluntary basis, and 
communities are encouraged to take advantage of the review 
process.
    Previously, the Census Bureau has relied on Public Service 
Announcements to advertise the decennial census, however, in 
2000 the Bureau will use paid promotion. The Bureau has hired a 
full service ad agency to buy radio, television, and print 
media spots to serve as major media outlet resources.
    b. Benefits.--Successful implementation of these programs 
is vital to the enumeration of each city and locality, and the 
Bureau must work closely with communities to ensure that proper 
hiring and techniques will be incorporated. Several of these 
programs were used during the dress rehearsals and the 
subcommittee is reviewing the results by specifically focusing 
on the programs which were instituted. The subcommittee 
maintains that it is imperative to establish and develop 
relationships between the local Census Bureau liaisons and 
local communities in order to achieve the most accurate counts 
possible.
    c. Hearings.--A field hearing entitled, ``Oversight of the 
2000 Census: Community Based Approaches for a Better 
Enumeration,'' was held on December 10, 1998, in Miami, FL. 
Witnesses included The Honorable Carrie Meek, Mr. Mark 
Schlakman, special counsel to Governor Lawton Chiles, State of 
Florida, Senator Gwen Margolis, chairperson of the Board, Board 
County Commissioners, Ms. Kelly C. Mallette, policy advisor, 
Office of Mayor Joe Carollo, Mr. Merrett R. Stierheim, county 
manager, Miami-Dade County, Mr. John Stokesberry, director, 
Area Alliance for Aging, Ms. Opal Jones, chief of staff, 
Commissioner Betty Ferguson, Dr. Dario Moreno, assoc. 
professor, Department of Political Science, Florida 
International University, Ms. Marleine Bastien, L.C.S.W., 
Commission on the Census 2000, Haitian-American Grassroots 
Coalition, Ms. Lynn Summers, executive director, Community 
Partnership for the Homeless.
    Congresswoman Carrie Meek began by commending Chairman 
Miller for bringing the subcommittee to Miami, and that holding 
field hearings around the country can help raise awareness of 
the upcoming census and the difficulties facing various 
communities. Ms. Meek stated that in the 1990 census, the 
highest miscalculations in the State of Florida occurred in the 
Miami-Dade County area. A disproportionate number of those not 
counted were people of color. Ms. Meek also pointed out that 
her community missed out on billions of dollars in Federal 
funding that would have gone to programs for schools, to build 
roads and low-income housing--all for a better quality of life 
for local residents. Ms. Meek finished her statement by 
touching on a bill which she recently introduced. This 
legislation will help citizens who receive welfare benefits, 
food stamps, housing or health care assistance, et cetera, from 
losing any of these benefits if they were to be hired by the 
Census Bureau as enumerators.
    Mr. Schlakman testified that the 1990 census failed to 
recognize more than a quarter of a million people in Florida. 
As a result, when Federal funds were appropriated, these people 
were ignored. He voiced concerns that the State of Florida may 
be subject to the same undercounts in 2000, and the Census 
Bureau must do a better job. Community leadership teams and 
Bureau staff should reflect the communities that must be 
counted, especially those which historically have a low mail-
response rate. Public awareness campaigns must involve minority 
and multi-lingual media outlets, community newspapers, the 
internet, billboards, churches and other resources. Mr. 
Schlakman noted the primary concern is attaining the most 
accurate count possible.
    State Senator Gwen Margolis spoke on behalf of Mayor Alex 
Penelas, and testified that nearly half of the total population 
of Miami-Dade County area were born in another country, and the 
city represents one of the most ethnically diverse regions in 
the United States. Unfortunately, the city also presents most 
of the problems which the Census Bureau enumerators face in 
locating and counting multi-ethnic communities. She stated that 
all four congressional districts in the area ranked among the 
top 50 districts which went undercounted in the 1990 census. 
Ms. Margolis stated that the city cannot continue to be 
shortchanged by undercounts where Federal aid is concerned. Ms. 
Margolis referred to the recommendations submitted in her 
written testimony concerning ways to improve the accuracy of 
census counts for the Miami area. The suggestions included 
greater use of current administrative records such as drivers' 
licenses, school enrollment records, real property records, and 
vital statistics to determine the existence of additional 
addresses, especially informal housing units, and housing in 
nonresidential structures. During the hearing, Ms. Margolis 
specifically stated that it would be possible to account for 
some households through the use of power and telephone company 
records, and the number of homeless registered for school 
through the Dade County School Board. Additional 
recommendations in Ms. Margolis' written testimony entail 
marketing the census by involving local firms, churches, and 
other groups to target hard-to-count areas, mail census 
questionnaires in languages other than English to locations 
based on consultation with local officials, send follow-up 
enumerators more frequently and at more varied times, and 
continue to work closely with local governments in updating the 
Master Address File [MAF]. Aside from these efforts to improve 
the accuracy of the upcoming census, Ms. Margolis, on behalf of 
Mayor Penelas, is in strong support of employing the use of 
statistical sampling.
    Ms. Mallette testified on behalf of Mayor Joe Corollo and 
stated that poverty is one of the foremost factors which result 
in undercounts of the Miami-Dade area. Overcrowded housing, 
homelessness, and linguistic isolation also present problems 
where individuals and families will fall through the cracks 
when the census is taken. Ms. Mallette also stated that over 90 
percent of the population are of minority backgrounds, with 
over 60 percent Hispanic, and almost 30 percent black. Within 
these groups, other ethnicities are mostly represented by 
Cubans, Nicaraguans, Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and other 
immigrant groups from the Caribbean Basin nations. Afro-
Americans and Haitians represent the largest groups among the 
black population. The ethnic make-up of this particular city is 
largely due to Miami's position as an international gateway, 
where almost 30 percent of the residents have entered the 
United States since 1980. According to Ms. Mallette, increasing 
immigration and economic distress suggests that the undercounts 
will still be higher than the average city in the year 2000. 
Ms. Mallette strongly supports the use of statistical methods 
to alleviate the possibility of undercounts for the city of 
Miami.
    Mr. Stierheim, county manager, also testified that Miami-
Dade County has been consistently undercounted. Mr. Stierheim 
noted that Miami is an extraordinarily diverse community, where 
many people may go unnoticed when census counts are taken. The 
witness reiterated the suggestions made by State Senator 
Margolis in her written testimony, and stressed the importance 
of enumerators who speak the predominant language of the 
particular neighborhoods that they are assigned. He also 
advised strong involvement with local governments in order to 
facilitate maintenance and updates to the address listings 
handled by the Bureau. Also, Mr. Stierheim mentioned that the 
county was not adverse to appropriating funds for census 
efforts.
    Ms. Opal Jones testified that efforts for the 2000 census 
should be geared toward techniques that would meet the 
constitution's mandate, and provide for as accurate a census 
count as possible. Ms. Jones specifically testified to the 
extent of the undercount, the need for more aggressive outreach 
efforts, the use of statistical sampling, and the importance of 
adequate funding for the county. According to Ms. Jones' 
written statement, she supports the use of administrative 
records, such as IRS records and drivers' licenses, to serve as 
a system of checks and balances, but feels that these resources 
are not entirely accurate. The witness testified that if 
perpetuated, the differential undercount will have long-term 
negative effects on minorities. She also stated that the 
average citizen in her neighborhood is not aware of the census, 
therefore a high profile public process is essential. Ms. Jones 
recommends that the Census Bureau focus on face-to-face contact 
with targeted groups in the local area who will stress the 
notion of confidentiality with census information.
    Mr. John Stokesberry, a representative of the aging 
community, commented on a myriad of reasons why the elderly 
fail to be counted. Those circumstances exist in cases where 
two older individuals, who are not married, are living together 
and do not want to disclose this information. Other frequent 
scenarios revolve around elder who immigrate and live in a 
residence with restrictions on the number of allowed persons, 
where the result is family members or relations who may go 
undocumented. Often, elders live in small efficiencies attached 
to a house--the efficiency was constructed without a license or 
permit which the elders may not have a mailing address. Other 
problems have surfaced because of elders living in unlicensed 
Adult Living Facilities [ALF], or living in trailer parks that 
census forms may never reach. Mr. Stokesberry voiced concerns 
about the Census Bureau hiring needs, where elders would be 
employed as enumerators for these specific communities. There 
is fear that if elders are hired, many who receive Social 
Security benefits or Federal pensions may lose a portion of 
their monthly payments. Mr. Stokesberry voiced strong support 
of legislation introduced by Congresswoman Carrie Meek, which 
seeks to prevent any loss of Federal benefits while hired as a 
temporary enumerator for the Census Bureau.
    Dr. Dario Moreno also testified concerning the challenges 
Miami presents to the Bureau in terms of getting accurate 
counts. Rapid urban growth, poverty, and growing immigration 
are the main problems the Bureau must face, and those which 
have contributed to undercounts of the past. Dr. Moreno 
testified that no other major metropolitan area in the United 
States has been as radically affected by immigration. 
Political, social, and economic unrest in the Caribbean and 
Latin America have had a direct impact on the city, as Miami 
provides a haven for these troubled foreigners. Other factors 
which contribute to the undercount are the large percentage of 
the foreign-born elderly, who often isolate themselves and are 
apprehensive about filling out a questionnaire form. Dr. Moreno 
urged the Census Bureau to reach out to newly arrived 
immigrants by working with local churches and community 
organizations, and stressed the need for strong partnership 
with State and local governments. He also encouraged the 
Complete Count Committees to work with the Bureau to raise 
awareness about the census.
    Ms. Marleine Bastien, a representative of the Haitian 
community, stated that more than 1 million Haitian-Americans 
reside in the United States. The Haitian community in south 
Florida is estimated at 450,000, with over half living in 
Miami-Dade County. Although most are successfully integrated 
within their communities, many are unemployed and do not speak 
English. This can be attributed to the large amount of 
undocumented individuals, as well as discrimination based on 
origin. Improving the counts for Haitians involve dealing with 
many issues such as most Haitian immigrants fear government 
officials, unofficial immigration status, housing arrangements, 
lack of communication and information about the census. Ms. 
Bastien provided several useful recommendations for improving 
Haitian population counts: 1) Recruit census-takers who speak 
Creole and are sensitive to the specific needs of the Haitian-
American community; 2) provide census questionnaires in the 
dominant languages of the communities; and, 3) use Haitian 
radio and television programs along with newspapers for 
advertising the 2000 census.
    Ms. Lynn Summers, a representative of the homeless 
community, testified that the methodology currently instituted, 
periodic headcounts with an added multiplier, do not produce 
sufficient results to accurately reflect the number of persons 
with no usual residence in the Miami-Dade area. Ms. Summers 
stated that her opinion is based on research over the past 3 
years, and diligent work to locate all of the homeless in the 
area.

                   Subcommittee on the Civil Service

1. Impact of the President's FY-1998 Budget on Federal Employees.

    a. Summary.--President Clinton's proposed Federal budget 
for fiscal year 1998 recommended reductions in spending of 
$6.252 billion from accounts used to pay Federal employees and 
retirees. The President's recommendations would have required 
Federal agencies to pay an additional 1.5 percent of employees' 
salaries to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund 
[CSRDF], a change that would have provided $621 million in 
savings the first year and almost $3 billion over the 5-year 
budget cycle. The President also recommended that Federal 
employees in both the Civil Service Retirement System [CSRS] 
and the Federal Employees Retirement System [FERS] pay an 
additional one half of 1 percent (0.5 percent) toward their 
retirements. This increased payroll deduction was recommended 
to be deferred and phased in, so that employees would face an 
increase of 0.25 percent beginning January 1999, 0.15 percent 
beginning January 2000, and 0.10 percent, beginning in January 
2001. In addition to these increases affecting current 
employees, the President proposed to delay the cost of living 
adjustment paid to Federal civilian annuitants each year from 
January to April. This reduction in payments to Federal 
retirees would have saved $278 million in fiscal year 1998, and 
was projected to achieve $1.5 billion in reduced benefits 
during the period ending in fiscal year 2002.
    b. Benefits.--This investigation provided an opportunity to 
review the President's budget proposals affecting Federal 
employees and retirees in light of the savings targeted to be 
achieved through changes in pay and benefits. These 
deliberations provided a basis for Congress to reject the 
administration's proposed delay in Federal retirees' cost of 
living adjustments when it enacted the Balanced Budget 
Enforcement Act of 1997. They also opened the door to exploring 
options to ensure more equitable treatment of Postal Service 
employees and FERS employees, whose retirement programs are 
currently funded on a ``full normal cost'' basis. The 
investigation underscored the need to modify the formula used 
to calculate the Government's share of the FEHB premiums. The 
formula was subsequently changed in the Balanced Budget 
Enforcement Act of 1997.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``The President's 1998 
Budget: Civil Service Impacts'' was held on February 13, 1997. 
The hearing provided an opportunity to review consequences of 
current strategies for funding Federal pensions, to assess the 
different effects of the changes on different Federal 
retirement systems, and to identify the consequences on 
different employees and agencies as they are affected by the 
changes.
    Mr. Mica noted that the administration had submitted 
similar proposals for each of the 2 previous fiscal years, and 
that none of these proposals had been enacted during that 
period. He observed that Federal agencies would have to reduce 
their current spending by $3 billion to comply with these 
increased payments into retirement systems, and that Federal 
jobs might have to be eliminated to pay for these expenditures. 
Mr. Mica also noted that the administration's proposal would 
have allowed the current formula for calculating Federal 
employees' health insurance premiums to shift from a 
calculation based on the former ``Big Six'' plans to an average 
based on the five largest plans remaining in the program. This 
shift would have led to higher insurance premiums for Federal 
employees, and Mr. Mica proposed to address this issue in a 
subsequent hearing. Mr. Mica stressed the importance of 
achieving the overall savings, noting that the Budget Committee 
has acted to realize savings from these programs when the 
subcommittee could not enact its own solutions in previous 
years.
    Mrs. Morella noted that she had introduced H. Con. Res. 13, 
expressing the sense of the Congress that annuitants' cost of 
living adjustments should be paid in January, consistent with 
the payment of COLAs to Social Security beneficiaries and 
military retired pay.
    Mr. Robert Tobias, national president of the National 
Treasury Employees Union, recommended that the subcommittee 
write to the chairman of the Committee on the Budget to request 
that the subcommittee be assigned a savings target of zero for 
this budget resolution. He asked that the increased retirement 
fund contributions from both employees and agencies be denied 
by the subcommittee.
    Mr. Michael Styles, national president of the Federal 
Managers Association, asserted that the Congress and the 
administration have failed to provide pay and benefits 
consistent with the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act. He 
observed that he had completed an assignment with a Navy 
contractor, and that private firms' employees were paid 
substantially more than public employees performing the same 
work. He claimed that the Federal workforce has continued to 
perform at solid levels, even in the face of continued 
pressures to reduce the workforce and to convert work to 
commercial firms through contracts. He concluded that these 
approaches have demoralizing effects on the Federal workforce, 
and should be resisted.
    Mr. Charles Jackson, president of the National Association 
of Retired Federal Employees, expressed disappointment with the 
President's proposal to delay annual cost of living adjustments 
to Federal annuitants. He claimed that the Civil Service 
Retirement and Disability Fund is able to pay current 
obligations, and reported that most large and medium employers 
in the private sector pay full retirement costs of their 
employees, where Federal employees pay 25 percent of their 
retirement costs. He contrasted the President's proposal to 
delay the COLA to Federal civilian annuitants, but not the 
COLAs associated with Social Security beneficiaries and 
military retired pay. He also noted that the President's 
proposal to allow the statutory modification of the Federal 
Employee Health Benefit Premium increase to take effect would 
result in a substantial price increase for Federal annuitants, 
an increase that would be difficult to absorb in light of the 
COLA delay.
    Mr. James Cunningham, national president of the National 
Federation of Federal Employees, expressed severe 
disappointment with the President's budget. He claimed that 
Federal employees should receive a 6.6 percent increase instead 
of the 2.8 percent that the President proposed. He observed 
that the increased pay to employees will increase the 
compensation costs of Federal agencies, and generate pressure 
for other spending cuts that might impede agencies' operations. 
He questioned the propriety of the administration's championing 
of its workforce reductions, and emphasized that his 
organization was interested in the National Partnership 
Council's work only to the extent that it contributed to more 
effective agency performance.
    Mr. Mica stressed that the subcommittee would be required 
to achieve savings in the entitlement programs under the budget 
resolution, and noted the political difficulties of achieving 
fair distribution of the responsibilities for reaching the 
budget targets. Both Mr. Styles and Mr. Jackson recommended 
that the tax cuts proposed for working Americans be used as a 
source of savings, rather than reducing the burdens that the 
retirement system places on tax revenues. Mr. Jackson indicated 
an interest in reviewing savings achieved through a Medical 
Savings Account pilot program authorized under the Kennedy-
Kassebaum Act of 1996. He recognized the desire to curb 
increases in medical costs, but preferred to see results of the 
pilot before endorsing any particular proposal to limit the 
growth of benefits.
    Mr. Styles and Mr. Tobias recommended achieving savings by 
reducing the contractor workforce. Mr. Styles claimed that 
there are no accurate reports of the number of employees 
working for agencies through contracts, and that Federal 
contracting costs, at $108 billion, now exceed the $103 billion 
Federal payroll. As a result, he argued, the Federal Government 
has not truly shrunk, but we have shifted to paying for these 
functions through contracts rather than through direct 
employment costs.
    Mr. Mica provided a copy of a letter from Office of 
Personnel Management Director James B. King acknowledging that, 
if his proposal to cap the Federal payment for health insurance 
premiums at a fixed dollar amount had been adopted, Federal 
employees would have saved $820 million in health insurance 
premiums during the past 2 years. This would have averaged $200 
per enrollee in the FEHBP. He also demonstrated that the amount 
of money needed to pay Federal annuities is growing annually. 
Whereas Civil Service retirement outlays from the Treasury 
exceeded receipts by $24 billion in 1992, this year the 
retirement accounts will require $30 billion in support from 
the taxpayers. This shortfall is projected to increase to $107 
billion per year within 20 years, and continue to grow for the 
foreseeable future. Mr. Mica commented that he considered 
singling out Federal civilian retirees for the delayed COLA was 
blatantly unfair, and sought the panel's suggestions for 
options to address the Budget Committee's targets.
    Mr. Hugh Bates, president of the National Association of 
Postmasters of the United States, observed that the Postal 
Service had achieved an operating surplus of $1.8 billion 
during the previous year, and endorsed efforts to balance the 
Federal budget. He opposed the COLA delay that would affect 
only Federal civilian annuitants.
    Mr. William Brennan, president of the National League of 
Postmasters, testified that the League also opposes requiring 
Federal employees and annuitants to assist efforts to balance 
the budget. He noted that the Postal Service already pays a per 
capita share of Federal retirement programs that is larger than 
other Federal agencies, because the Postal Service is required 
by law to make payments that are not required of other 
agencies. Mr. Mica observed that, where the Postal Service 
currently provides 54 percent of the cash in the Federal 
retirement funds, by 2015 the Postal Service will provide 81 
percent of this funding. He noted that, since Postal employees 
must already pay the full normal costs of their retirement, as 
calculated by the Office of Personnel Management, postal 
employees already pay a fair share toward retirement benefits, 
and that the President's proposal could be considered unfair to 
them.

2. Federal Hiring From the Welfare Rolls.

    a. Summary.--Although the Federal Workforce Restructuring 
Act of 1994 directed the reduction of 272,900 Federal employees 
by 2000, President Clinton announced a program to hire 10,000 
people off the welfare rolls into the Federal workforce. The 
President announced this effort as part of a program to ease 
the impact of welfare reform laws enacted in 1996. A hearing 
was called to develop an understanding of the administration's 
strategy for accomplishing this hiring initiative in a manner 
consistent with the workforce reduction targets, the variety of 
protections and reinstatement eligibility provided to Federal 
employees facing reductions-in-force, veterans' preference, and 
merit system principles. The hearing provided an opportunity 
for the subcommittee to review the administration's approach to 
hiring people currently benefiting from welfare into Federal 
employment. The administration articulated its reasons for 
believing that this could be accomplished consistent with merit 
system principles and veterans preference by relying upon 
normal turnover, targeting opportunities in entry level and 
temporary positions, and by using several excepted service 
hiring authorities that are available (albeit rarely used) to 
facilitate hiring in positions intended as training 
assignments. Employee organizations provided insight about the 
adverse effects on Federal employees who consider this 
initiative particularly ill-timed in light of their agencies' 
workforce reduction efforts. Private scholars and analysts were 
afforded an ability to demonstrate that different approaches 
are working more effectively in several States than the targets 
indicated by the administration.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee gained clear understanding 
of the effects on the working poor of providing a preference 
for welfare recipients, as proposed in legislation introduced 
by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson (H.R. 1066, the Federal 
Jobs Opportunity Act).
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Federal Hiring from the 
Welfare Rolls'' was held on April 24, 1997. Mr. Mica noted that 
Federal agencies have vast experience in welfare-to-work 
programs, but much of that experience has resulted in little 
success. Instead, State programs (such as Wisconsin's and 
Oregon's) have reduced welfare case loads substantially in ways 
that could make the Federal endeavor irrelevant to former 
welfare dependents' needs. He also noted that thousands of 
Federal employees have been separated involuntarily as part of 
downsizing and the administration's efforts to reinvent 
government. Those former employees have retention rights that 
would provide eligibility to return to agencies that have 
positions available. He noted that the Department of Defense 
had borne the lion's share of these reductions, and that it 
faced additional reductions in the President's budget proposal.
    Mr. Koskinen, Deputy Director for Management, Office of 
Management and Budget, reported that more than 2.8 million 
people were removed from welfare rolls, a 20 percent reduction 
from the numbers on welfare rolls in 1993. He estimated that 
current economic growth creates about 200,000 jobs each month. 
The President had asked corporate America to include welfare 
recipients among the workers who join the workforce during this 
expansion. In response to a request from the President, 
agencies had, during a 30-day period, assembled plans and 
identified appropriate positions that would be included in the 
President's initiative. The target of 10,000 positions reflects 
a proportionate share based on the Federal portion of the 
national workforce. Even during a general workforce reduction, 
Federal agencies hired 58,000 permanent and 140,000 temporary 
employees in 1996, so Mr. Koskinen viewed this target as within 
reason for a 3-year period. He believed that the targets could 
be realized without preferences or any set-asides for welfare 
applicants. Agencies would not create special jobs for these 
applicants, and they would have to pass any tests or meet 
appropriate qualifications, just as any other Federal employee.
    Mr. King, Director, Office of Personnel Management, 
described the interagency efforts used to develop and implement 
the administration's initiative. The Office of Personnel 
Management has provided written guidelines to agencies that 
describe optional hiring procedures available under current 
law. Most of the effort will involve providing additional 
information about opportunities in the Federal sector in new 
formats and in a more timely manner. OPM has established a 
target of 25 positions. The Bureau of the Census, which will 
soon begin hiring in preparation for the 2000 Census, has 
committed to hire nearly 4,000 welfare recipients, or 40 
percent of the governmentwide target. Most of the positions 
would be temporary, and provide introductory work experience 
during planning stages of the operation. Mr. King stressed that 
this initiative is not directed at career positions, but at 
providing entry-level opportunities. He reaffirmed his belief 
that the objectives could be accomplished consistent with merit 
system principles and veterans preference. In response to 
questions, Mr. King confirmed that employees hired as a result 
of this initiative would not get benefits other than those 
available to similarly-situated Federal employees.
    Ms. Disney, Deputy Assistant Secretary (Civilian 
Personnel), Department of Defense, reported that the Department 
of Defense continues to hire about 20,000 civilians each year 
for permanent positions, and another 23,000 temporary 
positions, even while planning to eliminate an additional 
90,000 positions during the next 3 years. Defense expects to be 
able to fill about 2,900 of these positions with current 
welfare recipients during the 3-year period. It will use a 
variety of wage-grade, temporary, and nonappropriated fund 
opportunities to accomplish this hiring goal.
    Mr. Brickhouse, Assistant Secretary for Human Resources, 
Department of Veterans Affairs, described the Department of 
Veterans Affairs' efforts to hire 800 applicants from the 
welfare rolls during the next 2 years. He noted that most of 
the opportunities would be in GS-1 and GS-2 positions that are 
temporary, but could provide important initial experience. He 
noted that in these positions, annual turnover rates average 
almost 20 percent. He stressed that the Department's targeted 
recruitment efforts would pay particular attention to veterans, 
and mentioned programs that are already in place to assist 
veterans in conversion to civilian employment. He affirmed that 
this target could be achieved without compromising veterans 
preference and while adhering to re-employment opportunities 
for former Federal employees.
    Mr. Hantzis, national executive director, National 
Federation of Federal Employees, reported that Federal 
employees are concerned about the manner in which the 
President's plan is being implemented. He noted that OPM 
figures indicated that Federal agencies currently employ 677 
persons in GS-1 and GS-2 positions, and, because OPM does not 
maintain a governmentwide re-employment priority list, it is 
difficult to know how many people remain on re-employment 
lists. The Department of Defense's ``stopper'' list includes 
21,000 RIF'd DOD employees. He expressed concern that 
advantages given to temporary hires under this initiative might 
place current temporary employees at an additional 
disadvantage. He noted that many National Federation of Federal 
Employees had described this initiative as ``outrageous.''
    Mr. Rector, senior policy analyst, welfare and family 
issues, the Heritage Foundation, described the policy as, at 
best irrelevant, and at worst a very foolish policy that has 
nothing to do with reducing welfare dependence. He noted that 
the administration had failed to consult with States that had 
implemented successful programs when it developed its 
initiative. He described this effort as ``more a press release 
than an actual mechanism for helping the poor.'' He noted that 
Wisconsin's welfare case load had dropped by 55 percent in the 
previous 4 years. By instituting effective work requirements, 
and counseling applicants about the dangers of welfare 
dependence, initial applications drop. Both Wisconsin and 
Oregon use ``pay for performance'' programs through which 
welfare recipients must work to earn their benefits. When such 
requirements are enforced, welfare recipients often find 
better-paying jobs. Rather than radical increases in poverty, 
States administering work-based programs have experienced 
substantial economic growth and increased self-sufficiency 
among former welfare dependents. These programs have 
contributed most to the 20 percent drop in welfare caseloads 
during the past 2 years, the biggest drop since the Korean war. 
He noted that child care has not proven to be a substantial 
obstacle, and that the funds freed from the reduced caseload 
provide ample resources for supporting child care initiatives, 
if necessary. Although funding for day care has gone up in 
Wisconsin, for example, it still amounts to less than 5 percent 
of the savings from the initiative. He emphasized that the most 
important step in the program is the follow-up; making certain 
that, once involved in work, the recipient remains in a 
position to earn any benefits that are acquired. Most 
employment will inevitably come from the private sector.
    Mr. Riccio, Manpower Development Research Corp., described 
welfare recipients as a diverse group, but generally a group 
that is lacking in traditional employment skills. Nonetheless, 
most welfare recipients have some work history, and nearly all 
are capable of securing and maintaining employment. However, 
not even the most successful welfare-to-work programs have 
developed effective strategies to counter the high turnover 
rates in positions occupied by welfare recipients in their 
first employment. Of California welfare recipients who left 
jobs, 41 percent reported quitting to seek better employment 
opportunities than the low-paid entry positions.
    Mr. Tetro, president, Training and Development Corp., 
stressed the importance of providing initial opportunities in 
our society. He noted the importance of the Wisconsin example 
cited in Mr. Rector's testimony, in major part because it is a 
common sense approach. He concluded that the most important 
strategy in combating welfare dependence is guiding people into 
work, then providing effective support when they are there. Mr. 
Tetro explained that he agreed with the Heritage Foundation 
testimony about the importance of monitoring the effectiveness 
of training programs. Most have not worked well, and most are 
pre-occupied with preserving bureaucratic procedures rather 
than with finding solutions to peoples' problems. He indicated 
that he had successfully restructured job training programs in 
Richmond, and agreed with Mr. Rector that they had not been as 
successful in Maine, a difference that he attributed to Maine 
being ``one of those States that has left the responsibility 
for welfare reform in the hands of the welfare bureaucracy.''
    Mrs. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas testified that she had 
introduced legislation that would provide a 3 percent addition 
to the test scores of applicants for Federal employment who 
were seeking jobs while on welfare rolls. She believes that 
this advantage would provide additional incentives to employing 
agencies to take the chance on reaching beyond the normal 
applicant pool. She added that initial employment efforts had 
failed before because of the difficulties of getting to work in 
low-wage positions. She noted that her bill was structured to 
avoid giving advantages over people who faced RIF situations. 
In response to Mr. Cummings question, however, she conceded 
that, as written, her bill would provide an advantage to 
welfare recipients over those whom he termed the ``working 
poor.'' She emphasized the importance of the first experience, 
of getting one's foot in the door.

3. Assisting the District of Columbia with It's Pension Liabilities.

    a. Summary.--As part of its proposal to rescue the District 
of Columbia government from a looming financial crisis, the 
administration proposed to have the Federal Government assume 
the liabilities of the District's defined benefit pension 
programs covering police, fire fighters, and teachers. Although 
these retirement programs are partially funded through accounts 
managed by the District of Columbia Retirement Board, the 
President proposed to have the Federal treasury seize most of 
the assets managed by the Retirement Board, in return for 
basing future pension payments on the ``full faith and credit'' 
of the U.S. Government. The seized assets would be depleted to 
pay benefits to annuitants during the transition. A hearing was 
called to examine the funding assumptions that supported this 
proposal and to compare them to the operation of Federal 
retirement programs.
    Defined benefit pension programs often promise generous 
benefits, but when governments rely upon the ``full faith and 
credit'' of future taxpayers to fund the pension obligations, 
they depend upon the willingness of future legislators to fund 
those obligations. In a March 27, 1997 memorandum, the 
Congressional Budget Office [CBO] described this as comparable 
to saving for college by placing IOUs in a cookie jar. Relying 
on nonmarketable securities to ``fund'' Federal pensions 
promotes a false sense of security since, as CBO testified, 
``Those Federal securities are merely the promise of the 
Federal Government to itself. The left pocket owes the right 
pocket, but the combined trouser assets are exactly zero.'' By 
contrast with the mostly unfunded Federal Civil Service 
Retirement System, the DC Retirement Board oversees investments 
in tangible assets currently valued at nearly 50 percent of 
actuarial liabilities. The unfunded half of the District's 
retirement liabilities can be traced back to the unfunded 
liabilities transferred to the District when Congress enacted 
home rule. The District government has had to rely on annual 
tax revenues to meet its growing pension obligations, currently 
amounting to $307 million per year. As a local jurisdiction, 
the District has great difficulty raising tax revenues to meet 
those obligations.
    b. Benefits.--This investigation provided an opportunity 
for the subcommittee to examine the President's proposal to 
deal with the District of Columbia's pension obligations as 
part of his program for the District's economic relief. The 
President proposed to assume the District's current pension 
liabilities and to use DC Retirement Fund cash assets to pay 
pension obligations until the assets are depleted. The 
Congressional Budget Office provided valuable testimony 
demonstrating the future liabilities incurred as a result of 
different approaches to financing pension benefits, and 
concluded that the ``pay-as-you-go'' approach used for the 
District's retirement systems and the Federal employees' 
retirement programs is unsustainable in the long run. This 
hearing supported subcommittee efforts to propose different 
funding mechanisms to address pension obligations facing the 
District government in light of the $35 billion long-term costs 
that will result from the President's proposal to assume the 
District's current pension liabilities.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``D.C. Retirement System: 
Coping with Unfunded Liabilities'' was held on April 29, 1997. 
At the hearing Subcommittee Chairman Mica recognized that the 
District needs relief from its mounting pension obligations, 
but he observed two fatal flaws in the President's proposal. 
First, by assuming the District's pension debts, the Federal 
Government incurs significant new long term obligations. These 
outlays are offset in the short term by enabling the U.S. 
Treasury to raid over $3.5 billion of hard assets from the 
District Retirement Board. Second, when those future 
obligations come due, the District's employees would join 
Federal employees at the mercy of the annual appropriations 
process. Where the District's unfunded accrued actuarial 
liability is $4.8 billion, the future obligations owed to 
Federal annuitants amount to more than $900 billion, of which 
only $380 billion is ``funded'' but with nonmarketable 
certificates of indebtedness. Within 20 years, the cost of 
redeeming the pension promises in the Federal cookie jar will 
surpass $100 billion annually. In 2041, those annual pension 
shortfalls are projected to exceed $220 billion. Mr. Mica 
foresees Federal pensions as becoming more vulnerable 
throughout that period in the absence of an adequate funding 
mechanism.
    Ms. Norton of the District of Columbia cited additional CBO 
memoranda demonstrating that the District's unfunded liability 
for these pensions compounds its operational difficulties, 
especially with regard to efforts to limit tax increases and to 
borrow funds when needed. She noted that, in 2004, the annual 
$52 million Federal payment to these systems will be completed, 
and that the District's obligations to address future funding 
would intensify. She acknowledged the challenges of the funding 
mechanism, but contended that these problems could imperil the 
overall proposal for the District's recovery.
    Mr. G. Edward DeSeve, Comptroller, Office of Management and 
Budget commented that the proposal to address the District's 
pension funding needed to be assessed in light of other efforts 
to reduce spending in the District government's budget. He 
traced these unfunded liabilities to the transition to home 
rule, and emphasized the congressional responsibility for the 
obligations accumulated before 1980. He noted that the 
President's plan would result in no net increase in Federal 
spending until the Retirement Board's assets were expended, 
sometime early in the next century.
    Mr. Anthony Williams, Chief Financial Officer, District of 
Columbia government, stressed the importance of resolving 
questions related to pension funding because of their effects 
in restricting the District's operating options. He noted that 
the President's recovery plan integrates efforts at economic 
development and improved cost controls with the funding changes 
proposed here. He conceded imperfections in the plan, but noted 
that these difficulties are very similar to the challenges 
faced in funding Federal employees' pensions.
    Mr. James Blum, Deputy Director, Congressional Budget 
Office, observed that the President's proposal takes advantage 
of the cash-based Federal accounting system to delay 
recognition of the assumption of the District's unfunded 
liabilities. He noted that the assumption would subject 
District pensioners to the same political risks now faced by 
Federal annuitants. He agreed that the unfunded liability could 
be resolved by extending the annual payment more than 30 years 
until the current obligations were redeemed, but noted that the 
pressures associated with other--equally unfunded--systems 
(Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid) would increase the 
difficulties of pursuing such a course. He also noted that 
switching the pension systems to defined contribution systems 
could reduce anticipated political risks of the current system. 
In responding to questions, Mr. Blum estimated that the annual 
increase in Federal spending attributable to the unfunded 
liability inherited as a result of this proposal would be about 
$700 million. Although such obligations pose no insurmountable 
difficulty in the short run, Mr. Blum observed that they are 
unsustainable in the long run.
    In response to questions, Mr. DeSeve conceded that there 
were alternative approaches to funding future liabilities for 
pension benefits, but claimed that the principal should be that 
the District provide for its employees' benefits. This proposal 
would freeze the current liabilities, and new proposals to 
address future coverage would be formulated consistent with the 
District's ability to pay. That ability would be enhanced by 
having the Federal treasury assume the current actuarial 
obligations. He also noted that the legislation created a new 
trustee for the retirement funds to enable the Secretary of the 
Treasury to manage the assets assumed under the bill.
    Under questioning from Ms. Norton, Mr. Blum acknowledged 
that these obligations would eventually face taxpayers, the 
questions center on the timing and the amount. He indicated 
that the least costly solution would be payment of the 
obligations when they are incurred, and that deferring them 
would inevitably increase the costs. He emphasized that the 
result of this proposal would be annual payments of $700 
million to $800 million annually, merely to meet current 
pension payments.
    Ms. Betty Ann Kane, chairman, Legislative Committee and 
Trustee, District of Columbia Retirement Board, reported that 
the accounting firm, Bear Stearns, had commended the Retirement 
Board's administration of the funds entrusted to it. In 1996, 
the Board realized a 14.1 percent rate of return on its 
investments, exceeding both the actuarially-assumed rates and 
its own targets. She noted that the Congress had acknowledged 
the actuarial shortcomings of the funds transferred to the 
District in 1980. She also noted that, for District employees 
hired after October 1996, a defined contribution program has 
been instituted to limit future obligations. She noted that the 
President's plan would have the system revert to the 
financially unsound basis that the Congress had rejected in 
1979. The Board's accountants, Milliman and Robertson, estimate 
that the $700 million annual costs would continue for 20 years 
after liquidation of the Board's assets, for a net long-term 
cost of at least $14 billion. She observed that the preferred 
solution would be for increased funding in the short term, but 
that Congress had previously rejected increasing the annual 
payment from $52 million to $104 million. She questioned 
whether the Congress would be willing to meet the projected 
$700 million annual costs in 10 years.
    Mr. Ron Robertson, chairman, Metropolitan Police Labor 
Committee, Fraternal Order of Police, testified that the 
Fraternal Order of Police favors retention of all current 
benefits without reduction, but expressed reservations about 
the funding mechanism in the President's plan. He recommended a 
funding strategy that would amortize payments proportionally 
over a 30 year period.
    Mr. Tippett, chairman, pension committee, Fire Fighters 
Association of the District of Columbia, contended that the 
President's plan was a bad deal for the fire fighters, and 
recommended that Congress consider the background that led to 
the current difficulties. He counseled against another deferral 
of these obligations. He reported that the method that the 
administration had chosen to implement the plan had created 
uncertainty and confusion in the affected workforce.
    Mr. James Baxter, treasurer, Washington Teachers Union, 
testified that the Washington Teachers Union supported the 
President's plan.

4. Review of Federal Employees Group Life Insurance [FEGLI] Program.

    a. Summary.--Chapter 87 of Title 5 establishes a group life 
insurance program for Federal employees. The subcommittee 
recognized that life insurance is an important component in 
employees' financial planning. Accordingly, it conducted the 
most extensive review of the benefits available under the 
program in over 40 years and compared those benefits to options 
offered by private sector employers.
    The FEGLI program began in 1954 as a one-size-fits all 
approach. But it has evolved to permit enrollees to now choose: 
basic life insurance, six levels of additional life insurance, 
family insurance, and three options with respect to post-
retirement basic insurance, plus accelerated payment options 
for the terminally ill. The basic insurance and all of the 
options, however, are built on term insurance. Close to 90 
percent of the eligible Federal workforce has consistently 
participated in the FEGLI program, attesting to its popularity. 
OPM has held only six open enrollment periods in the history of 
FEGLI, two of which have been held since 1993. These open 
seasons were offered in response to significant program 
developments. MetLife has been the primary insurance carrier 
for the FEGLI program since its inception in 1954.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's examination of FEGLI 
revealed a consensus that employees should have more choice in 
the selection of life insurance options and produced a number 
of recommendations for improvements that were incorporated in 
H.R. 2675, the Federal Employees Life Insurance Improvement 
Act. These recommendations included offering employees group 
universal or group variable universal life insurance options, 
additional voluntary accidental death and dismemberment 
insurance, more coverage for spouses and family members, and 
increased coverage during retirement. H.R. 2675 is described 
more fully in Section III. A. 4. (Subcommittee on the Civil 
Service).
    c. Hearings.--``Federal Employees Group Life Insurance: 
Could We Do Better?'' was held on April 30, 1997. The hearing 
was called to review operations of the Federal Employees Group 
Life Insurance [FEGLI] program and to ensure that Federal 
employees are receiving adequate coverage at a reasonable cost. 
FEGLI provides basic life insurance for 2.5 million Federal 
employees and 1.5 million retirees, with employees paying two-
thirds of costs and agencies paying one-third. Optional 
insurance is available above the basic coverage, with employees 
bearing full responsibility for the costs of additional 
coverage. The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] conducts the 
program for Federal agencies, with Metropolitan Life Insurance 
Co. (MetLife) processing claims. It is reimbursed for all 
claims by the Federal Government.
    Mr. William E. Flynn, Associate Director for Retirement and 
Insurance, Office of Personnel Management, testified that the 
FEGLI program was instituted in 1954, and has been a ``one size 
fits all'' program. It has developed to include optional 
benefits, including coverage for spouses and dependents, 
incremental coverage in six levels, and coverage during 
retirement as well as accelerated coverage for the terminally 
ill. OPM has conducted six open seasons to enable enrollment 
after initial hiring, two of those open seasons have occurred 
since 1993. That open season resulted in coverage expanding 
from 88.4 to 89.9 percent of the Federal workforce. A 1995 open 
season was conducted following passage of the Living Benefits 
Act, and 1301 applications for benefits have been approved 
under that program. He reported that the Civil Service 
Commission had initiated the contract with MetLife, and that 
contract had been sustained since the program began. MetLife 
incurred some risk at the outset of the program because the 
fund had no reserves. Today, the fund has accumulated a balance 
that would probably cover all claims. OPM saw no need for a 
basic restructuring of the program.
    Mr. Flynn acknowledged that the MetLife contract is renewed 
annually through negotiations with OPM. Mr. Mica observed that 
between 1994 and 1995, the administrative expenses charged to 
the program jumped from $6.6 million to $9.2 million. Mr. Flynn 
responded that the OPM Inspector General was nearing completion 
of an audit of those expenditures, and he attributed some of 
these costs to the open season conducted that year. These 
administrative expenses, including OPM and MetLife costs, 
amount to six-tenths of 1 percent of the total program costs. 
The planning necessary to address concerns about how they would 
be used. Mr. Flynn conceded that there is no record of MetLife 
having experienced a loss in this program, even though it 
nominally bears risk associated with the payment of benefits. 
He noted that the ``risk'' charge (about $850,000 annually) was 
waived after the reserve fund had reached adequate levels. He 
also acknowledged that all except about $50 million of the 
$17.4 billion reserve fund balance is invested in nonmarketable 
U.S. Treasury securities. This allocation of reserve funds is 
consistent with the original statute.
    Under questioning, Mr. Flynn acknowledged that there had 
been no recompetition of the contract in 43 years, but claimed 
that, in this case, ``doing better'' ``can only mean we can 
operate more efficiently administratively.'' He observed that 
MetLife currently receives good reviews from program users. He 
reported that OPM has an initiative under way to review the 
benefit design of this program, perhaps to include universal 
life insurance or variable universal life insurance, which 
would add a cash value component to the current term insurance 
benefits.
    Ms. Margery Brittain, vice president, Group National 
Accounts, Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., reported that 
MetLife had been selected at the start of the FEGLI program 
because it was the largest group life insurance carrier at the 
time. It currently maintains that status, with more than $1 
trillion in group life insurance coverage in force. She noted 
that the company pays 85,000 FEGLI claims annually, and that 
these claims total approximately $1.6 billion. Administrative 
expenses amounted to 0.6 percent of claims in fiscal year 1996. 
She testified that the design of the FEGLI program is generally 
consistent with life insurance benefits provided by other large 
employers, with the exception that most employers pay the full 
cost of basic life insurance for their employees. Many private 
sector firms provide group universal life insurance as optional 
coverage. Open enrollment periods are rare in private sector 
programs. Most private employers also select only one carrier 
to administer their life insurance coverage.
    Mr. Barnett I. Chepenik, president, Lincoln Financial 
Group, Inc., Chepenik and Associates, compared the FEGLI 
benefit with private sector programs and noted that the 
tendency of private employers to design flexible benefit 
packages for employees limited the base of employers that could 
be used for analysis. He noted that Federal employees under age 
45 receive a basic benefit that is greater than a year's 
salary, a benefit that is rare in the private sector. He noted 
that private employers negotiate more frequently to provide 
open seasons that would enable employees to elect optional 
coverage. He found the dependent benefit comparable to private 
sector options, but asserted that the opportunity for a 
competitive offering of additional benefits was feasible. In 
terms of post-retirement benefits, FEGLI is competitive with 
private sector benefits. He reported that private employers 
offer both group universal and variable life insurance 
products, and that these tend to be fully-funded by employees. 
He noted that group conversion is a significant expense to 
employees, but indicated that this cost is exacerbated because 
this course of action is highly influenced by adverse selection 
factors.

5. Erroneous Enrollments in the Federal Retirement System.

    a. Summary.--Although the Civil Service Retirement System 
[CSRS] was closed to new enrollment effective December 31, 
1983, agencies subsequently enrolled additional employees in 
CSRS mistakenly. Under current law, when the Office of 
Personnel Management [OPM] learns about such mistakes in 
retirement coverage, employees are converted to the proper 
retirement coverage enrollment. The law provides no option to 
employees in defining proper retirement coverage, and the 
correction of these errors has consequences for the employees' 
Federal, State, and (in some cases) local tax payments, for 
eligibility for benefits under the Social Security System, and 
with regard to retirement benefits.
    b. Benefits.--This investigation provided the subcommittee 
with extensive information about difficulties that affect 
several thousand Federal employees, former employees, 
annuitants, and survivors as a result of mistakes made by 
agencies during the transition to a new retirement system. The 
subcommittee demonstrated that the Congress and the Office of 
Personnel Management had been aware of the problem for more 
than 7 years, but that no effective remedy had been enacted to 
ease the costs borne by people who were the innocent victims of 
their agencies' errors. The investigation provided a record to 
support legislation that the chairman and ranking member have 
described as an immediate priority for the next session.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Agency Mistakes in 
Federal Retirement--Who Pays The Price?'' was held on July 31, 
1997. Witness included Mr. Alan White, Office of the Inspector 
General, Department of Defense; Mr. David Mangam, Army War 
College; Mr. John Gabrielli, Internal Revenue Service; Mr. E. 
Barry Schrum, Department of Energy; Mr. William E. Flynn, 
Associate Director, Retirement and Insurance Service, Office of 
Personnel Management; Ms. Sarah Hall Ingram, Associate Chief 
Counsel, Employee Benefits/Exempt Organizations, Internal 
Revenue Service; Ms. Diane Disney, Deputy Assistant Secretary 
(Civilian Personnel), Department of Defense; and, Ms. Linda 
Oakey-Hemphill, Agency Retirement Counselor, Department of the 
Treasury.
    At the hearing Subcommittee Chairman Mica reported that the 
problems associated with retirement system enrollment mistakes 
had been brought to Congress' attention in 1989 by the Federal 
Retirement Thrift Investment Board, but that the congressional 
response in 1990 indicated that employees who believed that 
they were harmed by these errors should sue for relief under 
the Federal Tort Claims Act. In notifying Federal employees of 
these errors, OPM had provided little or no assistance. 
Witnesses testified that they had received no accounting of the 
funds transferred out of their Civil Service Retirement and 
Disability Fund [CSRDF] accounts. OPM's indifference to the 
plight of Federal employees was highlighted through samples of 
letters that had been mailed to affected employees.
    Mr. Cummings observed that life does not have dress 
rehearsals, and that when people are deprived through no fault 
of their own of things that they deserved, Government has a 
responsibility to remedy the problem if the Government made the 
mistake.
    Mr. Pappas expressed his concern that the testimony 
presented at the hearing indicated a lack of accountability 
within the system established to manage the Federal retirement 
program.
    Mrs. Morella observed that these involuntary corrections 
are especially troubling for employees who rejected the 
opportunity to transfer into FERS when that system was 
established in 1987.
    Mr. Alan White reported that he was hired by the Department 
of the Air Force as a criminal investigator in August 1984, and 
had remained in CSRS through his transfer to the Inspector 
General's office in the Department of Defense. The mistake in 
his retirement enrollment was detected when he requested an 
estimate of the cost of buying CSRS credit for his military 
service (an option that is not available under FERS). His 
personnel office changed his retirement enrollment to FERS on 
February 28, 1996, retroactive to his entry on duty in 1984. He 
learned about the change by mail on a Saturday, when his leave 
and earnings statement reported a drop in his CSRS account from 
$51,000 to $103. His personnel office did not notify him of the 
change until April, and both his agency and OPM proved 
unresponsive in providing guidance.
    Mr. White read a statement from Mrs. Deborah Monroe, a GS-7 
program assistant in the Chicago office of the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development who had been in the CSRS since 
August 1983 and was involuntarily converted to FERS in 1995. 
She reported that both her agency and OPM told her that nothing 
could be done to correct her situation.
    Mr. David Mangam of the Army War College had completed a 
military career when he accepted an overseas limited 
appointment from the Department of Defense in 1983. In 1984, he 
gained a career-conditional appointment at the Army War 
College, and was enrolled in CSRS when hired. He indicated that 
he would not have accepted the position unless he was able to 
benefit from the coverage of the CSRS, because he was 
interested in converting his military service under that 
system. The agency changed his enrollment in November 1996 and 
OPM's review fully supported the agency's action. He reported 
that the complete transition between the systems would require 
257 pay periods--or nearly 10 years. He estimated that the 
mistake would cost him $30,000 per year, assuming retirement 
after 35 years of service. He also reported suffering 
aggravation of a diabetic condition that his doctors associated 
with the stress of the transition.
    Mr. John Gabrielli of the Internal Revenue Service's 
Buffalo, NY, office reported that he began service as a 
temporary appointee and was converted to career-conditional 
status in September 1984, at which time he was enrolled in 
CSRS. He was provided an opportunity to enroll in FERS during 
1987, but rejected it. He and four other employees were 
notified of the enrollment error on April 13, 1993, and were 
adjusted to FERS coverage, effective in May 1991. He reported 
that he still had not received notice of what credit he would 
receive for funds transferred from his CSRS account to his 
Social Security account, and whether he would receive a refund 
of any differences. He noted that the National Treasury 
Employees Union had assisted efforts to get appropriations 
language requiring OPM to address the issue, but that OPM had 
not provided a solution to date.
    Mr. E. Barry Schrum is a criminal investigator with the 
Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General. He was 
hired in December 1984 and enrolled in the CSRS under law 
enforcement retirement provisions. He, too, had been provided 
opportunity to elect FERS coverage in 1987, but chose to remain 
in CSRS. The Department's OIG personnel office informed him of 
the mistaken enrollment in April 1996 and notified that he 
would be retroactively changed to FERS enrollment. That change 
was made effective in a June 25, 1996, memorandum. He testified 
that he was informed at that time that he would be able to make 
retroactive contributions to the TSP, and that he would have to 
remain continuously employed in the Federal service for 8 years 
to make up the back contributions to the TSP. He recommended 
legislation that would require the agencies that made the 
mistakes to make employees whole, and submitted a letter from 
the Department of Energy attorney which claimed that the 
Department lacks the authority to compensate employees for 
these errors under current law.
    Under questioning, all of the employee witnesses asserted 
that they had little support from their agencies and virtually 
none from OPM. Two of the witnesses are parties to class action 
litigation, filed July 28, 1997, after completing 
administrative review through their agencies and having an 
initial claim from Mr. White denied by the Merit Systems 
Protection Board. They reported extensive legal fees associated 
with the litigation and the administrative reviews. Mr. 
Gabrielli reported that he lacked the means to pursue 
resolution of his case through an attorney, and that he was 
assisted by his union.
    Mr. William E. Flynn of the Office of Personnel Management 
noted that the resolution of this problem would require actions 
of OPM, the Thrift Investment Board, the Internal Revenue 
Service, the Social Security Administration, and the Treasury 
Department. He reported that these agencies are conducting 
discussions, but that they had not agreed on a solution to the 
problems associated with enrollment errors. He added that a 
comprehensive solution is desirable to address concerns of 
employees, former employees, annuitants, and survivors who have 
been affected by these concerns. Under questioning from 
Representatives Mica and Cummings, Mr. Flynn agreed to submit a 
proposal to resolve these problems to the subcommittee no later 
than September 10, 1997. Mr. Flynn admitted that OPM has no 
idea of the number of individuals affected by these enrollment 
errors, and that he could not estimate the cost of correcting 
the errors throughout the Federal service.
    Ms. Sarah Hall Ingram of the Internal Revenue Service 
admitted that the range of legal and tax policy questions 
associated with correcting these errors in retirement coverage 
were complicated and unclear. The IRS administers and collects 
the FICA taxes paid to the Social Security system, and private 
employers are normally required to deposit these in a timely 
manner. Federal employers are subject to nearly identical 
requirements for payment of these taxes. Few of these 
procedures, however, are intended for situations where mistakes 
in calculating the tax obligation require correction years 
after the tax should have been paid. She also noted that the 
Internal Revenue Code restricts the amount that an employee can 
contribute to a tax-deferred retirement account, and that such 
limits might have to be amended as part of any resolution of 
these issues.
    Ms. Diane Disney reported that the Department of Defense 
had found as many as 3,100 employees of the approximately 
170,000 hired between 1984 and 1986 who might have been placed 
into wrong retirement systems. In reviewing those records, many 
of the CSRS classifications were correct because of previous 
Federal service, but she conceded that the Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service is in the process of correcting 500 
employees' records. She noted the difficulties of correcting 
mistakes that are now more than 10 years old, and that some of 
the options essential to make employees whole are not 
authorized by current law.
    Ms. Linda Oakey-Hemphill of the Department of the Treasury 
described extensive interagency negotiations to attempt 
resolution of the issues, and reported that such concerns had 
been raised as early as 1987. She noted that the automated 
information available in personnel systems is not adequate to 
identify the enrollment errors, and does not provide adequate 
guidance for resolution of the cases. She reported that the 
Department of the Treasury had corrected as many as 600 cases 
since 1992, but could not estimate the number of additional 
errors that could remain in the system.

6. Employment Discrimination in the Federal Workplace.

    a. Summary.--Employment discrimination in the Federal 
workforce is a serious and continuing concern of the Congress. 
The subcommittee has received numerous reports of 
discriminatory practices by Federal agencies, as well as 
extensive information that demonstrates that the appeals 
procedures intended to resolve allegations of employment 
discrimination are not working. Data compiled by the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission and provided to the 
subcommittee indicate that, among non-Postal Federal agencies, 
complaints about employment discrimination have been filed at 
increasing rates since 1993. EEOC data indicated that white 
employees are filing more cases alleging race discrimination, 
and that age discrimination and religious discrimination cases 
are being filed more frequently. Filings of new cases increased 
even though the portion of complaints that are sustained after 
investigation has declined. The subcommittee received testimony 
in 1995 that reported that Federal employees file grievances at 
a rate five times higher than comparable private sector 
employees. Other testimony claimed that many Federal employees 
file grievances as a method of deterring Federal managers from 
acting to address performance problems among employees.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation provided an opportunity to 
document deficiencies in appeals processes from the perspective 
of Federal employees with Federal discrimination complaints. 
The subcommittee received impassioned testimony alleging 
mistreatment from Federal managers, describing apparent 
conflicts of interests as agencies investigate charges leveled 
against senior managers by employees, and reinforced 
information about delays averaging more than 2 years facing 
employees who work through the EEOC procedures. Representative 
Martinez was provided an opportunity to explain his bill, the 
Federal Employees' Fairness Act (H.R. 2441), that would address 
some deficiencies in these procedures.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Employment 
Discrimination in the Federal Workplace, Part I'' was held on 
September 10, 1997. The hearing provided an opportunity to 
receive statements from three panels of witnesses to describe 
difficulties that they have encountered in working with the 
dispute resolution procedures available to Federal employees. 
Witnesses on the first panel included the Hon. Albert Wynn of 
Maryland, the Hon. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, and the Hon. 
Matthew Martinez of California. The second panel consisted of 
Mr. Oscar Eason, president, Blacks in Government; Mr. A. 
Baltazar Baca, president, National IMAGE, Inc.; Mr. Thomas 
Tsai, chairman, Federal Asian-Pacific-American Council; and Ms. 
Dorothy Nelms, president, Federally Employed Women. The third 
panel included Mr. Howard L. Wallace, author, Federal 
Plantation: Affirmative Inaction Within Our Federal Government; 
Mr. Lawrence Lucas, Coalition of Federal Employees at the 
Department of Agriculture; Ms. Romella Arnold, National 
Association for the Advancement of Black Federal Employees; Ms. 
LaVerne Cox, Library of Congress Class Action Plaintiffs; and 
Mr. Sam Wright, Federal Aviation Administration employee.
    In his opening statement Subcommittee Chairman Mica 
emphasized that there is no place for discrimination in the 
Federal workplace, and affirmed his commitment to improving the 
appeals procedures available to Federal employees. He noted 
that his efforts to reform the procedures were defeated in the 
previous Congress, but observed that the testimony heard in 
this session demonstrated beyond a doubt that those procedures 
desperately need reform.
    Mr. Cummings reported that the Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission is aware of difficulties in its Federal case 
processing procedures, and that the agency is developing 
recommendations to revise those procedures within the limits of 
its administrative discretion. He added that he was also 
concerned about reports from the Merit Systems Protection Board 
that indicated that minorities remain concentrated in lower 
grades of the Federal workforce, and that Federal agencies do 
not adequately understand that employment discrimination 
affects every aspect of the employee's life.
    Ms. Norton claimed that the EEOC's jurisdiction has been 
expanded by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and the Americans With 
Disabilities Act, and questioned whether the Commission has 
resources adequate to perform the associated responsibilities. 
She indicated dissatisfaction with the budget levels proposed 
by the President. She interpreted statistics available to her 
as showing relative stability, and noted that the statistics 
weren't where she had wanted them in the first place. She 
hypothesized that the combination of buyouts, early 
retirements, and optional retirements used to achieve 
downsizing should have resulted in more opportunities for 
minorities to advance within the Federal workforce. She 
believes that the current system of addressing employee 
disputes, which includes investigations by agencies of charges 
filed against them, involves an inherent conflict of interest.
    Mr. Barrett described employment discrimination charges 
filed against senior officials of the Internal Revenue 
Service's [IRS] Milwaukee District Office. Even after the 
charges were confirmed by an EEOC administrative judge, the 
District Director announced that the discriminating supervisors 
would be allowed to retire ``with dignity'' rather than be 
disciplined. The victim of the illegal activities, however, 
continues to work, and has claimed retaliation in regard to the 
agency's response to her successful claims.
    Mr. Wynn described the problem of employment discrimination 
in the Federal workplace as a ``long-festering sore.'' He has 
concluded, after receiving complaints from numerous agencies, 
that the problem is systemic rather than a series of isolated 
incidents. He argued that the Federal service lacks diversity 
at the GS-13 to GS-15 senior management level. He considers the 
Federal experience to include ``a chronic pattern of abuse, 
misuse, and manipulation of personnel laws.'' In particular, he 
claimed that minority employees frequently receive arbitrary 
personnel evaluations, and that complaints often result in 
retaliation. He also claimed that the EEO process is under 
funded and ineffective.
    Mr. Hoyer asserted that Congress has a moral and legal 
responsibility to ensure that Federal workplaces recognize 
discrimination as both immoral and contrary to principles of 
sound management. He conceded that there are invalid charges in 
the system, but claimed that the vast majority of these claims 
merit redress.
    Mr. Martinez reported that he had previously served as 
chair of a subcommittee overseeing the EEOC. In hearings across 
the country, he reported numerous accounts of charges that had 
been rejected when agencies reviewed their own operations, only 
to have courts overturn the nondiscrimination findings when 
cases were taken to judicial channels. He contended that few 
employees have the resources to take agencies to court. He 
believes that the Federal Employee Fairness Act, which he had 
reintroduced, provided a suitable vehicle for streamlining the 
appeals process. He argued that administrative remedies are 
inadequate to address the problems that he has seen in the 
dispute resolution process. He noted that the Office of 
Management and Budget projected that his bill would save $25 
million. He noted that his bill would remove EEO jurisdiction 
that currently rests within agencies.
    Mr. Eason claimed that African Americans are being 
discriminated against in Federal employment, and that this 
discrimination has resulted in a decline in the percentage of 
African American men in Federal employment. (EEOC data indicate 
that the percentage of black men in the Federal workforce has 
declined from 8.41 percent in 1987 to 8.04 percent in 1996. 
Black men constitute 4.9 percent of the Civilian Labor Force.) 
He alleged that the process for addressing discrimination 
complaints has not been effective, but claimed that this 
process was the primary method of securing senior executive 
service promotions for minority employees.
    Mr. Baca testified that Hispanic Americans are the fastest 
growing minority in the United States, but the only minority 
group that is under represented in the Federal workforce. He 
asserted that downsizing should not be used as a pretext for 
discrimination. He noted that Hispanic employees have 
successfully sued the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and that 
similar suits are pending against other agencies, including the 
Postal Service. He noted that the Bureau of Land Management has 
been successful in its efforts to recruit Hispanic employees. 
He agreed that many of the problems could be addressed by 
improving the appeals procedures available to employees. He 
argued that effective enforcement of current laws is necessary 
to progress.
    Mr. Tsai alleged that discrimination has impaired the 
morale of Asian-Pacific-Americans, and contended that the two 
types of discrimination that are most commonly encountered by 
Asian Americans are nonselection and ``work environment 
harassment.'' He recommended revising the ``EEO program plan of 
each agency with specific goals to meet the needs and have the 
management involved in development of the program plan.'' He 
further asserted that managers should be held accountable for 
new efforts to achieve a diverse workforce.
    Ms. Nelms asserted that the Federal Government, as the 
largest employer in the country, ``has failed to establish a 
model workplace, and has allowed discrimination to continue 
rampant.'' She reported that 72 percent of federally-employed 
women are in jobs rated between GS-1 and GS-8.5. Women comprise 
42 percent of the GS-9 to 12 Federal workforce, 25 percent of 
its GS-13 to 15 workforce, and 19 percent of the Senior 
Executive Service. She claimed that federally employed women 
are subjected to both sexual harassment and sex discrimination. 
She praised cultural diversity efforts at different agencies, 
but asserted that the time needed to process complaints is too 
long, and that employees need additional training in the rights 
and obligations of Federal employees and agencies under the 
law.
    Mr. Wallace claimed that systemic discrimination is rampant 
throughout the Federal sector. He asserted that, at every 
agency that he examined, minorities are the last hired and 
first fired, disciplined more often and more severely, and 
given much smaller awards. He agreed that the EEO process is 
broken, in part because ``there is no incentive for managers to 
negotiate in good faith.'' He added, ``Most EEO officers, 
counselors, and other EEO personnel are part of the problem. 
They are rewarded for discouraging employees from filing and 
making the process so difficult to understand that many 
complainants withdraw . . . out of frustration. Findings of 
discrimination are virtually nonexistent, yet billions are 
being wasted on processing paper work that amounts to . . . an 
exercise in futility.'' He recommended immediate dismissal for 
the most egregious managers, and a ``three-strikes-and-you're 
out'' law for repeat discriminators. He agreed that EEO 
processing should be removed from agencies and placed within 
the jurisdiction of the EEOC.
    Mr. Lucas contended that the President's initiative on race 
cannot proceed until he has confronted discrimination in the 
Federal agencies. He asserted that the Department's proposal 
would ``grandfather'' county employees who have a history of 
discrimination and sexism into the Department. He noted that 
Secretary Glickman's Civil Rights Action Team [CRAT] had 
submitted 92 recommendations to address the problems at the 
Department of Agriculture, but Mr. Lucas described the 
Secretary's ``zero tolerance of discrimination'' initiative as 
a ``paper tiger.'' He commented, ``You all have created this 
dinosaur at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, and you are 
responsible for . . . the racism and sexism that exists in 
these Federal bureaucracies.''
    Ms. Arnold opened by announcing that her organization's 
first choice as a witness, a senior employee with the 
Department of the Interior, had been informed that ``her career 
would be over'' if she testified. Ms. Arnold appeared even 
though she feared reprisals as a result of testimony that she 
would provide. She commented that the Department has been the 
subject of numerous hearings and reports over the years, all 
indicating that the Department's employment practices 
systematically excluded African Americans as a class, and that 
the Department is ill-prepared to enter a more diverse century. 
She noted that blacks are 6.1 percent of the Department's 
employees, but 10.4 percent of the Civilian Labor Force. 
Interior has only four black males among its 365 attorneys. She 
recounted a history of incidents of inequitable treatment, 
including more than 700 discrimination complaints filed in 
1996. She noted that the Department averages 565 days to 
process such cases, more than three times the 180 day statutory 
limit.
    Ms. Cox reported that the Library of Congress had been in 
the process of resolving the Cook class action lawsuit since 
1975. Although the EEOC had found no discrimination in 1981, 
the U.S. District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, and 
awarded $8.5 million in damages. She claimed that the Library 
continues to resist implementation of the Cook settlement, but 
information provided from the Library indicated that the 
Library was in compliance with the terms of the settlement. The 
class action plaintiffs had withdrawn four of five outstanding 
complaints in court action the previous week.
    Mr. Wright reported that he has been employed by the 
Federal Aviation Administration since 1976, and involved in the 
EEO process since 1977. He contended that executive branch 
agencies fail to obey the law with regard to discrimination 
complaints, and that they are unwilling to investigate 
seriously claims of wrong-doing. When appellate agencies rule 
against Federal agencies, the agencies fail to take appropriate 
corrective actions. Federal officials, he alleged, incur no 
sanctions when found responsible for discrimination. He 
asserted that the Department of Justice and their agencies work 
to defend managers who are accused of discrimination. He 
described the nondisclosure clauses frequently included in 
settlement of discrimination complaints as ``depriving 
employees of their first amendment rights.'' He recommended 
that the EEOC be granted the same adjudicatory powers over 
agencies as the Merit Systems Protection Board. He concluded 
that additional laws defining discrimination are unnecessary; 
the challenge is to get the agencies to comply with laws 
already on the books.

7. Employment Discrimination in the Pursuit of Diversity.

    a. Summary.--Federal agencies have devoted more than 30 
years to efforts to eliminate illegal discrimination from 
Federal workplaces. Although agencies devote millions of 
dollars annually to training in the requirements of fair 
employment laws and other civil rights and diversity 
initiatives, the subcommittee has learned that complaints of 
employment discrimination based on race, gender, age, 
ethnicity, and related causes have increased in the past 5 
years. The subcommittee has learned that at least one agency 
advertises positions for ``unqualified applicants . . . .'' The 
rise in the number of complaints filed, however, is not 
consistent with the decline in the number of cases where 
discrimination is found. Statistics provided by the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission indicated that the portion of 
cases where discrimination is found has declined, whether this 
is reflected in settlements with corrective actions and/or 
agency and appeals decisions. This investigation brought to 
light cases where agencies are responsible for unlawful 
discrimination.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation augmented the 
subcommittee's record on employment discrimination in the 
Federal workforce by demonstrating the adverse consequences of 
diversity programs at several agencies. A hearing provided 
evidence that the Forest Service's hiring practices included 
advertising developmental assignments that sought ``unqualified 
applicants'' for firefighter positions. It also provided an 
alternative perspective from scholars who conclude that the 
implementation of proportional goals inevitably conflicts with 
both merit principles and the free choices of individual 
applicants and employees. The subcommittee had the opportunity 
to review the intentions and effects of Representative Canady's 
bill (H.R. 1909) that would eliminate race and gender 
preferences in Federal employment and set asides in Federal 
procurement.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Employment 
Discrimination in the Federal Workplace, Part II'' was held on 
September 25, 1997. In efforts to implement diversity programs, 
agencies have been faced with claims of discrimination from 
employees who believe that merit staffing procedures have been 
violated. Witnesses testified that they continued to encounter 
agency resistance and bureaucratic delays after successfully 
prosecuting discrimination claims in Federal courts. Three 
panels of witnesses included the Hon. Charles Canady of 
Florida, the Hon. Wally Herger of California, Ms. Lynn Cole, 
attorney, Mr. Angelo Troncoso, Internal Revenue Service, Mr. 
Edward Drury, Federal Aviation Administration, Mr. Ronald 
Stewart, Deputy Chief for Programs and Legislation, U.S. Forest 
Service, Mr. G. Jerry Shaw, general counsel, Senior Executives 
Association, and Mr. John Fonte, adjunct scholar, American 
Enterprise Institute.
    Subcommittee Chairman Mica noted that abuses of equal 
employment opportunity requirements can often be traced to 
excessive efforts to implement ``diversity'' programs, often 
through numerical goals or quotas. He emphasized that the 
Federal affirmative employment program was intended to work in 
the context of a merit system, not in conflict with it. He 
asserted, ``Affirmative action in the Federal Government should 
never have been about anything other than hiring the most 
qualified employees.'' He indicated that he and Mr. Cummings 
would be working with agency heads to address some of the more 
egregious complaints raised during the subcommittee's hearings 
on this topic. He also reported his intention to develop 
appropriate legislative measures for passage by the 
subcommittee in 1998.
    Mr. Herger reported that his office had encountered 
numerous incidents of discrimination practiced by the U.S. 
Forest Service in his district. He submitted documents 
advertising positions open only to applicants who do not meet 
minimum qualifications as well as a memorandum indicating that 
the Forest Service failed to fill firefighting positions when 
it could not get a sufficiently ``diverse'' pool of applicants, 
thus increasing risks of forest fires in communities adjacent 
to the forests where more than 800,000 acres burned last 
summer. Additional documentation showed that the Forest Service 
had received legal advice that these practices were in 
violation of the law, but continued them anyway.
    Mrs. Morella agreed that she found the Forest Service's 
actions in these instances to be simply outrageous.
    Mr. Canady reported that the Judiciary Committee's 
Subcommittee on the Constitution, which he chairs, has held 
nine hearings on Federal affirmative employment programs, and 
concluded that ``it has become increasingly clear that it is 
exceptionally difficult to defend, as a matter of legal or 
moral principle, the government practice of granting 
preferences on the basis of race or sex.'' He recognized that 
the United States has a history of unequal practices, but noted 
that the Nation has made great strides toward overcoming 
racism, and contended that ``the answer . . . is not to be 
found in Federal policies that classify, sort, and divide the 
American people on the basis of their race and gender.'' He 
contended that, rather than end affirmative action, his 
proposed legislation would reaffirm the original purpose of 
affirmative action as an initiative based on outreach and 
recruitment, coupled with nondiscrimination in selection and 
contract awards.
    Ms. Norton argued that the Supreme Court has already 
addressed Mr. Canady's concerns, that the President's ``mend 
it, don't end it'' approach has weakened affirmative action, 
and that many of the problems being addressed in this hearing 
are actionable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Mr. 
Canady reported that, in spite of these remedies, Federal 
agencies continue to hire and promote, and award contracts 
based on quotas, and that we should establish solid 
nondiscriminatory policies as the legal standard, rather than 
rely on the courts to act for the Congress.
    Ms. Cole reported that her clients have increasingly 
concluded that personnel decisions within their agencies are 
being made on bases other than merit, and that the remedies 
available through EEOC procedures are inadequate to resolve 
their growing dis-satisfactions within the system. In response 
to questions, she indicated that when agencies face 
discrimination complaints, they act both as adjudicators and 
those accused, inevitably resulting in conflicts of interests. 
She advocated a stronger role for mediation within the EEO 
process. Mr. Troncoso, one of Ms. Cole's clients, is a Cuban-
born immigrant who was denied promotions by the Internal 
Revenue Service [IRS] on three occasions, even though he was 
rated well-qualified every time and was the highest-rated 
applicant on two occasions. His efforts to seek redress through 
the agency's personnel procedures were rebuffed within 
personnel offices, which he characterized as defensive of 
management. He expressed concern that, even though he intended 
to make the IRS a career, he would experience retaliation as a 
result of this testimony. Mr. Drury is an air traffic control 
manager with the Federal Aviation Administration. After 26 
years of service, he was removed from his position as an 
airport tower manager as a result of pressures generated by the 
National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation Employees. He 
subsequently filed complaints through the Department of 
Transportation, but that case was not considered on its merits. 
He reported that it required 2 additional years to get his case 
to trial, where the Government's litigation strategy appeared 
to be to defeat him on legal technicalities rather than address 
the merits of the case. When the jury heard the evidence, it 
awarded $500,000 in punitive damages, an amount subsequently 
reduced by the judge to the $300,000 statutory ceiling. He 
noted that a subsequent complaint that addressed retaliation 
concerns was pending within the EEOC, and had been there for 
725 days.
    Mr. Stewart claimed that his experience as a regional 
forester in California had provided first-hand perspective 
about the ways in which discrimination undermines agency 
morale, and asserted that the Chief (Michael Dombek) had taken 
significant initiatives to eliminate discrimination in the 
Forest Service. He also noted the importance that Secretary of 
Agriculture Dan Glickman attaches to implementing his Civil 
Rights Action Team's recommendations. He noted a 37 percent 
reduction in open EEO cases as an indicator of the success of 
these efforts.
    Mr. Shaw predicted that promotions within the Federal 
service are likely to become increasingly contentious as 
downsizing continues. He reported substantial increases in the 
numbers of minorities and women holding positions in the Senior 
Executive Service, even in the face of the administration's 
efforts to reduce both SES and GS-13 to GS-15 positions. He 
reported that a 1992 survey of Senior Executive Association 
members found that 92 percent believed that employees abuse the 
complaints procedures to intimidate managers and agencies from 
taking actions against poor performers. Further, 56 percent of 
his members believe that non-legitimate complaints are filed in 
ways that deter the filing of well-founded grievances. He 
concluded that managers have little grounds for confidence in 
the current EEO system. Even when agencies settle cases, they 
do not reflect intentional discriminatory actions. He 
recommended that employees should be required to make stronger 
cases before having them processed, and that once complaints 
are recognized as meritorious, they should be heard by a single 
outside agency.
    Mr. Fonte argued that two visions of civil rights are in 
conflict. The traditional equal opportunity principles 
enshrined in civil rights laws and merit system principles have 
a different philosophical and legal foundation than the 
diversity principles being promoted recently. The diversity 
agenda, he demonstrated, rests on a theory of proportional 
representation that was rejected at the founding of the 
republic and has proved disastrous in any country that has 
attempted to implement it. He cited studies of people 
distributed in different occupations with different racial, 
ethnic, and gender compositions. Distributions reflected chosen 
avenues of opportunity rather than the result of discriminatory 
actions. He forecast that increased efforts to promote 
proportionalism would only increase dissatisfaction, because 
such a result can be realized only through heavy regulation in 
a command economy. He asserted, ``We will never arrive at a 
right percentage for all groups in all positions and at the 
same time remain a free society.'' In response to questions, he 
cited reports that, rather than an effort to redress historical 
discrimination, 75 percent of recent immigrants are eligible 
for preference programs. The difficulty with diversity programs 
is that, once numbers are defined, they trump all other 
factors, especially merit.

8. Oversight of Contracting Out Practices.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee conducted this investigation 
to provide additional information and to address changes since 
two previous hearings on contracting out that were conducted in 
1995. In 1996, the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] 
published a revision of OMB Circular A-76, the policy document 
that establishes standards for conducting cost comparisons in 
Federal agencies. Although the subcommittee has heard charges 
that agencies have reduced budgets and converted numerous 
functions to contract in order to redesign processes and save 
money, OMB reported that the Government's expenditures on 
contracting decreased to $111.7 billion in 1996, or $2.4 
billion below 1995 levels. A hearing provided an opportunity 
for employee organizations to voice concerns about contracting 
practices.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation provided an opportunity for 
the Office of Management and Budget and Defense agencies, which 
have the greatest experience managing competition for 
government services, to introduce recent data that documents 
the reduction in service contracting since GAO's last report in 
1997. They entered into the record data demonstrating that 30 
percent aggregate savings have been realized over a 10-year 
period from contracting for services. The long-term data 
provide a useful contrast to the anecdotal evidence that 
frequently shapes the discussion.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Contracting Out--
Successes and Failures'' was held October 1, 1997. This hearing 
fulfilled the chairman's commitment to employee organizations 
that they would have an opportunity to describe some of the 
difficulties that they have encountered in dealing with 
contractors who perform services for Federal agencies. 
Witnesses included Mr. Christopher Donellan, legislative 
director, National Association of Government Employees, Mr. 
James Cunningham, national president, National Federation of 
Federal Employees, Ms. Patricia Armstrong, chapter president, 
Federal Managers Association, Cherry Point, NC, Mr. G. Edward 
DeSeve, Acting Deputy Director for Management, Office of 
Management and Budget, Mr. John Goodman, Deputy Undersecretary, 
Department of Defense, and Mr. Samuel Kleinman, Center for 
Naval Analyses.
    Ms. Norton alleged that service contracting is driven by 
cost concerns alone, without adequate attention to the quality 
of work being performed. She has introduced legislation that 
would require cost comparisons, claiming that a 1994 General 
Accounting Office report concluded that agencies do not 
consistently save when they convert to contract. She has also 
sponsored legislation that would require OMB to develop an 
inventory of the number of people employed by service 
contractors, so that we could know whether, in converting 
employees, the number of people required to perform the work 
actually increased. She further proposed legislation that would 
reduce by $5.7 billion the amount of service contracting done 
by Federal agencies annually. The revenues would be directed to 
pay increases for civil servants.
    Mr. Donellan claimed that contracting out of services 
inevitably reduces support, and accused contractors of poor 
performance and dishonest practices. He cited the example of a 
laundry services contractor at Ft. Leonard Wood, MO, who 
allegedly abandoned the installation owing employees $23,000 in 
back pay and with utility bills unpaid. The company also failed 
to pay employees taxes before declaring bankruptcy. Although 
the Department of Labor will intervene, employees are slated to 
receive only 22 cents on the dollar owed to them.
    Mr. Cunningham asserted that any contracting out should be 
done only if all Circular A-76 procedures are followed, only if 
it can be demonstrated that there will be no decline in work 
quality, that a significant cost savings will be realized 
through the life of the contract, and that the contractor will 
be monitored extensively to prevent abuses. He reported that 
members' requests for assistance in addressing issues related 
to contracting have increased tenfold in the past year, notably 
within the Department of Defense. He cited an example of a 
service contract for maintenance of Navy airplanes that 
purportedly places limits on the amount of rust required to be 
removed from bolts on airplanes, resulting in contractors' work 
failing to pass quality inspections. Federal employees wind up 
having to complete the work.
    Ms. Armstrong reported that Congress wants to contract out 
$1 billion of the Navy work currently performed at the Cherry 
Point, NC, depot. She averred that under the revised Circular 
A-76, Federal managers have lost discretion to supplement their 
efforts with Federal employees; complete functions must be 
contracted. She noted that the Department of the Navy has 
40,000 positions currently under review, and plans to review 
80,000 positions over the next 5 years. Savings of $1.4 billion 
that will result from these cost comparisons have already been 
projected into future agency budgets. She also claimed that the 
Department of Defense is not able to monitor contracts 
adequately, resulting in overpayments and duplicate payments 
that are costly to taxpayers. She also observed that contract 
employees are allowed to strike, an option that is not 
available to Government employees. She cited a recent strike 
against the McDonnell-Douglas aircraft manufacturing division 
as one where contractor strikes allegedly affected Federal 
operations. She contended that competition, rather than 
contracting, is the key to savings, and that Federal employees 
have competed successfully for major contract awards.
    Mr. DeSeve testified that the administration is 
incorporating competition into budget as part of its efforts to 
improve service delivery. Contracting is merely one element of 
the endeavor to improve the business practices of Government 
agencies to achieve effective operations in the context of a 
balanced budget. He stated that the goal is not simply to 
contract for more services, but to optimize the use of both 
private and public resources by selecting the most cost-
effective providers. He declared, ``We have no evidence that 
suggests that contractors are reducing their costs or otherwise 
developing an unfair competitive advantage by reducing pay and 
benefits to their employees.'' He cited the Clinger-Cohen Act 
as one of the legislative improvements that enable agencies to 
make more effective and efficient use of the marketplace. He 
noted that the administration opposed the Freedom from 
Government Competition Act (H.R. 716), which it views as 
unnecessarily restricting Federal employees from competing when 
contracts are under consideration. He also opposed H.R. 885, 
which would prohibit agencies from contracting when Federal 
employees can provide services at a lower cost, describing the 
bill as ``unnecessary and administratively burdensome.'' He 
opposed legislation that would reduce contracting funds to pay 
for a Federal employee pay increase, commenting, ``Reducing 
contract dollars without regard to the disruption of service 
requirements or the competitive costs of services could lead to 
significant inefficiencies and limit an agency's ability to 
respond to changing conditions, emergencies, and other 
requirements.''
    Mr. Goodman affirmed that the Department of Defense must 
improve the performance and reduce the costs of support 
provided to the Nation's fighting forces. The Quadrennial 
Defense Review forecast that the Nation is likely to require 
more agile fighting forces in the future, and that maintaining 
those forces will require increased capital expenditures on 
weapons systems. In the absence of funding increases, 
productivity efficiencies are essential. Contracting is merely 
one element of a broad array of efforts to achieve that 
objective. He noted improvements in the Defense Logistics 
Agency's efforts to provide more direct shipments of goods 
acquired from private manufacturers, resulting in substantial 
improvements in force readiness. He described the Department's 
approach as ``a clear and measured approach of introducing 
competition into our support activities,'' rather than 
wholesale outsourcing. The Department saves more than $1.5 
billion annually as a result of 2,000 competitions conducted 
between 1978 and 1994, and claimed that competitions reduce 
costs by an average of 30 percent, regardless of whether 
private contractors or public employees win. Half of the 
competitions did not result in outsourcing. He noted that the 
General Accounting Office had confirmed these findings in a 
March 1997 report. He noted several recent competitions that 
did bring functions in-house after contractors lost to teams of 
Federal employees. He emphasized the continuing partnership 
with the Department's workforce, and described placement 
efforts associated with workforce reductions.
    Mr. Kleinman noted that the Defense Department's review of 
competitions showed that savings averaged 20 percent when 
functions are retained in-house, and 40 percent when they are 
converted to private contractors. These figures include the 3 
to 10 percent of costs required to monitor contractors' 
performance. He attributed these savings to the efficiencies 
resulting from competition. Although Federal employees have 
right of first refusal to positions with contractors, most 
prefer to remain with the Government, and only 3 percent accept 
contractors' offers of employment. He refuted assertions that 
costs increase after contracts are awarded, noting that the 
functions are subject to recompetition, and that there are 
always additional bidders eager for the business if costs rise. 
He acknowledged a couple of defaults, but reported that in most 
cases costs were contained and quality maintained.
    In response to questions, Mr. DeSeve emphasized that the 
important information needed to assess performance is data 
about the costs of production and the level of services 
provided. He asserted that he does not need to know the number 
of employees working on any particular contract, and that he 
would not have any use for the information if it were 
collected. He pointed out that, in many cases, the important 
factor is the method of providing services, a concern that 
frequently requires differing technologies rather than 
additional people. He noted that, when OPM eliminated its 
training workforce, it resulted in no significant change in 
training for Federal employees. He also observed that the 
change to contract investigations has resulted in sustained 
quality and the creation of a successful new business.

9. Review of Premiums Under the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
        Program [FEHBP].

    a. Summary.--Approximately 9 million Federal employees and 
retirees and their dependents obtain health insurance through 
the FEHBP. Following 5 years of relative stability in FEHBP 
premiums, including 2 years in which average premiums declined, 
OPM announced that 1998 premiums would increase by an average 
of 8.5 percent. The subcommittee conducted an investigation to 
examine the factors contributing to these increases.
    The subcommittee's examination revealed that the 8.5 
percent average premium increase masked wide variations in 
individual plan experiences. The employees' share of the 
premium increased, on average, by 15.4 percent. While premiums 
for a number of plans remained unchanged or actually decreased, 
the total premium for two employee-organization plans rose over 
20 percent, causing the employees' share to soar as much as 75 
percent.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee determined that the 
increases generally reflected rising health care costs and 
decreased plan reserves. Although the most recent Government 
mandates did not appear to add appreciably to the 1998 
increases, the subcommittee was warned that government-imposed 
mandates drive up costs and can contribute to significant 
increases in future premiums. For example, Blue Cross-Blue 
Shield testified that the cumulative effect of the 27 mandates 
imposed by OPM since 1990 was to increase its 1998 premiums by 
about $100 million. Likewise, the subcommittee learned that 
Maryland-based HMOs have been placed at a competitive 
disadvantage in the National Capital Area because State-
mandated benefits have driven up their premiums. The increased 
costs caused by mandates are, of course, borne by the employees 
and retirees who participate in the FEHBP and by the taxpayers. 
The subcommittee was also cautioned against overregulation of 
FEHBP premiums.
    The subcommittee's investigation also demonstrated that 
employees would have paid less for health insurance if either 
the ``Fair Share Formula,'' enacted in the Balanced Budget Act 
of 1997, or the ``Fixed Dollar Formula'' proposed by 
Subcommittee Chairman Mica in 1995 had been in effect. Under 
the ``Fair Share Formula,'' the average employees' share would 
have risen by 10 percent rather than 15.4 percent; the increase 
under the ``Fixed Dollar Formula'' would have been only 11.6 
percent.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``FEHB Rate Hikes--What's 
Behind Them'' was held October 8, 1997.

10. Suspension of Affirmative Action at the IRS.

    a. Summary.--In a May 1997, decision in Byrd v. Rubin, a 
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana ruled 
that the Internal Revenue Service's affirmative employment 
program was unconstitutional because it could not meet the 
strict scrutiny standards that the Supreme Court determined to 
be appropriate in Adarand Construction v. Pena. Rather than 
contest the Byrd case on its merits, the Government settled the 
case with Mr. Byrd and his three fellow plaintiffs. As was 
reported in previous subcommittee hearings on employment 
discrimination, that settlement included a nondisclosure 
agreement which cloaked the terms of the settlement from 
congressional oversight. The Department of Justice secured a 
modification of the settlement agreement that permitted 
informing Congress of the terms of the settlement, but 
redacting the amount of compensation paid to the litigants. On 
August 19, 2 days before the settlement agreement was signed, 
acting IRS Commissioner Michael Dolan issued a memorandum 
suspending two elements of employees' performance appraisals 
and two elements of the agency's business plan so that those 
elements could be revised to comply with constitutional 
requirements. On September 22, IRS' National Personnel 
Director, Mr. James O'Malley (who accompanied Mr. Fowler to the 
hearing) issued a memorandum revising the standards that had 
been suspended the previous month.
    The IRS had been identified in both of the subcommittee's 
previous hearings on employment discrimination in the Federal 
workforce. Although the Office of Personnel Management has 
responsibility for governmentwide personnel policies, the IRS 
testified that it had not consulted with OPM in acting to 
address its affirmative employment program. IRS also stated 
that it had consulted with the Department of Justice, which 
issued guidance to Federal agencies on compliance with Adarand 
on February 29, 1996. Justice not only had initiated legal 
guidance in the area, but it would also have responsibility for 
defending any modified standards in subsequent litigation. IRS 
reported that its workforce is 67 percent female and 35 percent 
minority, so continued application of affirmative employment 
standards raised questions about whether the agency was 
applying ``diversity'' criteria improperly.
    b. Benefits.--This investigation continued the 
subcommittee's efforts to understand the full effects of race 
and gender preferences in Federal human resource management 
operations. The IRS faces continuing scrutiny because of abuses 
of taxpayers and employees documented in recent reports, and 
reflects several challenges facing all Federal agencies in 
their efforts to ``mend'' affirmative employment practices 
consistent with the Department of Justice's guidelines issued 
after the Adarand v. Pena decision. The hearing provided the 
foundation for additional oversight activities that will be 
continued in the next session.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``IRS' Suspension of Its 
Affirmative Action Program'' was held on October 28, 1997. The 
witness testifying at the hearing was Mr. Charles D. Fowler, 
National Director, Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity 
Program, Internal Revenue Service.
    Subcommittee Chairman Mica affirmed in his opening 
statement that the subcommittee has a responsibility to ensure 
that important issues of public policy are not being decided 
through settlement agreements that are not subject to 
congressional review. He also emphasized the importance of 
ensuring that every Federal employee is hired, evaluated, and 
terminated on an equitable basis.
    Mr. Cummings was reassured by the IRS' implementation of 
revised performance elements and its renewal of its commitment 
to affirmative action.
    Ms. Norton stressed the importance of implementing 
affirmative action programs consistent with the law, and 
observed that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 favors 
settlements over litigation. She believes that consistency is 
important so that agencies are not vulnerable to litigation 
based on any perceived inconsistencies.
    Mr. Charles Fowler, who was accompanied by Mr. Dennis 
Ferrara of the General Counsel's office and Mr. James O'Malley, 
the IRS' National Personnel Director, had emphasized the 
principle of equitable treatment for all employees as a way of 
doing business since assuming his responsibilities (within 6 
weeks before this hearing). He claimed that the Service remains 
committed to both its diversity program and the concept of 
equitable treatment of all its employees. In response to 
questions, he expressed hope that the revised standards would 
encourage agency managers not to undertake actions that might 
be in violation of the law. The September 22, 1997, memo 
eliminated language included in previous standards that might 
have been interpreted as approving numerical targets. He added 
that the performance elements in place are temporary and 
subject to revision as the agency develops better ways to 
describe its managers' appropriate responsibilities.
    Mr. Fowler asserted that the agency has no numerical goals 
at present, and even the document on managing the workforce 
that had been a source of concern in the Byrd case, ERR-16, 
concentrated on positions of national level. Mr. Fowler 
indicated that outreach strategies would be used to address 
concerns about the diversity of upper management in the agency.
    Mr. Cummings indicated that he had encountered criticisms 
that the IRS was acting without adequate explanation of its 
decisions in selecting personnel for ``acting'' and 
``developmental'' assignments. These are opportunities that 
employees consider important in terms of career development. 
Mr. Fowler responded that review of these selections is an 
important element of his efforts in this position. He also 
added that he would make appropriate contacts with OPM and EEOC 
to endeavor to develop a consistent strategy to the concerns 
raised about these programs.

11. The Merits of Holding a CSRS to FERS Open Season.

    a. Summary.--The Treasury-Postal and General Government 
Appropriations Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-61) included a 
provision that would have allowed civil servants enrolled in 
the Civil Service Retirement System [CSRS] to switch their 
enrollment to the Federal Employees Retirement System [FERS]. 
Section 642 of the law would have authorized an open season 
between July 1 and December 31, 1998. This provision, however, 
was the subject of an item veto exercised by President Clinton 
on October 16, 1997. Mr. Mica reported that the item, with 
costs estimated at $2.1 billion over 5 years, was the single 
largest item veto exercised by the President to date. In 
vetoing this provision, the President had noted that the 
provision was introduced by the Senate during conference, and 
that the measure had not had adequate opportunity for hearings 
and public discussion.
    b. Benefits.--This investigation provided an opportunity 
for the subcommittee to review the President's use of the item 
veto on the measure having the largest cost and potential 
impact on Federal employees. It enabled a comparison of 
different bases of estimating the cost of this action, and 
dispelled impressions that an open season allowing for 
additional numbers of employees to shift from CSRS to FERS 
might provide a method of reducing the Government's long-term 
pension obligations under the older Federal retirement system.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``CSRS-FERS Open Season--
What are the Merits?'' was held on November 5, 1997. Witnesses 
included William E. Flynn, Associate Director, Retirement and 
Insurance Services, Office of Personnel Management, Michael 
Brostek, Associate Director, Federal Workforce and Management 
Issues, General Accounting Office, and Paul Van de Water, 
Assistant Director, Budget Analysis Division, Congressional 
Budget Office.
    As chairman of the authorizing subcommittee, Mr. Mica 
called the hearing to examine the merits of the issue and 
consider the appropriateness of enacting separate authorizing 
legislation. Federal employees had an opportunity to switch 
their enrollment into the newer retirement system when FERS was 
established in 1987. At the time, only 4 percent of the 
eligible employees took advantage of the open season to switch 
enrollment, although the Congressional Budget Office had 
estimated that approximately 10 percent of CSRS employees would 
do so. With 10 years' experience in the Thrift Savings Plan, 
supporters of the open season believe that a different dynamic 
might affect employees' decisions about retirement enrollment. 
Mr. Mica noted that the unfunded liability of the Civil Service 
Retirement and Disability Fund had increased during the 
previous 2 years, and that those obligations now constitute the 
fourth largest government debt being transferred to future 
generations. He also noted that, in light of the difficulties 
that the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] encountered 
managing the previous transition, and the importance of 
correcting enrollment mistakes already in the system, that the 
agency might have difficulty administering another open season.
    Mr. William E. Flynn of OPM testified that the 
administration had estimated that approximately 5 percent of 
the eligible employees, or about 60,000 individuals, would 
switch if an open season were held during 1998. He indicated 
that employees interested in switching might delay normal 
retirements to gain exemption from Government pension offset 
and windfall elimination provisions of Social Security law, and 
that agencies with unique demographic mixes might experience 
some human resource management challenges as a consequence of 
the new incentives that would be provided to employees. He 
estimated that the transfers would reduce the CSRDF's net 
actuarial unfunded liability by less than $2 billion, but when 
added costs for FERS funding and Thrift Savings Plan [TSP] 
contributions are included, the result would probably increase 
the long term costs to the Government. He stressed that many 
factors could affect individual decisions about retirement 
system enrollment, so that there are no sure methods of 
projecting the level of interest in such an open season.
    Mr. Michael Brostek of the General Accounting Office noted 
that participation in the TSP has risen substantially since its 
inception, and that more than half of lower-graded employees 
and nearly all higher-grade employees now participate. By 
transferring from CSRS to FERS, employees would become eligible 
for matching funds for current contributions, a factor that 
could increase incentives to enter the newer system at 
considerable cost to the Government. Agencies' retirement costs 
would increase for each employee who transferred to FERS. GAO 
provided estimates that the additional costs of such transfers 
could be projected at a rate of $32 million per year for each 1 
percent of the Federal workforce that switched to the newer 
system.
    Mr. Paul Van de Water of the Congressional Budget Office 
[CBO] reported that his agency had estimated that only 1 
percent of the CSRS employees would switch to the new system if 
provided another open season. This projection was based upon 
previous experience, adjusted for the reduced portion of the 
Federal workforce that remains in CSRS. CBO projected that 
these switches would raise net Federal costs by $250 million 
over the next 10 years, with most of the additional expense 
attributable to increased agency payments to the TSP accounts 
of employees. He indicated that employees who had already 
reached the maximum CSRS benefit would benefit from such a 
switch, as would employees with minimal CSRS coverage who would 
desire to avoid public pension offset provisions of the Social 
Security law. Both groups would impose additional costs on the 
Government.
    Mr. Brostek indicated that differences between the cost of 
living adjustment provisions in CSRS and FERS contribute to the 
continuing escalation of CSRS projected costs. Mr. Van de Water 
emphasized that, despite differences in details, all three 
projections indicated that the open season would cost 
Government in the aggregate. He added, that when each of the 
estimating models use comparable assumptions to project future 
costs, they reach similar conclusions. Given the difficulties 
of projecting switch rates, these variations are inevitable.

12. Medical Savings Accounts [MSAs] in the FEHBP.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee examined adding Medical 
Savings Accounts [MSAs] as another option for Federal employees 
in the FEHB Program. In 1997 and 1998, Federal employees 
experienced back to back increases in their share of health 
care premiums of 12.5 percent and an estimated 7.4 percent, 
respectively. Such premium hikes make it increasingly difficult 
for many Federal employees and annuitants to obtain affordable 
health care.
    MSAs offer the promise of providing a low cost option that 
places the power to make health care decisions in the hands of 
patients and their doctors rather than insurance companies or 
government bureaucrats. MSAs combine a savings account to cover 
out-of-pocket medical expenses, such as routine and preventive 
care, with a higher deductible insurance plan to cover major 
medical expenses. MSAs also have the additional benefit of 
being completely portable. In contrast to standard employer-
paid health insurance, MSAs follow the individual regardless of 
changes in his employment status. In addition, funds in MSA 
accounts can be used to purchase medical insurance during 
lapses in employment. MSAs also promote increased personal 
savings. If an individual does not have to spend their MSA 
assets on medical expenses, those funds remain available for 
future medical expenses or their retirement savings.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's examination of MSAs in the 
FEHB revealed widespread support for offering Federal employees 
the MSA option as part of their FEHB coverage. The approval was 
reflected in the testimony of several witnesses at the 
subcommittee's field hearing on the subject. Offering support 
for the inclusion of the MSA option in the FEHB were members of 
the political, legal, medical, financial, and marketing 
communities. These hearings also were helpful to the 
subcommittee in developing and reviewing MSA proposals in 
consultation with the Republican health care task force.
    c. Hearings.--A field hearing, ``Medical Savings Accounts 
[MSAs] in the FEHBP'' was held in Ft. Monmouth, NJ, on March 9, 
1998. The hearing was called to examine the possibility of 
offering MSAs to those Federal employees who participate in the 
FEHB Program.
    Mayor Bret Schundler of Jersey City, NJ, described his 
city's experience with MSAs. In 1994, Jersey City offered MSAs 
to its managers, becoming the first governmental entity in the 
United States to make them available to its employees. Jersey 
City set out to prove that MSAs would be less expensive than 
traditional low-deductible indemnity plans, while providing 
superior health coverage for employees. He testified that 4 
years later, he is confident that MSAs were successful, both in 
terms of cost concerns and employee satisfaction. Mayor 
Schundler also testified that Jersey City did not experience 
adverse selection among the segment of the workforce eligible 
for MSAs. However, Jersey City's overall workforce, including 
those not eligible for MSAs is disproportionately older, and 
therefore more expensive to insure as an isolated group than as 
part of a larger pool. As a result, he was forced to place his 
entire workforce, including the segment eligible for MSAs, in 
the New Jersey State health insurance program, which does not 
offer MSAs. Mayor Schundler testified that, based on his 
experience with MSAs, he will work to persuade the State to 
offer them through its program.
    Three physicians also testified in support of MSAs at the 
hearing. They all emphasized that MSAs offer patients the most 
control over their own health care decisions and the selection 
of their own doctors. Both Drs. Alieta Eck, a physician as well 
as a health care consumer, and Sidney Goldfarb, a urologist in 
private practice, stressed that MSAs promote preventive care 
and early detection, where greater impact can be made on health 
care. Dr. Goldfarb also testified that he chose an MSA for his 
own family's personal health care insurance because he was able 
to save a net of 75 percent of his health insurance premium. 
Dr. Joseph Cauda, a surgeon, observed that MSAs would aid lower 
income families in gaining access to better and more complete 
health care.
    Ms. Madeline Cosman testified as to the legal benefits of 
MSAs. Ms. Cosman, an attorney, has been practicing medical law 
for 33 years. Ms. Cosman stated that among the major legal 
advantages to MSAs were the avoidance of capitation, the 
avoidance of community ratings, the avoidance of violating 
confidentiality, and the avoidance of any third party 
definition of medically-necessary treatment. Advantages like 
these, according to Ms. Cosman, allow a person of any age or 
any degree of health to earn a fair amount of money if they do 
not use the entire amount in their MSA, as is the case with 
IRAs. Ms. Cosman went on to note that even a person who is ill 
with a serious chronic disease, while perhaps not able to turn 
a profit, would likely come out ahead financially under an MSA 
by not having to pay the copayments which are customary in 
first dollar indemnity plans.
    Mr. William Raab, vice president of marketing, Anthem 
Health and Life Insurance Co., which introduced their MSA 
product to their sales force in March 1997, testified that MSA 
sales have risen steadily for his company. He added that the 
tax advantages offered by MSAs have helped to make consumers 
receptive.
    Ms. Janine Kenna, the associate manager for product 
development at Merill Lynch, testified that the MSA concept is 
one of the most exciting and innovating developments in recent 
years from both the health policy and savings perspective. She 
added that her clients have informed her that the two most 
important factors that led them to establish MSAs were the 
ability to control their choice of doctors and the ability to 
use funds that are not used for medical expenses to supplement 
their retirement savings. In a March 17, 1998 letter to the 
subcommittee, Ms. Kenna pointed out that the average age of 
Merill Lynch MSA account holders is 46, and that the highest 
account holder age concentration is between 46 and 50 years 
old, which includes 19 percent of the total client base. The 
next highest account holder age concentration is the 51-55 age 
range, which includes 17 percent of account holders. These 
statistics seem to rebut the adverse selection argument, which 
holds that MSA accounts are only being taken on by the young 
and healthy.
    Two individuals representing the National Association of 
Retired Federal Employees [NARFE], testified. Both reaffirmed 
NARFE's opposition to MSAs in the FEHB. Mr. Benjamin Collier 
asserted that NARFE's opposition stems from the fear that MSAs 
will attract only the healthy persons. He speculated that their 
defection from other FEHB plans could possibly force insurance 
carriers to cut benefits, raise premiums, or both. Mr. Frank 
Bee, legislative director, New Jersey Federation of NARFE, said 
he could see no benefit to be gained by introducing MSAs into 
the FEHB because most people are content with their FEHB plans.

13. FEHBP: Program Guidance for 1999.

    a. Summary.--OPM administers the FEHBP, negotiating rates 
and benefit packages with participating carriers and providers. 
Each year it issues a ``call letter'' that outlines its 
objectives for the next contract year, including benefits or 
coverages it will require of all carriers. OPM's policies 
obviously can affect the premiums for FEHBP plans. In light of 
the dramatic increases in FEHBP premiums for 1998, the 
subcommittee examined the policies OPM proposed for 1999.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's examination disclosed that 
OPM's mandates have imposed significant costs on FEHBP carriers 
for very little benefit and have reduced the flexibility 
carriers need to develop innovative benefit designs that 
provide quality health care coverage at reasonable prices.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Federal Employee Health 
Benefits: OPM Program Guidance for 1999,'' was held on March 
17, 1998. Witnesses at the hearing were William E. Flynn, III, 
Associate Director of Retirement and Insurance Services, OPM; 
Stephen W. Gammarino, senior vice president, Federal Employee 
Program, BlueCross BlueShield Association; and Walton J. 
Francis, a consultant and author of the ``Checkbook's Guide to 
Health Insurance Plans for Federal Employees.''
    Subcommittee Chairman Mica emphasized that the FEHBP, which 
is often cited as a model employer-sponsored health benefits 
program, succeeds because of its market orientation. The 
program relies on the market forces of competition and consumer 
choice to ensure both competitive premiums and quality 
coverage. He pointed out that in recent years OPM has used its 
call letter to mandate specific benefits and, in the view of 
many, has been standardizing FEHBP benefits. He also pointed 
out that the President has directed OPM to implement certain 
provisions of the so-called patient's bill of rights in the 
FEHBP. These developments, he said, are of great concern to the 
subcommittee.
    Mr. Flynn testified that OPM's mandates have added little 
to the program's cost. The FEHBP, he also testified, was 
already in substantial compliance with the President's 
``patient's bill of rights'' and, therefore, anticipated that 
implementing it would not greatly increase premiums. However, 
he also testified that implementing that program would cost 
$32.5 million per year, more than half of which, $17.5 million, 
is attributable to its information disclosure requirements. The 
rest is divided about equally between requirements for 
continuity of coverage and access to specialists. In addition, 
he testified that OPM would require plans to cover 
pharmacotherapy benefits as a general medical benefit, which he 
estimated would cost between $8-10 million.
    Mr. Gammarino testified that BlueCross BlueShield plans 
cover about 3.6 million lives under 1.9 million contracts. He 
expressed concern over the information disclosure requirements 
OPM will require, noting that they were drawn to address 
problems created by products involving tightly-controlled 
networks of providers, such as HMOs. On the other hand, 
BlueCross BlueShield's network is very large, including more 
than 400,000 providers. He pointed out that collecting such 
information as languages spoken, office hours, and 
accessibility to the handicapped on so many providers would be 
costly and nearly impossible to keep current. Moreover, it 
would add little value since consumers can already obtain that 
information quickly and efficiently by directly contacting 
specific practitioners in the company's directory they may be 
interested in. Mr. Gammarino also stated that OPM's increased 
mandates and regulation of FEHBP plans threaten the very 
attributes that make the FEHBP so successful because they 
reduce flexibility, increase costs, and reduce competition. He 
pointed out that OPM and congressional mandates through the 
1990's have added about $100 million per year to BlueCross 
BlueShield's program costs. In his view, the long-range 
integrity and stability of the FEHBP depend upon allowing 
carriers to offer enrollees a variety of genuinely different 
products to choose from and providing a level playing field for 
all competitors.
    Mr. Francis testified that one of the strengths of the 
FEHBP is that it allows consumers real choices between plans 
with different benefits. He contrasted the FEHBP to some plans, 
notably the CALPERS program in California, in which benefits 
are standardized. Such standardization, he argues, eliminates a 
major dimension of consumer choice. Mr. Francis stated that the 
FEHBP is preeminent in providing good information to consumers 
because OPM has insisted that brochures are written in plain 
English and the information is provided in consistent formats. 
In his view, while some additional important information could 
be provided, such as numbers of participating providers in the 
case of HMOs, it is also possible to overload consumers with 
information of little value. He also expressed concern that the 
President's ``patient's bill of rights'' is not very carefully 
constructed. While it contains some excellent standards, he 
believes others, such as the 90-day continuity rule, will 
create incalculable problems in the real world. He also stated 
that requiring information on handicap accessibility could lead 
to some very costly requirements. However, he believed OPM 
would interpret the ``patient's bill of rights'' responsibly. 
Mr. Francis also identified innovations the FEHBP could accept 
in the future. These included permitting military retirees and 
military families to enroll, allowing more national fee-for-
service plans to compete, and adding medical savings accounts.

14. Long Term Care Insurance for Federal Employees.

    a. Summary.--Long-term care [LTC] refers to a broad range 
of supportive, medical, personal, and social services for 
individuals who are limited in their ability to function 
independently on a daily basis. Long-term services can be 
provided in a nursing home, an assisted living facility, the 
community or in the home. Increased life expectancy and the 
aging of the baby boom generation (people born between 1946 and 
1964) will bring rapid growth in the number of people at risk 
of needing LTC.
    Most people believe that they are covered for long-term 
care by their health care plans, disability insurance, or by 
Medicare. Unfortunately, many learn the hard way--when they or 
a family member needs care--that they are not sufficiently 
covered and must pay for long-term care on their own. According 
to the American Council of Life Insurance Policy Research 
Department, by 2030, the average annual cost of a nursing home 
stay will increase from $40,000 today to more than $97,000 (in 
1997 dollars).
    Employer-based plans represent the fastest growing market 
for long-term care insurance. These plans are generally 
available to the employer's employees, their spouses, parents, 
parents-in-law, and retirees on a beneficiary-pay-all basis.
    Federal employees have expressed a significant interest in 
being offered an option to purchase long-term care insurance. 
In one of its routine customer feedback surveys randomly 
distributed to Federal employees from January through March 
1997, the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] included 
questions regarding long-term care insurance. In response to 
the survey, approximately 86 percent of Federal employees 
expressed an interest in long-term care insurance.
    Chairman Mica conducted a hearing on the issue of providing 
long-term care insurance as an employee benefit. The purpose of 
the hearing was to collect information on long-term care 
insurance, examine how private sector employers are addressing 
their employees' long-term care needs, and to make an informed 
decision about how to give Federal employees access to this 
benefit.
    Subsequent to the hearing, Chairman Mica introduced H.R. 
4401, the Civil Service Long-Term Care Insurance Benefit Act. 
This legislation directs OPM to establish and administer a 
program through which Federal employees and annuitants may 
purchase group or individual long-term care insurance for 
themselves, their spouses, and any other eligible relative 
beginning January 2000.
    b. Benefits.--Long-term care is expensive. The vast 
majority of families are unprepared to shoulder the cost of 
long-term care, deplete hard-earned assets, and eventually 
depend on Medicaid to pay the costs of long term care. Long-
term care insurance provides protection from these catastrophic 
financial risks and reduces reliance on Medicaid. As a 
significant employer in America, the Federal Government can 
reach over 2.8 million workers and an additional 2.1 million 
retirees and survivors. Competition among carriers, group 
discounts, and volumes of sales will keep premiums affordable 
for Federal employees. Additionally, by offering long-term care 
insurance to individuals in their working years, the Federal 
Government can help encourage the purchase of this product at 
younger ages, when premiums are lower.
    c. Hearings.--On March 26, 1998, Chairman Mica conducted a 
hearing entitled, ``Long-Term Care Insurance as an Employment 
Benefit'' to examine the feasibility of offering long-term care 
insurance to Federal employees. The chairman stated that making 
affordable long-term insurance available to Federal employees 
would help Federal employees plan for financing long-term care 
services and to avoid severe financial hardships in their 
future. The chairman also noted that offering this employment 
benefit would keep the government competitive with private-
sector compensation practices.
    Two panels presented testimony to the subcommittee. The 
first panel consisted of representatives from the industry, the 
National Association of Retired Federal Employees [NARFE], and 
the Employee Benefit Research Institute [EBRI].
    David Martin testified on behalf of the American Council of 
Life Insurance [ACLI]. Mr. Martin stated that by the year 2030, 
it is estimated that the number of elderly persons will double 
from 35 million to nearly 70 million. He further noted that the 
elderly population is most likely to need long term care 
services.
    Mr. Martin also testified that private long-term care 
insurance can play an important role in financing long-term 
care and providing for a secure retirement. He stressed that 
relying on savings to pay for long-term care needs is not a 
financially feasible option for most middle-income Americans.
    Data that he presented to the committee revealed that 
lifetime assets needed at age 85 to pay for 2 years of nursing 
home care with an inflation protection of 5 percent for a 45 
year old today would be $489,446 (2030 dollars). In contrast, 
if that same 45 year old purchased private long-term care 
insurance such person would contribute about $417 in annual 
premiums and a lifetime value of premiums of $57,907. Lifetime 
savings from long-term care insurance would be $431,539.
    Mr. Martin also presented a chart that showed that a 2-year 
policy for an individual between the ages of 45-49 would cost 
approximately $500 annually or $19 per pay period. A 5-year 
policy would cost about $734 annually or $28 per pay period.
    Further, Mr. Martin's written testimony referred to an ACLI 
study that showed that private insurance can also address the 
Nation's long-term care needs in the future. For example, if 
workers between the age of 34 to 52 purchased long-term care 
insurance, the share of nursing home expenditures paid for by 
private insurance could increase from 3 percent today to 29 
percent in 2030. Accordingly, the Medicaid program could save 
$28 billion (in 1996 dollars) or 21 percent of total Medicaid 
nursing home expenditures. Similarly, about 40 percent of 
individual ``out of pocket'' nursing home costs could be saved 
by the increased ownership of long-term care insurance.
    Testifying on behalf of the Health Insurance Association of 
America [HIAA], Mr. David Brenerman stated that long-term care 
is the largest unfunded liability facing Americans today. Mr. 
Brenerman told the committee that annual nursing home costs 
average over $41,000 today and are estimated to increase to 
about $100,000 (in 1996 dollars) by the year 2030. He noted 
that rather than pooling risks, the current system for long-
term care places each household on its own to deplete its 
household resources at which time Medicaid then becomes the 
payer of last resort.
    However, Mr. Brenerman did state that the long-term care 
insurance market is growing. Of particular significance, Mr. 
Brenerman noted that the employer-sponsored market comprises 
about 14 percent of the approximately 5 million long-term care 
insurance policies that have been sold.
    Mr. Brenerman emphasized that offering Federal employees 
long-term care insurance would signal Federal Government 
support for encouraging personal responsibility and planning 
for long-term care through avenues such as long-term care 
insurance. Additionally, he noted that the sheer size of the 
Federal Government would assure an immediate and heightened 
awareness of long-term care financing issues among working 
adults. Mr. Brenerman stressed that since the Federal active 
employee population is large and considered to be a relatively 
young and healthy group, the administrative and marketing costs 
would be less, premiums lower, and underwriting minimized.
    Paul Fronstin testified on behalf of the Employee Benefit 
Research Institute [EBRI]. Mr. Fronstin reiterated that 
increased life expectancy and the aging of the baby boom 
generation will bring rapid growth in the number of people at 
risk of needing long-term care [LTC]. Mr. Fronstin stated that 
although the chances of having extended long-term care needs 
are small, the cost of such needs are extremely high. He noted 
that only a small portion of those who can afford long-term 
care insurance have purchased it. Further, he emphasized that 
others may lack information on the probability of needing long-
term care, may mistakenly believe that they are already covered 
by Medicare, self-insurance or disability insurance, or are 
relying on Medicaid to cover long-term care.
    Mr. Fronstin noted that individually purchased long-term 
care insurance as well as employment-based plans will increase. 
However, he stressed that barriers to expansion exist. 
According to Mr. Fronstin, the largest barrier to the expansion 
of the long-term care insurance market is the lack of public 
readiness to use assets to insure against the relatively low 
probability of need. He emphasized that public education is 
very much needed.
    Charles Jackson testified on behalf of the National 
Association of Retired Federal Employees [NARFE]. Mr. Jackson 
cited a statistic showing that half of all women and a third of 
men over 65 years of age are likely to spend some time in a 
nursing home at a cost of over $40,000 a year. He noted that 
based on these statistics NARFE members have an interest in 
long-term care insurance.
    Mr. Jackson stressed that long-term care insurance must be 
available to Federal annuitants as well as active employees. 
Further, he stated that long-term care insurance offered to 
Federal employees must provide cheaper premiums and better 
coverage than employees or annuitants could buy on their own.
    Mr. Jackson also emphasized that insurance carriers must 
have reasonable standards for making enrollees eligible for 
long-term care benefits, include flexibility, provide plan 
portability, and ensure that enough individuals enroll in a 
plan to provide a satisfactory risk pool.
    Mr. Jackson also expressed concern that cognitive disorders 
such as Alzheimer's disease are excluded in coverage. However, 
in response to a question later posed regarding this matter, 
Mr. Brenerman stated that about 80 percent of long-term care 
insurance policies cover cognitive impairment, including 
Alzheimer's disease.
    The second panel consisted of Ed Flynn testifying on behalf 
of the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] and Bob Williams 
testifying for the Department of Health & Human Services [HHS].
    Mr. Flynn stated that one of OPM's strategic goals is the 
establishment of a modernized performance-oriented total 
compensation system that includes a competitive benefits 
package for Federal employees. He stated that the idea of a 
Federal employee long-term care program should be revisited as 
part of this effort.
    Mr. Flynn also testified that OPM was engaged in two 
ongoing studies regarding long-term care insurance, one of 
which commenced in 1995, and the other in 1996. Under 
questioning by Chairman Mica, Mr. Flynn could not give an exact 
date of when these studies would be completed and the results 
available. However, he did anticipate that results would be 
accessible sometime in 1998. Mr. Williams later responded that 
findings from the other study should be available during the 
fall or winter. However, he noted that such findings must be 
cleared by the Office of Management and Budget prior to their 
release.
    Chairman Mica also asked Mr. Flynn whether it would be 
possible to establish a competitive long-term care insurance 
program for Federal employees within 6 months to a year. Mr. 
Flynn responded that the chairman's timetable was not 
unrealistic. When further questioned as to whether OPM could 
make this benefit option available to Federal employees by 
December 31, 1999, Mr. Flynn said that OPM would move forward 
with such a proposal if agreement was reached between Congress 
and the administration. However, he stressed while OPM 
recognizes the importance of providing for long-term care needs 
of individuals, OPM would have to review a specific proposal 
before taking a position on it.
    Mr. Williams said that HHS believes that policymakers must 
begin planning for the social and economic implications of 
population aging, particularly the increased demand for long-
term assistance for those with chronic illness and disability. 
He noted that long-term care can be a significant economic and 
emotional burden. He further stated that long-term care 
insurance can help protect against the high cost of nursing 
home care. Additionally, he stressed that long-term care 
insurance can help middle-income elders with long-term care 
needs remain at home by making their own money go further.
    Mr. Williams stated that HHS believes that employer-
sponsored long-term care insurance is the best vehicle for 
making high-quality coverage more affordable. He noted that 
such plans encourage people to enroll at younger ages when 
premiums are lower. Also Mr. Williams said that employer-
sponsored long-term care insurance is typically 15 percent less 
than coverage purchased on an individual basis.
    Finally, in response to a question posed by Chairman Mica, 
Mr. Williams stated that offering long-term care insurance to 
Federal employees as a benefit is an appropriate role for the 
Federal Government.

15. Review of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program [FEHBP] as 
        a Possible Complement to Military Health Care.

    a. Summary.--Because of numerous problems in the military 
health care system, including TRICARE (a component of the 
current military health care system), many have urged that 
military retirees and military families should be allowed to 
enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program 
[FEHBP].
    The FEHBP provides voluntary health insurance coverage for 
over 9 million Federal Government employees, annuitants, and 
their dependents. More than 85 percent of Federal employees 
participate in FEHBP. It is a market-based program in which 285 
health insurance carriers and HMOs compete for business. 
Participating carriers must offer group rates, provide 
reasonable policy coverage, and meet various requirements for 
financial solvency. Each plan must take any eligible employee 
without regard to a preexisting condition. The total annual 
cost of the program was approximately $16.3 billion in fiscal 
year 1997, of which $12.1 billion was paid by the government 
and $4.2 billion by enrollees.
    The Federal Government and enrollees share FEHBP premiums 
according to a statutory formula. The Federal share of the 
FEHBP premium is set at 72 percent of the weighted average of 
all plans (separate calculations are performed for self alone 
and self and family enrollments). However, the government share 
cannot exceed 75 percent of any particular plan's premium.
    The FEHBP option is not currently available to military 
retirees, their families, or to the families of active duty 
personnel. Beneficiaries of the military health care system are 
eligible to receive medical care at military facilities. 
However, depending on the level of demand and ready access to 
facilities, this care is not always assured. Moreover, 
Medicare-eligible retirees are effectively excluded from the 
military health care system.
    The military health system has been expected to fulfill two 
objectives that are, at times incompatible: providing medical 
services and support to the armed forces in combat, and caring 
for active duty personnel and their families, military retirees 
and their dependents, and survivors in peacetime and war. In 
fiscal year 1997, the military health care system offered 
health care coverage to about 8.2 million people, more than 
half of whom are retirees and their dependents and survivors, 
at a cost of $15.6 billion.
    As resources and space permit, all Department of Defense 
[DOD] beneficiaries are eligible for care at military 
facilities. Active duty personnel are given first-priority 
access to military facilities, followed by their family members 
and then retirees and their families. This space-available 
care, however, varies from comprehensive inpatient and 
outpatient care at medical centers and larger hospitals to only 
outpatient services at smaller facilities. Further, the past 
decade has witnessed substantial active duty force and 
infrastructure reductions, a 15 percent decrease in medical 
personnel strength, and the closing of one-third of all 
military hospitals.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's examination of the FEHBP 
as a complement to military health care revealed widespread 
support for authorizing Nationwide access to the FEHBP for 
military retirees, their families, and the families of active 
duty personnel. The subcommittee was able to draw on evidence 
presented at this hearing in developing and evaluating a number 
of such proposals, including the limited demonstration project 
established in the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1999.
    c. Hearings.--``FEHB Program as a Complement to Military 
Health Care'' was held on April 28, 1998. The hearing was 
called to examine proposals that would extend the FEHBP to 
active duty dependents, as well as to retirees and their 
families.
    Several Members of Congress testified at this hearing. 
Representative Cliff Stearns (FL) testified that he was in 
favor of authorizing the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
demonstration project to provide covered beneficiaries under 
the military health care system with the option to enroll in 
the FEHBP. Representative James P. Moran (VA) stated that he 
was in favor of granting Medicare eligible military retirees 
the option of participating in the FEHBP. Representative 
William ``Mac'' Thornberry (TX) testified that he favors 
Medicare subvention, as well as opening the FEHBP on a 
demonstration basis. Representative J.C. Watts (OK) advocated 
offering military retirees the option of selecting FEHBP for 
their health care coverage through a controlled, 5-year 
demonstration project in which eligibility would be limited to 
Medicare eligible retirees for the first 2 years of the program 
and costs would be capped.
    Mrs. Sydney Tally Hickey, associate director, Government 
Relations, National Military Family Association, testified that 
it is time to relieve DOD of trying to provide both a peacetime 
health care benefit and to meet its readiness mission. She 
attributed many of TRICARE's defects to the fact that it is a 
remnant of President Clinton's failed national health care plan 
that cannot be expected to function properly in the absence of 
the other components of that program that were to supplement 
it. Ms. Hickey emphasized that DOD should concentrate on the 
readiness mission it alone can provide, and leave peacetime 
health care to the well-proven FEHBP.
    Dr. Barbara Glacel, the wife of a senior ranking active 
duty officer, testified that access to quality care under the 
current military health care system, even for someone with her 
experience and the rank of her husband factored in, was 
extremely difficult to obtain. Dr. Glacel, who was diagnosed 
with breast cancer in December 1996, spoke of her difficulties 
in obtaining quality care under the TRICARE system. Dr. Glacel 
told the subcommittee that although TRICARE promised specialty 
care within 28 days of a routine consultation, one of her 
referrals to orthopedic surgery took 47 days. Dr. Glacel also 
testified about the onerous amount of paperwork she had to 
complete simply to move the treatment process forward. Dr. 
Glacel stated that her struggles to achieve access to care 
under the TRICARE system have left her with the clear 
impression that TRICARE administrators believe that breast 
cancer is no more significant than the common cold.
    A retired enlisted man, Mr. Boyd Simmons, testified that 
because obtaining quality care for his ill wife under the 
current system was so difficult and costly, he came out of 
retirement and took a government job just so that he and his 
family could participate in the FEHBP. Mr. Simmons return to 
government employment was precipitated by his struggles to 
obtain quality health care for his wife, who suffered from 
tracheal stenosis. Mr. Simmons testified that the lack of 
choice of health care providers under the TRICARE system left 
his wife with inadequate treatment options and a fearsome 
bureaucracy with which to do battle. Mr. Simmons stated that 
full participation in the FEHBP for retirees was the only way 
in which to avoid the national disgrace of not providing 
quality health care to those men and women who served our 
country so well.
    Mr. Hal Franck, Retirement Activities Officer, Mountain 
Home Air Force Base, stated that it was particularly difficult 
for military retirees to get access to quality care in rural 
areas. He added that the way to help military retirees would be 
to provide access to the FEHBP in rural America to all military 
retired veterans and their families who are too far removed 
from veteran or military health care facilities. Mr. Franck 
noted that while civilian employees in his area who participate 
in FEHBP have no difficulty finding doctors, retirees and 
active duty families struggle to obtain care because they are 
limited to doctors who participate in TRICARE.
    The Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health 
Affairs, Gary A. Christopherson, also testified. He contended 
that TRICARE is a strong system that is getting stronger every 
day. Mr. Christopherson added that while strong, TRICARE is not 
perfect, but neither is the FEHBP. In his opinion, offering the 
FEHBP option to active duty dependents, as well as to military 
retirees and their families, would present the DOD with vexing 
cost and readiness problems.

16. Civil Service Reform Issues.

    a. Summary.--After examining civil service issues in dozens 
of hearings during the 104th and 105th Congresses, a number of 
reform initiatives were advanced to the subcommittee. These 
initiatives addressed various aspects of Federal workforce 
management including safeguarding the integrity of the civil 
service, managing performance, reforming the employee appeals 
process, and enhancing pay and benefit programs. The 
subcommittee assembled a legislative proposal addressing these 
issues and incorporated a number of measures that had been 
referred in the course of the 105th Congress.
    To safeguard the integrity of the merit system, the 
proposal included provisions giving streamlined authority for 
agencies to conduct demonstration projects of personnel 
management improvements, restricting opportunities for 
political appointees to convert to career status, strengthening 
the sanctions imposed for violating the Hatch Act, and 
correcting abuses of official time (such as restricting Federal 
employees from lobbying while on official time.) To protect the 
Privacy Act rights of Federal employees, involuntary disclosure 
of home addresses to non-governmental organizations would be 
prohibited.
    The proposal contained measures to strengthening 
accountability through the management of performance. To that 
end managers would be better able to remove poor performers and 
retain their superior employees during a reduction in force, 
and agencies would be barred from implementing two-tier (or 
``pass/fail'') performance evaluation systems.
    To reform the employee complaint process several measures 
were considered to streamline the appeals procedures and 
strengthen alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
    A number of pay and benefit reforms for Federal employees 
were advanced. The legislative draft included provisions to 
reform the firefighter pay system and raise the current ceiling 
on Federal overtime pay. The precarious fiscal status of 
Federal retirement accounts would be remedied by providing for 
funding through equity holdings rather than nonmarketable 
Treasury securities. Additional portability for retirement 
benefits would be provided by allowing immediate participation 
for employees in the Thrift Savings Program and by making the 
retirement benefit of political appointees and congressional 
staff (who experience shorter careers and higher turnover) 
fully portable.
    b. Benefits.--This legislation was intended to provide a 
comprehensive set of reforms that would result in better pay 
and benefits for Federal employees, strengthen the merit 
system, and eliminate many of the procedural obstacles to 
effectiveness management of Federal agencies.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Civil Service Reform 
Issues'' was conducted on June 24, 1998, to examine the merits 
of various provisions of civil service reform legislation under 
consideration by the subcommittee. Chairman Mica, Mr. Pappas, 
Mrs. Morella, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Cummings, and Ms. Norton 
participated in the hearing. Witnesses included: Janice R. 
Lachance, Director, Office of Personnel Management; Mr. Michael 
Brostek, Associate Director, Federal Workforce and Management 
Issues, General Accounting Office; Mr. Grover Norquist, 
president, Americans for Tax Reform; Mr. Robert E. Moffitt, 
vice president, Domestic Policy Studies, the Heritage 
Foundation; Mr. Randel K. Johnson, vice president for Labor 
Policy, U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Patrick Korten, Cato 
Institute; Mr. John I. Just-Buddy, of Bowie, MD; Mr. Bobby L. 
Harnage, Sr., national president, American Federation of 
Government Employees; Mr. William W. Pearman, president, FAA 
Conference, Federal Managers Association; Mr. Albert Schmidt, 
national president, National Federation of Federal Employees; 
and Mr. Robert Tobias, national president, National Treasury 
Employees Union.
    Mr. Mica noted that the legislative proposal under 
consideration at this hearing reflected the subcommittee's work 
after more than 60 hearings during the previous 4 years. He 
noted that it incorporated major provisions that were adopted 
by the House in 1996. He noted the importance of reforms to 
ensure better performance and achieve greater accountability in 
the Federal workforce, to provide fair compensation for Federal 
employees, and to secure reliable funding for annuities. He 
stressed that we cannot separate the functions of rewarding 
government's outstanding performers from the challenge of 
developing more effective measures for removing poor 
performers. He contended that reform of the appeals procedures 
are critical because those procedures now impede effective 
management and obstruct efforts to enhance the caliber and 
reputation of public service. He emphasized that he is open to 
modifications of proposals contained in the subcommittee's 
draft outline, and solicited alternative proposals to deal with 
these pressing concerns from all witnesses and interested 
employees. He noted that the subcommittee had already approved 
legislation to strengthen veterans' preference, to limit fraud 
in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, to enhance 
Federal employees' life insurance benefits, and to correct 
retirement coverage classification errors. He described 
additional initiatives under consideration as employee 
benefits, including options for medical savings accounts and 
long-term care insurance.
    Mr. Cummings expressed support for several of these 
provisions, and indicated concerns about several significant 
provisions, including efforts to improve performance 
evaluations, to strengthen the Thrift Savings Plan [TSP], and 
to provide secure investment options for Federal employees' 
retirement benefits. He affirmed, ``I am fully prepared to 
delete and refine those items which are unworkable and 
unnecessary.''
    Mrs. Morella noted that many provisions in the draft 
outline incorporated bills that she had introduced. She cited 
measures increasing opportunities for Federal employees to 
invest in the TSP, to correct retirement decisions made during 
a period when OPM had not issued regulations, and to increase 
pay for administrative appeals judges in Federal agencies.
    Mr. Sessions expressed support for measures to strengthen 
the TSP, especially in making the Federal retirement benefit 
increasingly portable so that Federal employees will feel more 
able to move to private sector opportunities, and back, as 
opportunities develop. He praised the proposal to provide a 
more flexible, defined contribution benefit for political 
appointees and legislative staff, who need this flexibility for 
their careers.
    Ms. Lachance stated that OPM was working on a complex 
legislative proposal to balance flexibility and consistency 
while retaining the unified concept of Federal employment. 
Under questioning, however, she admitted that OPM's idea of 
flexibility did not extend to employee benefits. She supported 
measures to incorporate ``broadbanding'' approaches to 
employees' pay, which had been successful in previous 
demonstration projects. She indicated a willingness to work 
with the subcommittee to address concerns about the GS-10, Step 
1 cap on overtime pay, but described a proposal to increase the 
cap to the maximum pay in the General Schedule as ``too 
costly.'' She also opposed strongly any consideration of 
extending Federal retirement credit to nongovernment employees, 
such as those covered by the Railroad Retirement Board. Under 
questioning from Mr. Cummings, she also indicated that OPM is 
opposed to a requirement to collect information about the 
training activities of Federal agencies. In response to Mrs. 
Morella's questions, she indicated support for the TSP 
enhancements, but noted that cost concerns would have to be 
resolved before enactment.
    Mr. Brostek addressed concerns about demonstration project 
authority, uses of official time by organizations representing 
Federal employees, and the appeals processes. He noted that OPM 
had implemented demonstration projects only eight times in the 
20 years that the authority has been available, even though 
human resources management practices had altered dramatically 
in the private sector during that period. In a GAO survey of 34 
agencies, most could provide no formal records of the uses of 
official time. From the unsystematic reporting available, GAO 
estimated that Federal employees' organizations used more than 
2.5 million hours of official time, with more than 11,000 
employees charging some time to such accounts. About 460 
employees were reported as spending 100 percent of their time 
on representational activities. The total value of 
compensation, office space, facilities, equipment, travel and 
per diem attributable to official time reached $58 million. 
Although 23 agencies reported that official time helped to 
improve labor-management relations, 13 agencies acknowledged 
that official time diverted from the completion of routine 
agency work. GAO's extensive efforts to calculate official 
time, however, could not produce a single agency with a 
consistent method of maintaining such records over an extended 
period. Mr. Sessions expressed concern that GAO could not 
provide information about the amount of official time used to 
represent agencies' employees before the Congress. He described 
the current multiplicity of appeals systems as ``inefficient, 
expensive, and time consuming.'' He contended that any reform 
should provide fair treatment for Federal employees and promote 
effective Federal management. He noted that surveys of five 
agencies and five companies indicated promise for alternative 
dispute resolution approaches.
    Mr. Norquist expressed strong support for Representative 
Morella's proposal to strengthen employees' opportunities to 
save through the TSP. He also endorsed the measure to provide a 
more portable option for political appointees and legislative 
staff, who typically have less extensive government careers. He 
noted that defined contribution plans are being adopted 
increasingly at State levels around the country and that 
institutions of higher education also have implemented defined 
contribution plans to provide for the portability that 
professors seek as they move between institutions. In response 
to questions, he noted that most States and local governments 
have invested pensions independently, so that there are assets 
available to pay future benefits without burdening future 
taxpayers.
    Mr. Moffitt focussed on issues related to the relationship 
between career and noncareer employees, performance management, 
and proposals to restructure Federal employees' benefits 
programs. He emphasized the importance of drawing distinct 
lines between career and political employees as methods of 
ensuring the accountability of political employees and 
protecting the integrity of the career service. He noted the 
importance of the President's ability to appoint personnel, and 
described as ``wrong headed'' a proposal that would reduce the 
already tiny number of such positions, thereby weakening the 
President's control over an administration. He endorsed the 
proposal to apply sanctions to Hatch Act violations, especially 
since recent administrative and judicial decisions had 
restricted the imposition of penalties largely to removal from 
a position. Such sanctions have no effect on employees who have 
resigned office, leaving any violations unpunished. He also 
supported efforts to bar political appointees from ``careering 
in,'' and noted that the National Academy of Public 
Administration had previously raised similar concerns. He 
observed that efforts to improve the security of retirement 
funding and to create a more portable retirement system for 
political appointees and congressional staff responded to the 
need to attract highly-qualified persons for these positions. 
He also supported strengthening the investment options for 
Federal employees under the current TSP. He cautioned, however, 
that many civil service issues are resolved primarily in terms 
of the self-interest of government employees, and reminded the 
subcommittee that there is a broader public with common 
interests in the resolution of critical performance and 
government management issues. Under questioning, he noted the 
advantages of stock-invested pension accounts, and observed 
that we have greater public confidence in such investments, in 
part because 43 percent of citizens now own some form of 
equities. He opined that Federal employees' ability to watch 
their TSP investments grow has provided additional support for 
this perspective.
    Mr. Johnson observed that the need for reform of the method 
of using official time within the government should be a matter 
of bipartisan consensus. Under current practices, agencies 
provide employees abundant time to conduct union business, and 
the sum of subsidies to Federal employee unions provided 
through official time indicates a serious need of reform. He 
added that recent interpretations of law have allowed official 
time to be used to lobby the Congress, and that no current 
system exists to monitor these arrangements. He provided a 
legal analysis of several recent Federal Labor Relations 
Authority decisions which require the inclusion of official 
time for lobbying purposes in agency collective bargaining 
agreements. He indicated that by supporting their current 
programs and additional pay and benefits, Federal employee 
organizations would almost inevitably be lobbying against more 
general interests--such as reduced aggregate taxation. Although 
he acknowledged that comparable practices exist in the private 
sector, companies allowing union activities on corporate time 
monitor and manage such activities on a continuous basis. He 
hoped that the administration witness, who opposed additional 
paperwork burdens on Federal employee organizations, would take 
the same perspective on private organizations.
    Mr. Korten heartily encouraged the subcommittee to curb 
recent trends that undermine the integrity of performance 
management in the Federal service, especially the move toward 
pass/fail systems. He emphasized the adverse effects on morale 
when excellent performers receive the same ``pass'' rating as 
marginal ones, and he noted that the appeals process currently 
is so cumbersome that managers are deterred from taking sound 
performance management decisions. In particular, current 
practice undermines pay-for-performance. He noted the 
importance of turnover among political appointees, and approved 
of subcommittee proposals to limit the careering in of 
political appointees. He commented that the lack of portability 
in the Federal retirement system was a major factor encouraging 
appointees to seek career status. Although he supported 
measures to invest an increasing portion of retirement 
deductions in individual accounts, he fears that the present 
proposals will be overwhelmed by the effort to save Social 
Security in the not-too-distant future.
    Mr. Just-Buddy is a career employee of the Department of 
Agriculture who had managed an outreach office as Acting 
Director. When a directorship was created for the office, it 
was intended to be a political appointment, with a career 
deputy. However, the vacancy was announced as a career 
appointment, and he was forced to compete to retain his own 
position. The agency competed the vacancy twice, revising the 
position description to facilitate competition by noncareer 
applicants. The individual selected had previously served in a 
political capacity on the Secretary's staff in the office of 
communications. No interviews were conducted for this SES 
position. After the individual was selected, he was appointed 
to the position previously held by Mr. Just-Buddy, who noted 
that the competition against political appointees inevitably 
places career civil servants at a disadvantage. He is now 
serving with the National Association for the Advancement of 
Colored People on an Intergovernmental Personnel Act 
assignment. He believes that his ``rights as a citizen'' were 
violated in the course of placing a political appointee in this 
position, but current laws provide no redress, nor do they bar 
the repetition of such abuses.
    In response to Mr. Cummings' questions, panelists concluded 
that an absolute bar on Federal employment for persons 
convicted of narcotics abuses was excessive. Most panelists 
recommended a time limit, or gradation of penalties, at minimum 
differentiating between felony and misdemeanor convictions, and 
with some concern for the length of time that lapsed between 
the conviction and the possible Federal position.
    Mr. Harnage objected to significant reform measures 
incorporated in the draft legislation, including measures to 
curb abuses of official time for representational activities 
and proposals to improve managers' abilities to remove poor 
performers.
    Mr. Tobias insisted that any flexibility introduced through 
demonstration projects include union participation in reaching 
decisions. He also opposed efforts to monitor and curb abuses 
of official time and the performance management initiatives 
incorporated into the discussion outline. He expressed concerns 
about efforts to revise Federal Employees Compensation Act 
[FECA] provisions.
    Mr. Schmidt contended that Congress should strengthen the 
role of collective bargaining in Federal agency management. The 
National Federation of Federal Employees strongly opposed a 
provision, requested by the Office of Personnel Management, 
that would require the Federal Circuit to hear its appeals from 
Merit Systems Protection Board decisions. He joined the other 
union witnesses in opposition to major sections of the 
proposal.
    Mr. Pearman expressed support for modifications of the GS-
10, Step 1 ceiling on overtime pay and supported reform of the 
FECA, as well as for the expanded investment opportunities 
provided through the TSP reforms. The Federal Managers 
Association generally supports demonstration projects and the 
limitation on performance improvement programs and pass/fail 
performance management systems, but is reluctant to provide 
additional weight to performance appraisals in influencing 
personnel actions. Although all Federal Aviation Administration 
employees have been exempt from the personnel rules contained 
in Title 5, U.S. Code, since 1996, FMA is working to bring the 
agency back under several provisions that limit agency 
management, including restoration of the appeals system.

17. FEHBP Premium Increases for 1999.

    a. Summary.--On September 11, 1998, OPM announced that 
FEHBP premiums for 1999 would rise by an average 10.2 percent. 
The average increase in the individual's share of premiums will 
be 7.4 percent. The new ``Fair Share'' formula adopted in the 
Balanced Budget Act of 1997 was applied for the first time to 
determine the premium cost sharing for 1999. The FEHBP also saw 
65 plans, including one fee-for-service plan, withdraw. 
Although these plans were generally among the smallest 
participating in the program, this 19 percent decline in 
participating plans nevertheless limits employees' choices. The 
subcommittee examined these developments in order to identify 
the reasons for the premium increases and the departure of so 
many plans, as well as to examine the effects of the new 
formula.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's examination of this issue 
has helped it identify the major factors underlying the 1999 
FEHBP premium increases. It has also identified one major area 
in which OPM has refused to allow BlueCross BlueShield to 
implement a cost containment strategy that other carriers have 
been permitted and may be over-regulating this important 
program.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``FEHBP Premium Increases 
for 1999'' was held on September 24, 1998. Witnesses were 
Stephen W. Gammarino, senior vice president, Federal Employee 
Program, BlueCross BlueShield Association; Terry Latanich, 
senior vice president, Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C.; and 
William E. Flynn, III, Associate Director for Retirement and 
Insurance, OPM.
    Subcommittee Chairman Mica pointed out that in 1998 average 
subscriber premiums rose $132 and will rise by $88 in 1999. As 
a result, employees and annuitants spent $560 million more in 
1998 and will spend $400 million more in 1999 for health care, 
or almost $1 billion in extra costs over 2 years. Likewise, the 
government's burden over those 2 years is another $2.2 billion. 
He also pointed out that recent data indicated that 1998's 
FEHBP increase of 8.5 percent were substantially higher than 
the increases experienced by other employer-sponsored health 
insurance plans, and that the Congressional Budget Office had 
forecast single digit increases in private health care 
insurance premiums through the year 2008. He asked whether 
factors unique to the FEHBP explained this difference. 
Subcommittee Chairman Mica also noted that about half of the 
cost of implementing the President's so-called ``patient's bill 
of rights'' stemmed from additional paperwork requirements, and 
asked why the government should be fueling already rising 
premium increases by imposing irrelevant burdens on 
participating carriers and providers. In addition, he indicated 
that the subcommittee should examine the implications of the 
rapid rise in prescription drug costs, which currently account 
for 20 percent of overall FEHBP costs. The departure of 65 
plans from the FEHBP, Subcommittee Chairman Mica observed, is 
telling us something about the business climate fostered in the 
FEHBP. Congress, he noted, may need to redirect FEHBP 
management away from over-regulation toward flexibility and 
choice, roll back mandates, and look at other options to lower 
costs, such as medical savings accounts, and act on tort reform 
if it wants to ameliorate these higher costs.
    Mr. Gammarino testified that BlueCross BlueShield plans are 
experiencing an increase in overall health care costs, 
particularly in the cost of prescription drugs, the fastest 
growing component. Prescription drugs now approach 30 percent 
of BlueCross BlueShield plan's total benefit costs. In large 
part this is attributable to the large number of older people 
in those plans; the average age of individuals in its Standard 
Option plans is 60, and the average age is 70 in the High 
Option plan. He emphasized that prescription drugs have become 
effective alternatives to hospital admissions and surgery. 
Nevertheless, because their costs cannot be permitted to rise 
unabated, he explained that BlueCross BlueShield has looked 
continually for effective controls, and identified greater 
flexibility in benefit design as holding near-term promise.
    Mr. Latanich testified that Merck-Medco Managed Care 
(Merck) is the pharmaceutical benefit manager for several FEHBP 
plans, covering more than 4 million lives. He pointed out that 
most health plans have experienced 15 to 20 percent increases 
in their drug costs. The principal contributing factor is the 
aging of the FEHBP population and the attendant increase in 
drug utilization that accompanies aging. The second factor is 
that physicians are prescribing drugs more frequently as new 
drugs become available to treat a broader range of illnesses. 
Merck estimates that increased utilization adds about 10 to 12 
percent to plan costs. But Mr. Latanich also emphasized that 
these drugs often replace more costly invasive medical 
procedures and treat previously untreatable diseases. In 
addition, he pointed out that the mix of medicines changes in 
ways that increase drug costs, citing as an example a new, more 
effective drug for migraine headaches that costs $14 per day. 
It replaces a drug that costs about $3.40 per day. He also 
identified a third contributing factor: increases in the price 
of prescription drugs. In order to help FEHBP plans and others 
control costs, Merck employs aggressive use of generic 
substitution, formularies, drug utilization review, the use of 
mail order pharmacy benefits, and general health education and 
physician education. However, Merck does not foresee changes in 
the rate of cost increases in the prescription drug component 
of plans' costs, although prescription drug prices themselves 
will rise only modestly.
    Both Mr. Gammarino and Mr. Latanich identified additional 
flexibility as important for carriers to control costs. Both 
also suggested that with respect to drug costs in particular, 
requiring co-payments by the individual would increase their 
involvement in their own health care and help control costs. 
However, it also became clear through Mr. Gammarino's testimony 
that OPM has refused to allow his plans to implement co-
payments on mail order pharmaceuticals, primarily because of 
its impact upon the elderly. However, as Mr. Latanich made 
clear, other plans have been permitted to apply copayments to 
older individuals.
    Mr. Flynn testified that the FEHBP premium increases were 
in line with rate hikes facing large and mid-sized employers 
and reflected developments in the health care market. He 
further said that the new ``Fair Share'' formula had cushioned 
the impact of rising health care costs on employees. Without 
it, according to him, under the ``Big 6'' formula, individual 
shares would have gone up by 13 percent, and under the ``Big 
5'' formula, which would have applied if Congress had taken no 
action, employee shares would have skyrocketed by 36 percent. 
The government will spend an additional $803 million this year 
(not counting additional costs borne by the Postal Service) 
because of the premium increases. Mr. Flynn agreed with the 
other witnesses that the age of the FEHBP population and 
increasing drug costs are prime causes of the 1999 rate hikes. 
He also cited the need for insurers to maintain adequate levels 
of reserves in the context of their overall financial 
performance. He asserted that the President's ``patients bill 
of rights'' and other mandates have added little to costs. Mr. 
Flynn also said that OPM was concerned about the rising costs 
and is examining cost-containment strategies that have been 
used effectively by other employers.

18. Cost Accounting Standards.

    a. Summary.--The FEHBP contracts for both 1998 and 1999 
contained a provision requiring all experience-related carriers 
to begin conforming their accounting systems to the Cost 
Accounting Standards administered by the Cost Accounting 
Standards Board. These standards were originally developed to 
cover manufacturing operations and, as written, are 
incompatible with accounting practices suitable to health 
insurance carriers and providers. OPM itself had long 
recognized the incompatibility of the Cost Accounting Standards 
with the accounting practices of health care insurers and had 
refrained from requiring compliance with them. Imposition of 
these standards threatened to force some carriers, particularly 
BlueCross BlueShield, which covers about 44 percent of the 
FEHBP market, to discontinue participation in the FEHBP.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's review of this issue 
revealed that OPM already has sufficient authority to ensure 
satisfactory audits of FEHBP plans. It also revealed that 
implementing the standards could disrupt the FEHBP and impose 
unnecessary costs on carriers while providing no additional 
benefit to the government. The subcommittee worked with the 
Appropriations Committee to include language prohibiting the 
application of those standards to FEHBP contracts in the 
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999.
    c. Hearings.--There were no hearings specifically on the 
Cost Accounting Standards. However, the subject was examined in 
the hearings on the FEHBP premium increases in 1998 (Section 
II. B. 9 of the Subcommittee on the Civil Service) and 1999 
(Section II. B. 17 of the Subcommittee on the Civil Service) 
and the hearing on OPM's policy guidance for 1999 (Section II. 
B. 13 of the Subcommittee on the Civil Service).

19. Improper Release of Confidential Information on a Federal Employee.

    a. Summary.--Information taken from the background 
investigation file of a Department of Defense employee, Linda 
Tripp, was released to the media in apparent violation of the 
Privacy Act. Two high-ranking employees at the Department, 
Clifford Bernath and Kenneth Bacon, subsequently confessed to 
making the information public. To date, neither has been 
disciplined for his role in this apparently illegal disclosure. 
This incident has raised grave concerns about the security of 
the confidential background files that are routinely maintained 
on thousands of Federal employees.
    b. Benefits.--There have been no benefits to date because 
the administration has refused to cooperate with the 
subcommittee. Instead, the Department of Defense has invoked 
its Inspector General's investigation as a pretext for 
shielding even information that could not possibly compromise 
that investigation from legitimate congressional scrutiny.
    c. Hearings.--There have been no hearings.

                Subcommittee on the District of Columbia

1. Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this subcommittee investigation 
is to review the significance of the Wastewater Treatment 
facility in the city of Washington, DC, and the immediate 
region. Most all Federal facilities, in all 3 branches of 
government, plus approximately 2 million residential users in 
Virginia, Maryland, and the District, depend upon Blue Plains. 
It treats an average 325 million gallons a day on 154 acres in 
Southwest Washington. A collapse of Blue Plains, which seemed 
possible last year, would be an ecological catastrophe.
    As recently as September 1995, the Environmental Protection 
Agency [EPA] warned of a very real possibility that raw sewage 
would flow into the Potomac because of serious shortcomings at 
Blue Plains. But since the new Water and Sewer Authority came 
into existence, on October 1, 1996, there have been no EPA 
violations. And there have been no more ``boil water alerts.''
    Subcommittee Chairman Davis convened a hearing to enunciate 
the improvements as a result of the new Water and Sewer 
Authority on November 12, 1997.
    b. Benefits.--In review of the current situation at Blue 
Plains under the new Water and Sewer Authority, existing 
concerns and practical solutions were explored. The new law, in 
place for 13 months at the time of the hearing, established an 
11 member Authority, with 5 suburban representatives and a 
super-majority required for significant actions. Blue Plains 
was transferred to the Authority from the Public Works 
Department of the District of Columbia government. There is an 
orderly payback of $83 million dollars planned for the 
Authority from the District of Columbia government. 
Subcommittee Chairman Davis praised the role of the local, 
State, and Federal officials who worked together to make it 
possible for the Water and Sewer Authority to work very well. 
Additionally, Subcommittee Chairman Davis praised the role of 
the subcommittee and its bi-partisan fashion in which it 
conducted itself for helping to reverse many dangerous trends 
at Blue Plains.
    c. Hearings.--On November 12, 1997, the subcommittee held 
an informational hearing on the ``District of Columbia Water 
and Sewer Authority.'' The hearing followed just over the 1 
year anniversary of the Water and Sewer Authority. Those 
testifying were, Michael McCabe, Region 3 Administrator, 
Environmental Protection Agency; Michael Rogers, chairman, 
Washington District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority; 
Jerry N. Johnson, general manager, Washington District of 
Columbia Water and Sewer Authority; Honorable Douglas Duncan, 
county executive, Montgomery County, MD; Michael Errico, deputy 
chief administrative officer, Prince Georges County, MD; 
Anthony H. Griffin, alternate member, Washington District of 
Columbia Water and Sewer Authority, Fairfax County, VA.

2. Public Law 104-8, District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and 
        Management Assistance Authority (D.C. Control Board).

    a. Summary.--An oversight hearing was conducted to review 
the implementation of the management reforms required by the 
national Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement 
Act of 1997 (Public law 105-33) by the D.C. Control Board. 
Legislation originating in this subcommittee and signed by the 
President on April 17, 1995 (Public Law 104-8) created the D.C. 
Control Board and conferred upon it responsibilities and 
authority. Since that time the underlying statute has been 
occasionally refined and the Control Board has participated in 
a significant number of hearings held by this subcommittee 
dealing with various significant issues affecting the District 
of Columbia.
    The management reforms enacted as part of Subtitle B of 
Title XI of the Revitalization Act (Public Law 105-33) went 
into effect following the President's signature on August 5, 
1997.
    b. Benefits.--The management reforms were enacted in 
response to the exceptionally poor management practices which 
Congress noted in the District government. Almost without 
exception, the District lacked sound management and direction. 
It was manifestly clear to Congress that changes had to be made 
rapidly in order to avoid a complete breakdown of municipal 
services. These reforms were not motivated by desire to confer 
or remove specific power from existing government entities. 
Rather, the reforms were enacted by a strong belief that 
management issues are the long term keys to the best possible 
government and prosperity for the District. The management 
reforms directed the Control Board and the city to develop and 
implement management reform plans for 9 specified departments 
of the District government. All entities of the District 
government were directed to develop and implement management 
reform plans in the areas of asset management, information 
resources management, personnel, and procurement. The Control 
Board was required to enter into contracts with consultants to 
develop the management reform plans.
    Management reform teams were established for each 
management reform plan. Department heads were directed to take 
any and all steps within their authority to implement the terms 
of the plan. In the case of a management reform plan covering 
the entire District government each member of the management 
reform team was instructed to take any and all steps within the 
member's authority to implement the terms of the plan, under 
the direction and subject to the instructions of the chairman 
of the control board. In carrying out any of the management 
reform plans the member of the management reform team was 
required to report to the Control Board. Such reports were 
required to be made solely to the Control Board.
    During the control year, as defined by Public Law 104-8, 
the Mayor may appoint the head of each department following 
recommendations from and consultation with the Control Board 
and notification to the city council. Each nomination of a 
department head is subject to approval by the control board. 
Appointments may be made directly by the control board if the 
Mayor does not make a nomination within 30 days from the date 
any vacancy begins, or for a longer period as established by 
the Control Board upon notification to Congress.
    A vacancy was deemed to exist in the head of each of the 9 
departments mentioned upon enactment of Public Law 105-33. The 
Control Board was also given the power to remove any department 
head. Removal by the Mayor was made subject to approval by the 
Control Board.
    Executive summaries of the initial consultant's reports 
were made available on October 16, 1997. These reports 
confirmed deep problems throughout city government. On December 
5, 1997, the Control Board announced plans to implement a 
number of recommendations for improving city services. A 
reported 170 projects were listed for priority consideration. 
The Control Board also indicated an intention to submit a 
report to Congress in January 1998, regarding final decisions 
about management improvements. A new chief management officer, 
as required by the Revitalization Act, is expected to be 
appointed shortly. The recently enacted Budget for fiscal year 
1998 (Public Law 105-100) signed by the President on November 
19, 1997, provides the Control Board with great flexibility in 
these areas.
    c. Hearings.--Subcommittee Chairman Davis convened a 
hearing on December 19, 1997, ``Oversight Hearing on D.C. 
Control Board, Implementation of Public Law 105-33 and Police 
Matters.''
    Witnesses who gave testimony to answer concerns of the 
subcommittee were Dr. Andrew Brimmer, chairman of the District 
of Columbia Financial Responsibility Management Assistance 
Authority (D.C. Control Board); Mr. Stephen Harlan, vice 
chairman, D.C. Control Board; and Ms. Sonya T. Proctor, acting 
chief of police, Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police 
Department.

3. D.C. Metropolitan Police Department and the Booz-Allen Memorandum of 
        Understanding.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this subcommittee investigation 
was to focus on strategies to improve public safety in the 
District of Columbia. Implementation of recommendations by the 
consultant charged with helping the city improve crime 
prevention, Booz-Allen, were examined. Additionally, recent 
changes in the Metropolitan Police Department were discussed.
    b. Benefits.--(Also see H.R. 2015) There had been major 
changes in the Metropolitan Police Department during 1997. 
Prior to the Booz-Allen report, crime had gone up in the 
District while it had gone down in the country and in other 
major cities. The upsurge in crime prior to the Booz-Allen 
report occurred despite the fact that population in the 
District had gone down. That trend had now been reversed. The 
Office of Chief of Police was now much more in charge of the 
Department, including promotions, and the number of homicides 
and other major crimes were down. At the same time, also as a 
result of information prepared by Booz-Allen, major changes had 
been made in the homicide unit. There were disturbing reports 
of excessive overtime, closure rates that were unacceptably 
low, and ``secrecy pledges'' that were apparently being applied 
to other law enforcement agencies. The subcommittee sought a 
clear explanation of those matters as part of its oversight 
responsibility.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight of District of Columbia Metropolitan Police 
Department and the Booz-Allen MOU,'' on September 26, 1997. 
Those providing testimony were Mr. Larry D. Soulsby, chief, 
District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department; Dr. Gary 
Mathers, senior vice president, Booz-Allen & Hamilton; Judge 
Eugene N. Hamilton, Chief Judge, District of Columbia Superior 
Court; Ms. Mary Lou Leary, acting U.S. attorney, District of 
Columbia.

4. District of Columbia Public School 1997 Repair Program and 
        Facilities Master Plan.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this subcommittee investigation 
was to highlight the good efforts of local school officials to 
achieve some positive results in helping students obtain a 
quality education and to caution for the care needed to the 
overall recovery of positive results in helping students obtain 
a quality education.
    b. Benefits.--(See H.R. 2015) School closings of the prior 
year placed the school in a primary characteristic of turmoil. 
The Control Board had to deal with school closings, a school-
by-school assessment, and an excruciating court case. School 
repair work was expected to be done during the summer of 1997 
and it was never anticipated that all schools would have to be 
repaired by the opening day of classes. When D.C. Superior 
Courts ruled that no work could be done when anyone was inside 
the buildings, the crisis accelerated and deepened. There were 
virtually daily court hearings, and new buildings were found to 
require repairs. And the same people responsible for the 
repairs were also responsible for the school children and for 
procurement. Throughout this difficult time it was unclear 
exactly how much money would be available. There was some 
concern that the General Services Administration was not 
utilized, despite explicit congressional authority to employ 
their expertise. There was concern that the school officials 
were ``non co-operative.'' The hearing focused on addressing 
the concerns mentioned in addition to the Facilities Master 
Plan.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``D.C. Public School 1997 Repair Program and Facilities Master 
Plan,'' on January 23, 1998. Those providing testimony were: 
Ms. Mary Filardo, director, 21st Century School Fund; Mr. 
William R. Lawson, FAIA, Assistant Regional Administrator, 
Public Buildings Service, General Services Administration; Mr. 
Jonathan Miller, project manager, Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & 
Mendenhall Architects; Dr. Andrew Brimmer, chairman, District 
of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance 
Authority; Mr. David Cotton, Cotton and Co., LLP; Mr. Anthony 
Williams, chief financial officer, government of the District 
of Columbia; Mr. Ed Stephenson, chief financial officer, 
District of Columbia Public Schools, Dr. Bruce MacLaury, 
chairman, District of Columbia Public School Emergency Trustee 
Board; General Julius Becton (USA, Ret), chief executive 
officer, District of Columbia Public Schools; General Charles 
Williams (USA, Ret), chief operating officer, District of 
Columbia Public Schools.

5. Management Reform--Cost, Savings, Net.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this investigation was to 
review management reform in the District of Columbia in 
accordance with Public Law 105-33, National Capital 
Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997. The 
responsibility of the D.C. Control Board was increased by this 
law, transferring the authority of nine of the District's major 
agencies to the board.
    b. Benefits.--The hearing highlighted information on 
decisions made about management reform plans, scheduling of 
implementation, costs associated, regulatory reform and roles 
of the chief management officer.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Management Reform--Cost, Savings, Net,'' on January 30, 1998. 
Those providing testimony for this hearing were: Marion Barry, 
Mayor, District of Columbia; Linda Cropp, council chair, 
District of Columbia City Council; Dr. Andrew Brimmer, 
chairman, District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and 
Management Assistance Authority; Dr. Camille Barnett, chief 
management officer, District of Columbia; Mr. Anthony Williams, 
chief financial officer, government of the District of 
Columbia; Mr. David Schlein, national vice president, District 
14, American Federation of Government Employees; Mr. Chuck 
Hicks, president and acting executive director, Council 20, 
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees.

6. Fiscal Year 1997 District of Columbia Audit Report and CFO 
        Oversight.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this investigation was to focus 
on the degree of improvement of the District's fiscal picture 
during the last year by reviewing the Comprehensive Annual 
Financial Report [CAFR].
    b. Benefits.--One of the most important benefits of this 
hearing included oversight of the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer [CFO]. The District of Columbia Financial 
Responsibility and Management Assistance Act of 1995 (enacted 
on April 17, 1995) was intended in part to eliminate budget 
deficits and management inefficiencies in the District of 
Columbia government. The act established the Office of Chief 
Financial Officer for the District of Columbia. The following 
year, Congress enacted the 1996 Budget Act, which included a 
section expanding the CFO's authority by transferring all 
budget, accounting and financial management personnel in the 
executive branch of the District government from the Mayor's 
authority to the CFO.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Fiscal Year 1997 District of Columbia Audit Report and CFO 
Oversight,'' on February 11, 1998. Those providing testimony 
were: Edward DeSeve, Acting Deputy Director, Office of 
Management and Budget; Mr. John Farrell, partner, KPMG, Peat 
Marwick, Marion Barry, Mayor, District of Columbia; Linda 
Cropp, council chair, District of Columbia City Council; Dr. 
Andrew Brimmer, chairman, D.C. Financial Responsibility and 
Management Assistance Authority; Mr. Anthony Williams, D.C. 
chief financial officer.

7. District of Columbia Public School Census and Enrollment Oversight.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this investigation was to 
determine the number of students enrolled in the D.C. Public 
School System.
    b. Benefits.--The purpose of this hearing is to address 
matters involving past and present issues related to student 
enrollment counts and the procedures implemented to determine 
those enrollment statistics for the District of Columbia Public 
Schools. This hearing will also examine the findings documented 
in the report of the U.S. General Accounting Office issued in 
August 1997, which evaluated the accuracy of the enrollment 
count process that DCPS utilized in school year 1996-1997. The 
GAO report was specifically requested by this subcommittee.
    Additionally, testimony is expected to include the results 
of a follow-up review by GAO, of the procedures utilized by 
DCPS to determine the 1997-1998 student enrollment count, and 
the conformance with the findings, conclusions, and 
recommendations which were included in the August 1997 report.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``District of Columbia Public School Census and Enrollment 
Oversight,'' on March 13, 1998. Those providing testimony were: 
Ms. Cornelia Blanchette, Associate Director, Education and 
Employment Issues, Health, Education, and Human Services 
Division, U.S. General Accounting Office; Mr. George Grier, 
principal, the Grier Partnership; Mr. Richard Wenning, 
director, Department of Educational Accountability, District of 
Columbia Public Schools; General Julius Becton, chief executive 
officer and superintendent, District of Columbia Public 
Schools; Dr. Joyce Ladner, District of Columbia Financial 
Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority; Dr. Bruce 
MacLaury, chairman, District of Columbia Public School 
Emergency Board of Trustees; Mrs. Wilma Harvey, president, 
District of Columbia Board of Education.

8. Oversight on the Academic Plan for the District of Columbia Public 
        Schools.

    a. Summary.--This investigation reviewed the current status 
of the development and implementation of an academic plan whose 
goal is to improve student achievement in the District of 
Columbia Public Schools.
    b. Benefits.--Benefits included determining the current 
status of the development and implementation of an academic 
plan whose goal is to improve student achievement in the 
District of Columbia Public Schools. Issues which impact 
academic achievement, including but not limited to, the 
curriculum, support infrastructure, teacher certification, 
continuing education for educators and administrators, student 
promotion policies, short-term and long-term academic goals and 
objectives will be discussed.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight on the Academic Plan for the District of Columbia 
Public Schools,'' on April 3, 1998. Those providing testimony 
were: Ms. Patricia Harvey, senior fellow and director of Urban 
Education, National Center on Education and the Economy; Ms. 
Marlene Berlin, Ad-Hoc Parents Coalition; Ms. Delabian Rice-
Thurston, Parents United for the D.C. Public Schools; Linda W. 
Cropp, chairperson, District of Columbia City Council; Dr. 
Joyce Ladner, D.C. Financial Responsibility and Management 
Assistance Authority; Dr. Bruce MacLaury; chairman, D.C. Public 
Emergency Board of Trustees; General Julius W. Becton, chief 
executive officer and superintendent, District of Columbia 
Public Schools; Mrs. Arlene Ackerman, chief academic officer, 
District of Columbia Public Schools.

9. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department Oversight and 
        Federal Law Enforcement Assistance.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this investigative hearing was 
to provide an introduction of the new police chief in 
Washington, DC and information concerning his plans for the 
department. The subcommittee was concerned about community 
policing and systemic improvements in law enforcement in the 
District. An emphasis also included information on strategies 
to improve public safety by the Metropolitan Police Department 
and the role that some of the Federal police forces have in 
local anti-crime efforts.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department Oversight 
and Federal Law Enforcement Assistance,'' on May 8, 1998. Those 
providing testimony were: Mr. Charles H. Ramsey, chief of 
police, District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department; 
Mr. Stephen Harlan, vice chairman, District of Columbia 
Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority; 
Mr. Gary Abrecht, Chief of Police, U.S. Capitol Hill Police; 
Mr. John L. Barrett, Special Agent-in-Charge, Criminal Division 
Washington, DC Field Office, U.S. Federal Bureau of 
Investigation; Mr. Peter J. Dowling, Special Agent-in-Charge, 
Washington, D.C. Field Office, U.S. Secret Service; Mr. Peter 
F. Gruden, Special Agent-in-Charge, Washington, DC Field 
Office, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

10. New Washington Convention Center.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of the this investigation was to 
review the legislation enacted by the District of Columbia City 
Council, signed by the Mayor of the District of Columbia and 
approved by the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility 
and Management Assistance Authority (D.C. Control Board) 
regarding the financing plan for the Washington Convention 
Center. The subcommittee also considered congressional 
legislation to authorize the Convention Center Authority to 
issue bonds and waive the 30 legislative days waiting period 
for Council enactments to go into effect. Particular interest 
was focused on the proposed financing mechanism including any 
potential benefits or risks associated with the project, as 
well as the process employed to develop this project.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``The New Washington Convention Center,'' on July 15, 1998. 
Those who provided testimony were: Mr. Terry Golden, chairman, 
Washington Convention Center Authority; Dr. Andrew Brimmer, 
chairman, District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and 
Management Assistance Authority; Marion Barry, Mayor, District 
of Columbia; Linda Cropp, chairwoman, District of Columbia City 
Council; Ms. Gloria Jarmon, Director, Health, Education, and 
Human Services, Accounting and Financial Management Issues; 
U.S. General Accounting Office, Mr. Rick Hendricks, Director, 
Property Development, U.S. General Services Administration, 
National Capital Division; Mr. Dan Mobley, CAE president 
Washington, D.C. Visitors.

11. Status of District of Columbia Public School Readiness for the 
        1998-1999 School Year.

    a. Summary.--The purpose of this investigative hearing was 
to determine the status of the District of Columbia Public 
Schools [DCPS] related to readiness for the 1998-1999 school 
year. The hearing examined a number of issues regarding DCPS 
and the scheduled opening on September 1, 1998. Parts of the 
focus was on the progress of capital improvements and facility 
repairs. Other reviews included, but were not limited to, 
ongoing short term and long term plans, the status of a number 
of academic related issues and the management structure 
elements currently being addressed by DCPS.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Status of District of Columbia Public School Readiness for 
the 1998-1999 School Year,'' on August 26, 1998. Those 
providing testimony were: Mrs. Arlene Ackerman, superintendent 
and chief executive officer, District of Columbia Public 
Schools; Mr. Joe D. Howze, acting director, Office of Capital 
Improvements and Assets District of Columbia Public Schools; 
Colonel Bruce A. Berwick, Commander and District Engineer--
Baltimore District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Mr. Nelson 
Alcalde, Regional Administrator--National Capital Region, U.S. 
General Services Administration; Mrs. Constance Newman, vice-
chairman, District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and 
Management Assistance Authority; Ms. Elois Brooks, deputy 
superintendent, District of Columbia Public Schools; Ms. 
Maudine Cooper, chairman, District of Columbia Public Schools 
Emergency Transitional Board of Trustees; Ms. Wilma Harvey, 
president, District of Columbia Public Schools Board of 
Education; Mrs. Constance Newman, vice-chairman, District of 
Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance 
Authority; Ms. Carlotta C. Joyner, Director, Education and 
Employment Issues, U.S. General Accounting Office.

12. District of Columbia Y2K Compliance Challenges.

    a. Summary.--The District of Columbia shares a part of the 
year 2000 computer problem. The Y2K as it is commonly known 
presents an enormous challenge for this Nation. It is a 
management issue of the magnitude which may never have 
confronted public agencies, private businesses or the citizens 
of American people ever before. The problem is not new. The 
requirement to address this matter has been known for years. 
However, many decisionmakers mistakenly believed that affected 
systems and devices would be replaced with new technology 
sufficiently in advance of the dates when the year 2000 issues 
would become a reality. Simply put, many computers and other 
electronic devices are programmed to use only two digits to 
represent each year. As a result, many computer systems will 
not be able to differentiate between the year 2000 and the year 
1900. In the 1970's and 1980's, it was common practice to 
program using two-digit dates to save costly computer storage 
space. Even in the 1990's, old habits are regularly 
demonstrated: two-digit dates abound in mainframe, client/
server, desktop, and process control systems. Programmers and 
managers making decisions to continue to use two-digit dates 
obviously failed to recognize, or acknowledge, the magnitude of 
the issues that the year 2000 problem would create. Government 
entities face a unique Y2K challenge. Not only does the year 
2000 matter require a plan for remediation and testing of all 
critical systems and processes, but it must be done in a manner 
so as to insure that there are a continued and uninterrupted 
delivery of services. The District of Columbia, as is the case 
with other local and State governments, is responsible for 
ensuring the health, safety and economic vitality of all of its 
residents. To accomplish this, efforts must be taken to 
minimize the risk of failures in both the government and 
business environments, which included contingency planning for 
possible failures. Many of these activities are interdependent, 
and in far too many instances, the recognition level of the 
potential ramifications is inadequate. Given the complexity of 
the issue itself, the unique nature of the relationship between 
the District of Columbia and the Federal Government, and the 
important role of the District of Columbia within the 
Metropolitan Washington region, our attention is drawn in a 
special way to the Y2K challenges that confront the District. 
The regional compacts which exist among various governmental 
entities require us to examine these matters in a more 
comprehensive fashion. Examples include the D.C. Water and 
Sewer Authority, and the Metropolitan Washington Area Transit 
Authority. Regional agreement dealing with emergency response 
and emergency preparedness, along with several health and human 
services activities, reinforces the need to work together to 
insure to the extent possible that none of these important 
public services are jeopardized. Additionally, the 
transportation and public safety activities which are critical 
to the ability of the Federal agencies to function efficiently, 
must be maintained.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee has worked closely with the 
new chief technology officer and the city's chief management 
officer to identify any impediments to the District's ability 
to achieve successful results in addressing this challenge, and 
that with the commitment of the Control Board, the City 
Council, and others, that all sides can collectively improve 
the potential for a positive result, while minimizing the risk 
of a less desirable outcome. The results and progress to 
clearly understand the status of the District's Y2K plan 
development and implementation, and then pursue an oversight 
strategy that will keep the subcommittee informed of their 
progress. Utilities, communications, health services, 
transportation and public safety, are but a handful of the 
areas that will require specific strategies and oversight. It 
is anticipated that future hearings will examine the status of 
these efforts.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``District of Columbia's Year 2000 Compliance Challenges,'' on 
October 2, 1998, together with the Government Management, 
Information, and Technology Subcommittee and the Technology 
Subcommittee of the Science Committee. Those providing 
testimony were: Mr. Jack Brock, Director, Information 
Management Issues, Accounting and Information Management 
Division, U.S. General Accounting Office; Mrs. Constance 
Newman, vice-chairman, District of Columbia Financial 
Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority; and, 
Suzanne Peck, chief technology officer for the District of 
Columbia.

   Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology

1. GAO High-Risk Series.

    a. Summary.--The General Accounting Office [GAO] High-Risk 
Series highlights programs, activities, or agencies 
particularly vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse. GAO 
compiled the first high-risk list in a letter dated January 23, 
1990. The letter responded to a request from the chairmen of 
the House Government Operations Committee and the Senate 
Governmental Affairs Committee based on congressional concern 
that waste, fraud, and abuse were endemic throughout the 
Federal Government. GAO found that the Government was plagued 
by serious breakdowns in its internal control and financial 
management systems. If uncorrected, these breakdowns create an 
environment ripe for waste, fraud, and abuse. The January 23rd 
letter also found that these serious breakdowns in systems 
controls had been known, in several instances for many years, 
but had not been corrected by the agencies. The high-risk 
series was an attempt to ensure that areas likely to result in 
material losses are identified, and that appropriate corrective 
actions are undertaken to stem or minimize the losses. GAO 
decided to continue monitoring agencies progress in correcting 
the problems and, in 1993, changed the format from a letter to 
a series of reports, 17 in all. In 1995, GAO identified 20 
high-risk problems. Now, with the issuance of the 1997 series, 
the number of areas considered particularly vulnerable to 
waste, fraud, and abuse has risen to 25, including 10 that were 
on the original list.
    Subcommittee Chairman Horn convened a hearing to examine 
the substantive problems behind the programs on the high-risk 
series. The subcommittee heard testimony from Gene L. Dodaro, 
Assistant Comptroller General, Accounting and Information 
Management Division, accompanied by Keith O. Fultz, Assistant 
Comptroller General, Resources, Community and Economic 
Development Division, and Henry L. Hinton, Jr., Assistant 
Comptroller General, National Security and International 
Affairs Division, all from the U.S. General Accounting Office.
    Mr. Horn opened the hearing by noting the challenges 
presented by both the areas that have been on the high-risk 
series since 1990 and the new areas that were added in 1997. He 
asked for analysis from GAO on the problems that land agencies 
on the high-risk series and the types of solutions that enable 
them to improve.
    Gene L. Dodaro opened his testimony by focusing on the 
problems at the Department of Defense and the Internal Revenue 
Service. He noted that as of 1995, about half of the $70 
billion in defense inventory, or $35 billion, was not needed. 
He further noted that no major component of the Department of 
Defense had received a positive audit opinion. In terms of the 
IRS, he noted that for the past 4 years, GAO has been unable to 
render an audit opinion at the IRS. The reason is that the IRS 
has been unable to substantiate the balances of $1.4 trillion 
in revenues collected with the account balances of individual 
taxpayers.
    Mr. Dodaro also addressed the major information technology 
projects on the high-risk series, including the tax system 
modernization at the IRS and the air traffic control 
modernization effort. He noted the importance of the Clinger-
Cohen Act for improving the record on these projects, as well 
as for addressing one of the major new additions to the high-
risk series, the year 2000 problem. He stressed the importance 
of reform legislation in general, noting the importance of 
``fully and effectively implementing the legislative foundation 
established for broader management reforms.'' Mr. Dodaro 
emphasized the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and the 
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993.
    b. Benefits.--Publicity is one of the best cures for waste, 
fraud, and abuse in Government. The high-risk series brings 
much-needed congressional attention to areas where management 
is inadequate. Focus on the series and the issues outlined in 
it provide useful direction for implementation of important 
reform legislation. According to the General Accounting Office, 
areas of waste that can be substantially reduced include:
          $6-$20 billion in fraudulent and abusive Medicare 
        claims (1996),
          $1 billion in SSI overpayments (annually),
          $132 million in tax filing fraud (1995).
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight of the General Accounting Office's High-Risk 
Series,'' on February 13, 1997.

2. Year 2000 Computer Date Problem.

    a. Summary.--Many computers that use two digit date fields 
will fail to recognize the century date change on January 1, 
2000. After midnight on the last day of ``99,'' computers 
around the world will automatically flash to ``00''--and many 
will interpret these digits as the year 1900 instead of the 
year 2000. If left unchanged, affected computer systems will be 
unable to function or send correct and accurate information to 
multiple systems. This issue must be addressed promptly by 
industry and government.
    The Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
Technology held its initial hearing on the year 2000 problem on 
April 16, 1996. The specific focus was on what Federal agencies 
were doing to prevent a possible computer disaster on January 
1, 2000. Kevin Schick of the Gartner Group, expressed concern 
that ``there is no sense of urgency . . . [I]f [Federal 
agencies] are not already well into this project by October of 
1997, [the Government] will be doing a disservice to the very 
constituents that depend on [it] to prevent something like this 
from happening to them . . .''.
    Alarmed by what the subcommittee learned at that hearing, 
Subcommittee Chairman Stephen Horn and Ranking Member Carolyn 
Maloney sent a joint congressional oversight letter on behalf 
of the subcommittee. The letter was addressed to each Cabinet 
department and 10 additional agencies. The April 29, 1996, 
letter asked 13 detailed questions intended to learn the status 
of each agency's preparation for the year 2000.
    The overall response the subcommittee received was 
discouraging. Only 9 of the 24 agencies responded that they had 
a plan for addressing the problem. Five of the agencies had not 
even designated a specific official within the agency to be 
responsible for the problem. No agencies had complete cost 
estimates for fixing the problem. Only seven agencies even had 
partial estimates. Efforts at the Departments of Energy and 
Transportation were so primitive that neither could answer any 
of the 13 questions posed by the April 29th letter. Many 
agencies with direct responsibilities for furnishing services 
to the public, such as the Departments of Labor and Veterans 
Affairs and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, had only 
the most limited year 2000 initiatives underway.
    Appearing before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Treasury, Postal Service and General Government on March 11, 
1997, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget 
committed to furnishing Congress with a quarterly report on 
Federal progress toward correcting the year 2000 computer 
problem. The first quarterly report was transmitted to Congress 
on June 23, 1997. It was based on data provided to OMB by all 
major departments and agencies on May 15, 1997.
    The subcommittee convened three hearings on this issue. The 
first hearing drew, in part, on agency responses to a January 
14, 1997 oversight letter to each of the statutory department 
and agency Chief Information Officers. Witnesses included the 
following agency Chief Information Officers: Ms. Liza 
McClenaghan, Department of State; Assistant Secretary Emmett 
Paige, Department of Defense; Ms. Patricia Lattimore, 
Department of Labor; Mr. John J. Callahan, Department of Health 
and Human Services; Associate Deputy Secretary Michael Huerta, 
Department of Transportation; and Mr. Mark D. Catlett, 
Department of Veterans Affairs. In addition, Joel C. 
Willemssen, Director, Accounting and Information Management 
Division, General Accounting Office, testified about GAO's work 
on the topic.
    Mr. Horn opened the hearing with reference to the January 
14 letter that requested information from each agency on its 
year 2000 plans, noting that ``the quality of the response 
varies widely.'' Mr. Horn outlined three questions every agency 
must answer:
          1. Have you defined the size and scope of the 
        problem?
          2. Do you know how and when the fixes will be made?
          3. Have you identified mission critical systems and 
        set clear priorities for action?
Mr. Horn expressed grave concern that 12 of the 14 Federal 
Departments plan to implement their solutions in the final 3 
months of 1999.
    Joel C. Willemssen's testimony focused on GAO's newly-
released report: ``Year 2000 Computing Crisis: An Assessment 
Guide.'' The purpose of the report was to provide a useful 
framework for agency managers to use in planning and 
implementing their year 2000 programs. Ms. Liza McClenaghan, 
Chief Information Officer for the Department of State, 
testified that the Department of State had accurately defined 
the year 2000 problems if faced. She reported that 57 of the 85 
mission-critical systems were not year 2000 compliant. She 
estimated the total cost of the year 2000 problem for the State 
Department at $135.2 million. She stated that the strategy 
included integrating year 2000 fixes into a larger plan for 
modernization of information technology infrastructure.
    Assistant Secretary Emmett Paige, Department of Defense, 
testified that the DOD was ``far down the road to completing'' 
the assessment phase. He pointed to the Defense Integration 
Support Tools, or DIST, as a management tool to track essential 
information regarding DOD systems. He also noted that the DOD 
was reprogramming resources from all areas for use in solving 
the year 2000 problem and asked that Congress reduce the drain 
on resources by lowering the number of special reporting 
requirements.
    The subcommittee's second hearing on the year 2000 problem 
in 1997 extended the focus beyond standard computer systems to 
survey other affected technologies, including a variety of 
consumer products. Witnesses testified on the year 2000 risks 
associated with embedded microprocessors. Many critical 
technology systems depend on automated devices that control 
their operations. These can include security systems for badge 
readers, surveillance and home security systems, medical 
devices, factory machinery, and telephone systems. Problems 
associated with date calculations in these devices can result 
in various malfunctions or shutdown.
    At the hearing, Bruce Hall, research director for the 
Gartner Group, explained the ``time horizon to failure'' issue. 
Ann Coffou, managing director, Giga Group, testified on the 
problems with embedded microchips. Vito Peraino, an attorney 
with Hancock, Rothert & Bunshoft, covered the potential for 
year 2000 liability claims. Harris Miller, president, 
Information Technology Association of America, testifying about 
his organization's certification program for the year 2000 
software conversion process. Following the hearing, the 
chairmen and ranking members of the two subcommittees sent an 
oversight letter to department and agency heads to determine 
whether the agencies were assessing their vulnerability to the 
embedded chip problem.
    The subcommittee's third hearing on the year 2000 problem 
in 1997, once again held jointly with the Technology 
Subcommittee, evaluated Federal department and agency progress 
on the basis of the quarterly progress report provided to 
Congress by the Office of Management and Budget. At this 
hearing, committee members called upon the executive branch to 
attach far greater priority to the year 2000 effort.
    Subcommittee Chairman Horn opened the hearing by stressing 
the importance of high-level attention for progress on this 
problem. With the Office of Management and Budget as lead 
witness, he asked: ``Has the President of the United States 
made this an issue? He is one of the great communicators of 
this century. We need him to awaken the Nation to this very 
serious situation.'' He also asked whether agency timetables 
were realistic and adequate to solve the problem before the 
unmovable deadline of midnight, December 31, 1999, and whether 
agencies have sufficient management processes in place to 
monitor their year 2000 efforts. He asked these questions in 
the context of the disappointing news reflected in OMB's 
quarterly report, which showed that some agencies with critical 
responsibilities for providing public services were stuck at 
the starting gate. As of May 15, noted Mr. Horn, fully 18 out 
of 24 agencies had yet to finish assessing the vulnerability of 
their computer systems to the year 2000 problem; 10 out of 24 
agencies had yet to complete any testing of software changes. 
Mr. Horn stated that these were discouraging and worrisome 
statistics.
    Sally Katzen, Administrator, Office of Information and 
Regulatory affairs, Office of Management and Budget, testified 
that the administration's estimate for governmentwide cost of 
preparing its computers for the date change had risen to $2.8 
billion, from $2.3 billion in February. Despite this, she 
insisted that the Government was on track to complete all 
necessary fixes before January 1, 2000. Her prepared testimony 
concluded that ``the year 2000 computer problem will be a non-
event.'' She testified that ``we will all breathe a very happy 
sigh of relief on December 31st, 1999.''
    Joel Willemssen, Director of Accounting and Information 
Management Division, General Accounting Office, was much less 
optimistic. He testified that based on the latest information, 
Federal agencies simply did not have enough time to complete 
all necessary fixes. He strongly urged agencies to prioritize 
so that critical systems are fixed in time.
    Joe Thompson, Chief Information Officer, General Services 
Administration, testified that the General Services 
Administration is working to raise awareness of the year 2000 
problem throughout the government. He reported that GSA's 
Federal Supply Service has notified manufacturers and service 
and equipment providers that all products sold to the 
Government must be year 2000 compliant.
    Kathleen Adams, chair of the Interagency Year 2000 
Subcommittee of the Chief Information Officers Council and 
Assistant Deputy Commissioner for Systems, Social Security 
Administration, testified on the role of the Interagency Year 
2000 Subcommittee. She reported that the year 2000 subcommittee 
is developing a database that will contain information 
regarding whether commercial-off-the-shelf software presently 
in use in Federal agencies will function properly after the 
date change. She stressed that although the efforts like this 
database can help, the responsibility for success or failure 
ultimately lies with the Chief Information Officer of each 
agency and with OMB.
    b. Benefits.--The year 2000 problem is going to be 
expensive to the taxpayers, but how expensive depends on how 
quickly officials step up to the problem. Administration cost 
estimates are already nearing $4 billion, and figures in this 
range have been deemed dramatically low by a variety of 
experts. The ultimate cost depends to a great extent on how 
early and how efficiently the Government can address the 
problem. The costs associated with fixing this labor-intensive 
problem will rise significantly as the date change nears. 
Furthermore, failure to repair computers before the date change 
will bring a variety of costs of untold proportions. It is 
therefore critical that the fixes are made and made early. 
Effective efforts to expedite this process will save the 
taxpayers considerable amounts of money.
    Potentially even more significant that the financial toll 
of a delayed response to the year 2000 problem is the danger of 
failure. It is very difficult to determine the exact 
consequences of inaccurate date computations in most computer 
programs. Despite this, or perhaps because of it, preparations 
for the date change are crucial. Failure to make the necessary 
fixes puts citizens at risk of everything from late social 
security checks to unsafe travel conditions.
    c. Hearings.--The Subcommittee on Government Management, 
Information, and Technology held three hearings on this issue 
in the first session of the 105th Congress: (1) ``Will Federal 
Government Computers Be Ready for the Year 2000?'' February 24, 
1997; (2) ``Year 2000 Risks: What Are the Consequences of 
Information Technology Failure?'' March 20, 1997, held jointly 
with the Subcommittee on Technology of the Science Committee; 
(3) ``Will Federal Government Computers be Ready for the Year 
2000?'' July 10, 1997, held jointly with the Subcommittee on 
Technology of the Science Committee; (4) ``Russia's Year 2000 
Problem,'' October 17, 1997, a field hearing held in Beverly 
Hills, CA; (5) ``Oversight of the Federal Government's Year 
2000 Efforts,'' March 18, 1998; (6) ``Status Update on the Year 
2000 Problem,'' June 10, 1998; (7) ``Year 2000: Biggest 
Problems and Proposed Solutions,'' June 22, 1998; (8) 
``Oversight of the Year 2000 Problem: Lessons to Be Learned 
from State and Local Experiences,'' a series of field hearings 
held in New York City; Dallas, TX; New Orleans, LA; Lakewood, 
OH; Indianapolis, IN; and Palatine, IL; (9) ``Y2K: What Every 
Consumer Should Know to Prepare for the Year 2000 Problem,'' 
September 24, 1998, held jointly with the Technology 
Subcommittee of the Science Committee; (10) ``Y2K: Will We Get 
There On Time?,'' September 29, 1998, held jointly with the 
Transportation Committee and the Technology Subcommittee of the 
Science Committee; and (11) ``District of Columbia's Year 2000 
Compliance Challenges,'' October 2, 1998, held jointly with the 
Technology Subcommittee of the Science Committee.

3. Implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act.

    a. Summary.--The American voters have made it clear that 
they think the Federal Government is too often ineffective, 
inefficient, and overly expensive. Real reform must involve 
fundamental changes in how the Government operates, beginning 
with the adoption of effective management techniques from the 
private sector. Outcome-oriented or results-driven performance 
management strategies adopted from the private sector are the 
driving force of the Government Performance and Results Act of 
1993.
    The Government Performance and Results Act is the 
centerpiece of Federal management reform in recent years. In 
essence, the act requires Federal agencies to ask and to 
repeatedly answer some very basic questions: What is the 
agency's mission? What are its goals and how will the agency 
achieve them? How can the agency's performance be measured? How 
should that information be used to make improvements? These 
questions are answered in Strategic Plans, required by the 
Results Act to be completed for the first time by September 30, 
1997. The plans provide the framework for agency's management 
to examine activities throughout the organization, ensuring 
that all activities relate to the agency's basic mission. To 
Congress, this is an opportunity for a broad discussion about 
an agency's future direction and program priorities.
    In preparation for this historic submission of the first 
Strategic Plans, the Subcommittee on Government Management, 
Information, and Technology consulted with the Office of 
Management and Budget [OMB], House Majority Leader Dick Armey, 
and a wide range of Federal agencies. The General Services 
Administration [GSA] was a particular focus of subcommittee 
efforts.
    In August agencies submitted draft Strategic Plans. The 
plans were reviewed by Congress for legal compliance and 
quality. The subcommittee was the primary evaluator for GSA and 
participated with Mr. Armey's staff in the evaluation of all 
Federal agencies. A large number of agency Strategic Plans were 
not legally compliant. The quality of these plans ranged from a 
low of 11 to a high of 62 on a 105 point scale. The GSA 
Strategic Plan rated an unacceptable 35.
    The final Strategic Plan submissions in September were 
reviewed and evaluated by the same process using the same 
criteria. Because of the congressional oversight the average 
score increased by 56 percent from 29.9 to 46.6, with a low of 
28 and a high of 75 on a 100 point scale. GSA increased to 40.5 
points.
    In addition to GSA, the subcommittee paid particular 
attention to the Strategic Plan of OMB because of OMB's role in 
guiding the Results Act compliance of all other agencies. OMB's 
final plan was much improved in packaging and clarity but not 
in substance. OMB's Strategic Plan does not show the strategy 
and resources required for high quality Results Act Strategic 
Plans throughout the Federal Government.
    The subcommittee held a series of four hearings on the 
Results Act in the first session of the 105th Congress. This 
series of hearings will continue in the second session. The 
Results Act provides a unique opportunity to view the Federal 
Government on a comprehensive basis. In this context, the 
executive branch should seek to identify and set the priorities 
for the services that must be provided, the activities that 
must be carried out, and the measurement of the results that 
are achieved.
    The first subcommittee Results Act hearing of the session 
was held in two parts. In the first part, the subcommittee 
examined the status of the consultation process required by the 
Results Act. It anticipated the consultations between executive 
branch agencies and Congress that would take place during much 
of 1997 on the content of agency strategic plans. The objective 
was to take a closer look at what the consultation process 
would actually involve.
    L. Nye Stevens, Director, Federal Management and Workforce 
Issues, General Government Division, testified for the General 
Accounting Office. Mr. Stevens stressed the importance of the 
consultation process. He pointed to the string of failed 
efforts to link results with resources in the Federal 
Government, including PPBS (the Planning Programming Budgeting 
System) and zero-based budgeting. The reason they failed, 
argued Mr. Stevens, was that they each ignored the need for 
constructive, candid communication and shared goals between 
branches of the Government. He advised the members of the 
subcommittee to pay particular attention to engaging the right 
people in the consultation discussions. Those with authority 
over operations need to be involved in the process, as do 
Members of Congress. He also suggested that strategic plans 
should be considered dynamic, subject to change and open to 
criticism by all participants.
    The subcommittee also heard testimony from three agencies: 
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Social 
Security Administration, and the Forest Service. All three were 
early GPRA pilots. Representatives from these agencies 
discussed how they were preparing for full GPRA implementation. 
Dwight Robinson, Deputy Secretary, Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, testified that HUD has used performance 
reporting to monitor performance of programs since fiscal year 
1994. He emphasized the role of technology by highlighting 
HUD's use of an application of Lotus Notes software to 
coordinate program and departmental efforts. He said the 
application facilitates communication among management levels. 
He also said it ``allows for a system based on resource levels 
that may be utilized by program areas down to the process 
level.''
    The second part of the hearing took place on March 13, 
1997. The subcommittee listened to a local government success 
story with an eye toward the Federal reform effort. The 
featured program was the substantial reinvention process 
undertaken by the city of New York under the leadership of 
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. The reinvention has involved re-
engineering and could extend to privatization of certain 
government activities. The subcommittee heard about how New 
York City dramatically improved its management practices and 
gained nationwide acclaim for its considerable crime-fighting 
accomplishments.
    Mr. Horn opened this part of the hearing by observing that 
New York's achievement is part of a pattern of change from 
which the Federal Government should learn. In New Zealand, the 
Federal Government and local governments include performance 
measures in their annual financial reports, and in Great 
Britain the Audit Commission compiles and reports on a series 
of performance measures for local governments. They have 
improved the performance of their departments and lowered the 
cost of doing business. The approach is basic: carefully 
evaluate each activity, decide whether it furthers the agency's 
mission, drop it if it does not, and then decide how to perform 
the essential tasks more efficiently and at a lower cost.
    State and local governments in the United States are using 
performance measures to improve the quality of their services. 
Several States and local governments in the United States also 
provide examples of the effective use of performance 
measurement for management of programs, including Oregon, 
Minnesota, North Carolina, Florida, and Texas. Prince William 
County in Virginia has a performance management system for all 
major areas of service delivery. The Board of Prince William 
County in Virginia uses performance data to annually update its 
current 5-year strategic plan and to formulate a new plan that 
will be more realistic. Portland, OR has a performance 
reporting system for the city's six largest programs: police, 
fire, parks, water, sewer, and streets.
    Mayor Giuliani testified on the management reforms behind 
New York City's reduction in crime over recent years. He 
pointed to reorganization. Three separate police departments 
were merged into one, enabling the pooling of resources and 
efficiency of organization where jurisdictional disputes 
traditionally hindered action. Mr. Giuliani also pointed to the 
innovative use of technology in the form of the Compstat 
program. This program provides the police department with up-
to-the-minute statistics on crimes in each of the city's 
precincts, allowing both immediate response to trends in crime 
as well as coordinated planning on overall patterns of crime.
    The subcommittee's second hearing on the Results Act in 
1997 focused on pilot projects required by the law in the early 
stages of implementation. The Results Act specifies that the 
Office of Management and Budget shall report on the benefits, 
costs, and usefulness of the plans and reports prepared by 
pilot agencies. These pilots are essential to effective 
implementation of the act. From them the Government will 
experiment with and learn about three aspects of Federal 
management reform: performance goals, managerial accountability 
and flexibility, and performance budgeting.
    The law called for a minimum of 10 performance measurement 
pilot agencies. But instead of 10 or another relatively small, 
manageable number, OMB created 72. This is troublesome to the 
subcommittee. At the hearing, Subcommittee Chairman Horn 
expressed concern that it looks very much as though executive 
branch attention to this law is being spread too thin. The 
pilots were meant to provide concrete experiences with success 
and failure in the implementation of this act. Quantity appears 
to have become the enemy of quality.
    John Koskinen, Deputy Director for Management at the Office 
of Management and Budget, testified on his Office's reviews of 
pilot agency efforts to implement the principles of the Results 
Act. He stated that no element of performance-based management 
is more important than the strategic plan. They are the 
foundation and framework for implementing all other parts of 
the Results Act. According to Mr. Koskinen, OMB issued strong 
guidance to Federal agencies supporting congressional 
consultation. Looking ahead, he further reported that OMB has 
prepared guidance on the preparation and submission of annual 
performance reports in fiscal year 1999.
    L. Nye Stevens, Director of Federal Management and 
Workforce Issues at the General Accounting Office, testified 
that implementation of the Results Act had so far achieved 
mixed results. Mr. Stevens predicted highly uneven 
governmentwide implementation in the fall of 1997, noting that 
many agencies did not appear well positioned to provide in 1997 
an answer to the fundamental Results Act question of whether 
programs have produced real results.
    GAO found that agencies are confronting five key challenges 
that were limiting effective implementation of the Results Act: 
(1) establishing clear agency missions and strategic goals when 
program efforts are overlapping or fragmented; (2) measuring 
performance, particularly when the Federal contribution to a 
result is difficult to determine; (3) generating the results-
oriented performance information needed to set goals and assess 
progress; (4) instilling a results-oriented organizational 
culture within agencies; and (5) linking performance plans to 
the budget process.
    At the third Results Act hearing, the subcommittee heard 
testimony from the Office of Management and Budget and the 
General Accounting Office regarding the content of OMB's 
Strategic Plan. Gene Dodaro, Assistant Comptroller General, 
Accounting and Information Division, General Accounting Office, 
testified on the deficiencies in OMB's August draft Strategic 
Plan. He also testified on the improvement in OMB's final 
September Strategic Plan and the remaining deficiencies. Mr. 
Dodaro cited evidence within OMB's plan to make the distinction 
between relative strengths in budgeting and serious weaknesses 
in management. GAO continued to testify concerning the serious 
weaknesses in the strategy and resources for management tasks. 
GAO emphasized the lack of assurance that the planned method of 
coordinating agency efforts via councils would accomplish 
anything.
    Mr. G. Edward DeSeve, Acting Deputy Director of Management 
at OMB, testified on the compliance and completeness of OMB's 
final Strategic Plan. He testified that a number of meaningful 
tasks were accomplished using the method of coordinating 
councils. He testified that the strategy and resources 
currently available to OMB were sufficient to accomplish all of 
OMB's responsibilities.
    Subcommittee Chairman Horn questioned Mr. DeSeve concerning 
``management'' as versus ``budget'' activities at OMB. In 
particular, he enumerated some of OMB's responsibilities and 
questioned OMB's capacity to handle all the work. Mr. DeSeve 
insisted that OMB's strategy of coordinating councils was not 
due to insufficient resources but a purposeful choice of the 
best way to achieve management improvement throughout the 
Federal agencies.
    At the fourth and final subcommittee hearing on the Results 
Act in 1997, testimony was heard from the General Services 
Administration [GSA] regarding the content of GSA's Strategic 
Plan. Mr. Dennis J. Fisher, Chief Financial Officer at GSA, 
testified as to the completeness and quality of the GSA 
Strategic Plan. Mr. Fisher was personally in charge of the 
plan's development and attested to its alignment with GSA 
divisional plans and budgets. Mr. Horn questioned GSA building 
rental rates, overhead costs, and flexibility.
    b. Benefits.--The quality of agency Strategic Plans and 
their derivative Performance Plans and Performance Reports 
affects the effectiveness and efficiency of the entire Federal 
Government. Without strategic plans and actual performance 
measures against those plans, it is impossible for any large 
organization to access its success. This is particularly true 
to Federal Departments and agencies because of the diverse 
nature of the programs they administer. For a large number of 
Federal programs it is very difficult to assess their success. 
It is especially difficult to compare the relative success of 
duplicate or overlapping programs. Consequently, it is 
difficult for Congress to determine which programs are worth 
the American taxpayer's investment; which programs should be 
expanded because they work well and which programs should be 
canceled because they do not deliver their intended result.
    The subcommittee has conducted hearings to oversee the 
Government's implementation of GPRA. The subcommittee has made 
recommendations on how strategic plans should be developed. The 
subcommittee has made explicit the intentions and expectations 
of Congress for the content and quality of GPRA strategic 
plans. The subcommittee has worked with specific agencies such 
as GSA and OMB to review their draft strategic plans. Further, 
because of the special function of OMB in guiding other Federal 
agencies, the subcommittee has insisted that OMB set serious 
standards for all Federal agencies to deliver realistic 
strategic plans and meaningful performance measures.
    The subcommittee worked closely with congressional 
leadership to evaluate the draft strategic plans submitted in 
August. The critiques provided to the largest 24 Federal 
Departments and agencies resulted in substantial quality and 
content improvements in the final strategic plans submitted for 
September fiscal year end. In fact, the average score for final 
strategic plans was almost double the score for draft plans.
    The quality of agency Strategic Plans and their derivative 
Performance Plans and Performance Reports affects the 
effectiveness and efficiency of the entire Federal Government. 
Further, the quality of Results Act plans affects the ability 
of Congress to evaluate program adherence to policy, program 
effectiveness and efficiency, and program duplication, overlap, 
and waste. Similarly, the administration and the agencies 
themselves are affected by the quality of their Results Act 
plans. A small effort by the subcommittee has tremendous 
leverage in improving Results Act plans and, thereby, 
performance throughout the Federal Government.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held four hearings on the 
Government Performance and Results Act in 1997: (1) 
``Government Performance and Results Act Implementation: How to 
Achieve Results,'' March 10 and 13, 1997; (2) ``Government 
Performance and Results Act: Status and Prospects of the 
Results Act,'' June 3, 1997; (3) ``Oversight of OMB's GPRA 
Strategic Plan,'' October 6, 1997; (4) ``Oversight of GSA's 
Government Performance and Results Act Strategic Plan,'' 
October 8, 1997; and, (5) ``H.R. 2883, The Government 
Performance and Results Act Technical Amendments of 1997,'' 
February 12, 1998 (see the legislative section of this report 
for more on H.R. 2883).

4. Internal Revenue Service Management.

    a. Summary.--The Internal Revenue Service has had 
difficulty adapting to the information and accountability 
demands of the late 20th century. The subcommittee held two 
hearings on financial management at the IRS in 1996. Those 
hearings focused on the IRS's revenue accounting system and the 
IRS's problems with collections, management of accounts 
receivables, filing fraud and fraudulent refunds, records 
retention, tax lien recovery, and unauthorized browsing of 
taxpayer records by IRS personnel. Despite promises for reform 
made at those hearings, a steady stream of press reports on 
feeble management, failed automation, and poor customer service 
at the IRS continued unabated into 1997.
    The list of failed projects at the IRS includes:
         The Tax Systems Modernization project, a $4 
        billion attempt to modernize the IRS's decades-old 
        computer systems;
         Cyberfile, a project that would have allowed 
        taxpayers to prepare and electronically submit their 
        tax returns from their personal computers;
         Integrated Case Processing, a program that 
        would have allowed IRS representatives to access all 
        the data needed in order to answer taxpayer questions 
        over the telephone;
         the Document Processing System, a system that 
        would have scanned paper documents and electronically 
        captured data for subsequent processing and retrieval; 
        and
         the Service Center Recognition/Image 
        Processing System, the failed document-scanning program 
        that the Document Processing System was designed to 
        replace.
    Several important questions must be answered. What does the 
IRS need to do to get its modernization project back on track? 
How is the Treasury going to ensure that the IRS embarks on a 
modernization plan that will work? What sort of milestones or 
benchmarks should a modernization plan have so that its 
progress can be monitored? How long do we have to wait to see 
results? Will the right people be held accountable? How can we 
overcome obstacles to change such as the organizational culture 
of the IRS? How do we modify it? How do we make sure that the 
IRS can manage multimillion-dollar information-technology 
development projects, even if such projects are given to 
outside contractors?
    The IRS must be accountable. Americans have a right to know 
whether the agency that collects taxes from their hard-earned 
money is capable of managing its internal operations in an 
efficient, fair, and accountable way.
    A hearing entitled, ``Internal Revenue Service 
Mismanagement and Ideas for Improvement,'' was held on April 
14, 1997. The subcommittee heard testimony from Lynda Willis, 
Director for Tax Administration and Policy of the General 
Accounting Office, who discussed the progress the IRS has made 
in acting on recommendations submitted by GAO to improve IRS 
operations. Robert Tobias of the National Treasury Employees 
Union, presented IRS employees' views on how to restore public 
and congressional confidence in the IRS. Sheldon Cohen, former 
IRS Commissioner during the Johnson administration and a 
National Academy of Public Administration fellow, also 
testified on information technology challenges at the IRS. Mr. 
Cohen was Commissioner when the IRS first started to 
computerize its operations. Deputy Commissioner Michael Dolan 
provided testimony on the IRS's approach to modernization.
    Mr. Horn noted at the hearing that the President was faced 
with the task of nominating a new IRS Commissioner. Mr. Horn 
advised the President that he should be judicious in his choice 
of the new IRS Commissioner. It should not be someone who is 
simply a CPA tax accountant, or a tax lawyer, but someone who 
has demonstrable management expertise in providing leadership 
to large, complex organizations. The President later followed 
Mr. Horn's advice by nominating Charles O. Rossotti, a 
technology executive, to the position.
    b. Benefits.--Congressional attention to the troubles at 
IRS are essential if the agency is going to reform. At the 
heart of IRS's problems is poor management, including poor 
financial management and poor information technology 
management. The year 2000 computer software conversion problem 
is an issue that illustrates the importance of improving 
management at the IRS. Without serious attention, it may become 
necessary to add the year 2000 problem to the IRS failure list. 
This would be a catastrophe not only for the IRS but for all 
the other agencies and organizations that depend on IRS 
information.
    c. Hearings.--``Internal Revenue Service Mismanagement and 
Ideas for Improvement'' was held on April 14, 1997.

5. Debt Collection.

    a. Summary.--The Debt Collection Improvement Act [DCIA] was 
signed into law on April 26, 1996, as a part of Public Law 104-
134. The DCIA established new tools to assist agencies in 
collecting debts owed to the United States. It provides 
agencies incentives to increase collections of delinquent debts 
while protecting the rights of debtors. It also allows agencies 
to rely on the expertise of private-sector debt collectors.
    The subcommittee held two hearings regarding the 
implementation of the Debt Collection. The first hearing was 
entitled ``Implementation of the Debt Collection Improvement 
Act of 1996.'' Larry Summers, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, 
described efforts to reform and modernize the Internal Revenue 
Service. Summers noted his opposition to an independent 
Internal Revenue Service and opposition to an oversight board. 
According to Mr. Summers, no other issue occupies more of his 
time than debt collection. John Koskinen, Deputy Director, 
Office of Management and Budget described the challenges, 
priorities, trends in the debt collection area, and the 
importance of interagency cooperation. Koskinen was questioned 
as to OMB's commitment to the debt collection function. 
Koskinen asserted that debt collection is a priority and that 
OMB is actively engaged, although the function occurs primarily 
at other agencies.
    Mr. Gerald Murphy, Assistant Fiscal Secretary, Department 
of the Treasury described the activities within his Department 
to organize the Treasury Offset Program to intercept payments 
to delinquent debtors, provide for cross-servicing, draft 
regulations and other activities intended to promote debt 
collection. Mr. Steven McNamara, Assistant Inspector General, 
Department of Education, noted his office's work to identify 
benefit fraud in the Pell Grant program. According to McNamara, 
a confidential survey of tax returns was conducted that 
compared them against stated income. The survey revealed that 
nearly $200 million in Pell Grants went to ineligible 
individuals who had lied on their applications.
    Mr. Mitchell Adams, commissioner, Massachusetts Department 
of Revenue, described the effort of the State of Massachusetts 
to collect delinquent debts including student loans and child 
support, through wage garnishment. Mr. Adams noted a 
technically advanced system designed to automate this process.
    The subcommittee's second hearing on debt collection was 
entitled ``Oversight of Federal Debt Collection Practices,'' 
and held on November 12, 1997. Jerry Hawke, Undersecretary, 
Department of the Treasury, and Gerald Murphy, Assistant Fiscal 
Secretary, Department of the Treasury, described the Department 
of the Treasury's efforts to implement the Debt Collection 
Improvement Act. The Department was criticized for poor 
progress and missteps. The Department was unable to produce a 
timetable for implementation.
    David Longaknecker, Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary 
Education, Department of Education, noted his agency's 
improvements in debt collection. The department, with years of 
experience in the area and an excellent team in place, has 
improved its recoveries of delinquent debts.
    John Gray, Deputy Administrator, Small Business 
Administration, described the SBA's program to collect 
delinquent debts. These efforts include a large loan sales 
program that has been the subject of some delays. Mr. Gray 
indicated that the SBA would begin referring delinquent 
accounts to the private collection agencies under contract with 
the Department of the Treasury by January 1998.
    The subcommittee convened another hearing on debt 
collection, entitled ``Oversight of the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture Debt Collection,'' on March 30, 1998. At this 
hearing, the subcommittee examined issues relating to debt 
collection practices at the Department of Agriculture including 
the agencies' implementation of the DCIA. The Department of 
Agriculture holds 40 percent of the loans owed the Federal 
Government, or approximately $100 billion. According to the 
Department of the Treasury, the Department of Agriculture 
accounts for 20 percent of the delinquent debts held by major 
credit agencies and almost 50 percent of the debt which has not 
yet been referred to the Department of the Treasury for 
collection action. The Rural Utility Service, a bureau of the 
Department of Agriculture, lists only $50,000 in delinquent 
debts in a total portfolio of about $35 billion. The 
subcommittee was particularly interested in Department of 
Agriculture loan programs and debt collection efforts. 
According to recent GAO reports describing the debt collection 
situation at the USDA, compared with other major credit 
agencies, the USDA has referred a relatively small amount of 
debts for cross-servicing and offset.
    The subcommittee heard from witnesses from the USDA as well 
as the General Accounting Office. Ms. Linda Calbom, Director, 
Civil Audits at the GAO, summarized the findings of a report 
issued by GAO in September 1997 entitled, ``Federal Electricity 
Activities: The Federal Government's Net Cost and Potential for 
Future Losses.'' As part of this report, GAO provided an 
assessment of the Federal Government's risk of future losses 
from the Rural Utility Service's electric portfolio. Ms. 
Calbom's testimony focused on findings from the report 
concerning substantial write-offs of loans to rural electric 
cooperatives, likely additional losses from electricity loans 
considered financially stressed, and the potential future 
losses of currently viable loans that may become stressed due 
to high production costs or regulatory or competitive 
pressures.
    The most significant loan write-offs were related to 
generation and transmission cooperative borrowers who defaulted 
on loans due to poor business judgment either by 
underestimating production costs or overestimating customer 
demand. Further the GAO report concluded that many generation 
and transmission borrowers have production costs higher than 
investor-owned or publicly-owned generating utilities which 
indicated that RUS borrowers may have difficulty competing in a 
deregulated electricity market.
    The second panel of witnesses was comprised of officials 
from the USDA. These witnesses included Sally Thompson, Chief 
Financial Officer; Mr. Keith Kelly, Administrator, Farm Service 
Agency; Mr. Wally B. Beyer, Administrator, Rural Utilities 
Service; and Mr. Jan E. Shadburn, Administrator, Rural Housing 
Service.
    Sally Thompson pointed out that while the USDA is the 
largest user of Federal direct credit, its delinquency rate of 
7.2 percent is well below the overall Federal delinquency rate 
of 20 percent. Ms. Thompson noted that the USDA is taking 
significant steps to improve the collection of delinquent 
debts. USDA has actively utilized administrative offsets to 
collect delinquent debts.
    Keith Kelly commented on the progress made by the Farm 
Service Agency in implementing the provisions of the DCIA. 
According to Mr. Kelly, at the end of fiscal year 1997, the FSA 
had a total debt portfolio of approximately $34.6 billion. Mr. 
Kelly explained that most of this debt is being serviced in a 
timely fashion. The Farm Service Agency is in the process of 
making a full transition to the use of the Treasury Offset 
Program as required by the DCIA and plans to be fully compliant 
with the Treasury Offset Program in the fall of 1998.
    Wally Beyer testified that the Rural Utilities Service has 
taken the necessary steps to be in full compliance with the 
DCIA. The RUS has a $31 billion electric loan portfolio. 
According to Mr. Beyer, the overwhelming majority of RUS 
financially stressed borrower loans are the result of RUS-
financed Generation and Transmission cooperative investments. 
These loans were made approximately 20 years ago to generate 
and transmit coal and nuclear power. Moreover, these loans were 
made at a time when interest rates were in the double digits 
which has increased the financial burden on these borrowers. 
RUS has developed an in-house division devoted entirely to 
financially stressed electric utility borrowers. Only 14 RUS 
power supply borrowers have entered into debt restructuring 
negotiation during the past 18 years. Negotiations and the 
complexity of debt restructuring makes the DCIA's 180 day 
timeframe for debt recovery impractical.
    Mr. Jan Shadburn, Administrator of the Rural Housing 
Service [RHS] at the Department of Agriculture, explained that 
implementation of the DCIA by the RHS has been delayed due to 
the necessity to revise systems and procedures. Mr. Shadburn 
testified that the RHS has a loan portfolio of over $35 
billion. The debt collection tools included in the DCIA has 
assisted in the efficient and effective management of this loan 
portfolio.
    The subcommittee's fourth hearing on debt collection was 
entitled, ``Oversight of the Implementation of the Debt 
Collection Improvement Act,'' held on June 5, 1998. Federal 
debt collection continues to be a major problem. According to 
the Department of the Treasury the United States is currently 
owed $50 billion in delinquent non-tax debt. The Debt 
Collection Improvement Act of 1996 [DCIA] provided Federal 
agencies with new tools and incentives to improve Federal debt 
collection. Agencies, however, have been slow to implement the 
DCIA. Thus far, the Department of the Treasury has spent $40 
million to implement the DCIA, but only $4 million has been 
collected. This includes $5 million on a computer system which 
was discarded once completed.
    Administrative offset is the withholding of funds owed to a 
person to satisfy a debt also owed by that person. This is 
accomplished by matching the delinquent debtors name and 
verifying information against the payment records of Federal 
agencies. The Department of the Treasury's Financial Management 
Service [FMS] will undertake this offset. Key implementation 
issues include whether delinquent debts have been referred to 
FMS by the agencies; whether the payment files include Social 
Security numbers; the degree of success obtained by these 
actions; cooperation between OMB, Treasury, and the agencies; 
and collection results. Early reports indicate that agencies 
have expressed reluctance and stated that they were unprepared 
to give FMS the delinquent debt.
    In addition, FMS has run into problems building the system 
for administrative offset. FMS initially built the Interim 
Treasury Offset Program [ITOP], which was designed as a concept 
system to demonstrate the feasibility of conducting offsets. 
FMS then paid a contractor $5 million to build the Grand 
Treasury Offset Program [GTOP], a more robust system, in the 
words of the Department of the Treasury, to accomplish a 
greater range of functions. Once developed, GTOP was discarded, 
and FMS returned to using ITOP.
    At the hearing, the General Accounting Office and the 
Inspector General of the Department of the Treasury addressed 
FMS' development of administrative offset systems in some 
detail. GAO has criticized FMS for lacking an overall concept 
of operations, functional requirements, and a risk management 
plan for ITOP. Since GTOP also lacked these plans, there is 
some concern that ITOP would experience the same problems as 
GTOP, which cost taxpayers $5 million.
    The Department of the Treasury is required under the DCIA 
to write regulations. The Department also intends to put out 
guidance on certain issues. There is no formal deadline that 
the Congress established in passing the DCIA. While the 
Department of the Treasury has not completed the regulations, 2 
years past the date of enactment, the department has made good 
progress in the last 6 months on drafting regulations.
    To date, agencies have referred $16.5 billion for 
administrative offset and $1.5 billion for collection action. 
That leaves approximately $10.7 billion that is eligible for 
referral but has not been referred for administrative offset, 
and $6.9 billion that has not been referred for collection 
action.
    The subcommittee heard from a number of witnesses from 
Federal agencies about implementation of the DCIA. The DCIA 
will largely be implemented by program staff and personnel in 
the offices of the chief financial officers. It will be audited 
by the Inspectors General in their respective agencies.
    Richard Gregg, Commissioner of the Financial Management 
Service [FMS], Department of the Treasury, testified on the 
progress FMS has made in implementing the debt collection 
provisions of the DCIA. FMS established a management team 
responsible for implementing the DCIA. The merger of the tax 
refund offset and the Treasury offset programs, proposed for 
January 1998 has been delayed until January 1999. FMS and the 
Internal Revenue Service have worked closely and developed a 
mechanism for agencies to simultaneously refer debts to both 
the tax refund offset and administrative offset programs. Mr. 
Gregg also testified that FMS is working to increase the 
collection of past-due child support. As of 1998, 15 States 
have voluntarily agreed to participate in this administrative 
offset program to collect past-due child support.
    John Hawke, Undersecretary of the Department of the 
Treasury, testified about the Department of the Treasury's 
progress implementing the DCIA. Mr. Hawke provided an analysis 
of the $52 billion in delinquent non-tax debt owed the Federal 
Government. According to Mr. Hawke, $47.2 billion of the debt 
is older than 180 days and therefore within the scope of the 
DCIA.
    Richard Calahan, the Acting Inspector General from the 
Department of the Treasury, testified about an audit performed 
by the Treasury Office of Inspector General on FMS' efforts to 
develop the Grand Treasury Offset Program [GTOP]. The audit 
report concluded that the development of the GTOP was not well 
planned or well managed. According to Mr. Calahan, FMS has 
concurred with the recommendations in the IG audit report. The 
OIG is conducting another review focusing on FMS' overall 
strategic process. The IG is finding fundamental weaknesses in 
FMS overall strategic planning process. According to Mr. 
Calahan, these fundamental weaknesses will need to be corrected 
if FMS is to be successful in implementing the DCIA.
    Gary Engel, Associate Director, Governmentwide Accounting 
and Financial Management Issues, Accounting and Information 
Management Division of the General Accounting Office testified 
about GAO's review of the Department of the Treasury's efforts 
to collect delinquent non-tax debts through its administrative 
offset program. Since the subcommittee's oversight hearing on 
the DCIA implementation held in November 1997, agency referral 
of delinquent debt to the Department of the Treasury for 
administrative offset has increased from $9.4 billion to $16.7 
billion. This increase is the result of a closer working 
relationship between the Department of the Treasury and Federal 
agencies to identify debts that can be referred and to 
incorporate the debt agencies submitted for the IRS tax refund 
offset program into Treasury's administrative offset database. 
A significant amount of debt remains uncollected, in part 
because Treasury has experienced significant problems 
developing an administrative offset program system.
    b. Benefits.--The role of the Federal Government in the 
credit markets is enormous. The Federal Government dominates 
the markets for student loans and housing loans, and has a 
strong impact on other sectors as well. Effective Federal debt 
collection practices is essential to protect the interests of 
the taxpayers, and strong congressional oversight is essential 
to effective debt collection practices. At this point, the 
Government is still in the process of implementing the DCIA. 
There are a variety of steps in the process of implementation 
that warrant heightened congressional attention.
    c. Hearings.--Subcommittee Chairman Horn called two 
hearings regarding implementation of the Debt Collection 
Improvement Act, one on April 18, 1997 and the other on 
November 12, 1997. In addition, (3) ``H.R. 4243, Government 
Waste, Fraud, and Error Reduction Act of 1998; H.R. 2347, The 
Federal Benefit Verification and Integrity Act; and H.R. 2063, 
The Debt Collection Wage Information Act of 1997,'' was held on 
March 2, 1998; (4) ``Oversight of the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture Debt Collection,'' was held on March 30, 1998; and 
(5) ``Oversight of the Implementation of the Debt Collection 
Improvement Act,'' convened June 5, 1998.

6. Federal Measures of Race and Ethnicity.

    a. Summary.--For the past two decades, the Federal 
Government had used four racial categories to measure the 
population: black, white, American Indian or Alaskan Native, 
and Asian or Pacific Islander. Separately, individuals have 
also been classified according to Hispanic ethnicity. Since the 
1978, these categories have been set forth in the Office of 
Management and Budget's Directive No. 15--Race and Ethnic 
Standards for Federal Statistics and Administrative Reporting. 
Race and ethnic classifications are used for implementation of 
numerous Federal laws on voting rights, lending practices, 
provision of health services, and employment practices. The 
data are also utilized by State and local governments for 
legislative redistricting and compliance with the Voting Rights 
Act.
    Directive No. 15 has restricted designation of an 
individual to one of the four racial categories. The major 
concern with this requirement is that a growing segment of the 
population can claim multiple racial heritages. It is argued 
that forcing such individuals to choose just one heritage is 
unfair to them and an unnecessary inaccuracy in the measurement 
of race. Proposed solutions included creation of a new category 
called ``multiracial,'' and, alternatively, allowing 
individuals to mark more than one of the four traditional 
categories.
    Due to increasing pressure over the measure of multiracial 
status as well as a variety of other concerns, OMB conducted a 
4-year review of Directive No. 15. The review involved four 
public hearings around the country and three sample surveys to 
measure the affect of proposed changes. The review was 
conducted by the Interagency Committee, a task force created by 
OMB with representation from 30 Federal agencies. The 
Interagency Committee completed its review of Directive No. 15 
and submitted its recommendations to OMB in July 1997. The 
recommendations were published in the July 9, 1997, Federal 
Register. The Interagency Committee rejected the proposal for 
creation of a ``multiracial'' category but recommended that 
individuals be permitted to ``select one or more'' of the 
current categories of race whenever the Federal Government 
measures race.
    The Interagency Committee argued for its ``select one or 
more'' recommendation by observing that the multiracial 
population is growing. Allowing individuals to identify with 
more than one race will help to measure the demographic changes 
more precisely. The Interagency Committee also pointed out that 
at least 0.5 percent of respondents already mark more than one 
race in spite of instructions to choose just one. Finally, 
there is a trend toward reporting more than one race at the 
State level. Currently five States allow individuals to select 
a multiracial category or to choose more than one race.
    The Interagency Committee provided several reasons for 
rejecting a multiracial category. First, it found that there is 
no general consensus on the definition of ``multiracial.'' 
Second and related, a multiracial category is more likely to be 
misunderstood by individuals responding to questions on race. 
Such misunderstanding would lead to inaccurate responses and 
therefore less reliable data on race. A third reason is that a 
multiracial category would require either more space or mode 
coding.
    OMB accepted public comments on the Interagency Committee 
recommendation for approximately 2 months, after which time it 
announced its decision to adopt the recommendation with slight 
modifications. On the multiracial issue, it adopted the 
``select one or more'' recommendation. The changes will be 
adopted by the Census Bureau during its dress rehearsal for the 
2000 census in the spring of 1998.
    The subcommittee held a series of three hearings on this 
issue. The series was entitled, ``Federal Measures of Race and 
Ethnicity and the Implications for the 2000 Census.'' They took 
place on April 23, May 22, and July 25, 1997.
    The first hearing provided background on the issues 
involved in Federal measures of race and ethnicity. The 
subcommittee heard testimony from the Office of Management and 
Budget, the General Accounting Office, the Department of 
Education, and the Department of Health and Human Services.
    The second hearing featured advocates and opponents of a 
multiracial designation, including Susan Graham, president, 
Project RACE; Ramona Douglass, president, Association of 
MultiEthnic Americans; Karen Narasaki, executive director, 
National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium; Harold 
McDougall, director, Washington Bureau, National Association 
for the Advancement of Colored People; Eric Rodriguez, policy 
analyst, National Council of La Raza; and JoAnn Chase, 
executive director, National Congress of American Indians. The 
subcommittee heard arguments that the categories of Directive 
No. 15 did not accurately account for a particular group from 
U.S. Senator Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI) and Helen Hatab Samhan, 
executive vice president, Arab-American Institute. The hearing 
also featured demographic and sociological specialists: Dr. 
Mary Waters, Department of Sociology, Harvard University; Dr. 
Balint Vazsonyi, director, Center for the American Founding; 
and Dr. Harold Hodgkinson, Institute for Educational 
Leadership.
    The third hearing featured testimony on the potential 
consequences of the Interagency Committee recommendation. 
Several witnesses focused on challenges presented by the 
variety of new data created by allowing individuals to select 
more than one race. The central issue is how this data will be 
tabulated. One major concern is whether the recommendation, if 
adopted by OMB, would lead to double counting of individuals 
who identify with more than one race. This could be a problem 
particularly in the enforcement of civil rights laws. The 
Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Isabelle 
Katz Pinzler, addressed this issue.
    b. Benefits.--Federal measures of race and ethnicity are 
important to many people for a variety of reasons. The data 
gathered by the Census Bureau and other Federal agencies as 
well as by school districts and hospitals throughout the 
country provide essential information to governments, 
businesses, and a variety of other organizations. Professionals 
from statisticians to law enforcement officials rely on this 
data. Furthermore, all individuals have a first-hand experience 
with this data: they are the ones who provide it. The way the 
Federal Government decides to measure race and ethnicity 
therefore affects many people at many levels. The decision of 
whether to make changes to the current standards was a very 
important one. It was a decision that needed to be considered 
cautiously and openly. Although ultimately the decision was in 
the hands of OMB, it first needed the attention of Congress and 
the American people. The subcommittee's hearings on the issue 
both broadened and deepened deliberations on the issues 
involved in the decision.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a series of three 
hearings on this issue. The series was entitled, ``Federal 
Measures of Race and Ethnicity and the Implications for the 
2000 Census.'' These hearings were held on April 23, May 22, 
and July 25, 1997.

7. The Post FTS-2000 Telecommunications Contract.

    a. Summary.--The FTS2000 contract was first issued in 1988 
by the General Services Administration. The contract governs 
Federal purchases of long-distance telephone services and other 
ancillary services. By most estimates, it has been successful 
in reducing Federal telecommunications costs. Prior to the 
FTS2000 contract, GSA operated a government-owned 
infrastructure that cost more than standard commercial rates 
offered by AT&T, MCI and Sprint, the three main long-distance 
firms. The FTS2000 contract reduced significantly the rate-per-
minute charge paid by Federal agencies using the contract, 
which was awarded to Sprint and MCI.
    GSA has worked with the Interagency Management Council 
[IMC], a group of agency telecommunications experts, in 
managing the FTS2000 program and planning for the follow-on 
contract. This planning process was initiated in March 1993. 
The IMC and GSA solicited input from agency users, industry, 
and academia for the follow-on contract (FTS2001).
    Enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996 
[TRA] affected planning for the FTS2001 contract by promising 
to bring a new era of competition to telecommunications. This 
undermined the justification for a longer-term contract, since 
a long-term contract awarded now would not allow the Federal 
Government to benefit from industry consolidation and 
competition under TRA.
    In September 1996, GSA released its then-current strategy 
for the FTS2001 contract. In response to congressional and 
industry interest, GSA released a revision of the strategy in 
February 1997 in the form of a statement of principles rather 
than a draft RFP. The revision created an opportunity for the 
eventual contractors in the FTS2001 and MAA programs to compete 
against each other. A refinement of these principles was issued 
on April 4, 1997. The refinement governs the contract duration, 
award process and means of competition, and the inclusion of 
optional services.
    b. Benefits.--The FTS-2000 contract has benefited taxpayers 
enormously. The follow-on contract will provide a contracting 
vehicle to allow Federal agencies to obtain better rates for 
local service. Congressional participation in guiding this 
process was crucial to achieving the best possible 
telecommunications deal for the taxpayers.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on April 30, 
1997, entitled, ``Oversight of the Post-FTS2000 
Telecommunications Contract.''

8. White House Management Issues.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee addressed two concerns 
regarding management of the Executive Office of the President: 
the status of special Government employees and the lack of a 
chief financial officer in the White House. The issue of a 
chief financial officer in the White House was treated through 
legislation with H.R. 1962 (see Section III. A. Legislation, 
New Measures for more discussion.)
    The continuing spate of allegations about mismanagement at 
the White House have been frequent reminders of the need for 
serious, statutory changes in the way the White House is run. 
H.R. 1966, the ``Special Government Employee Act of 1997,'' 
updates the definition of a ``special Government employee'' to 
cover unpaid, informal advisors. Foremost is the need for 
accountability and adherence to conflict-of-interest and other 
disclosure requirements. The White House has a history of using 
informal associates and advisers who are present in the White 
House on an ongoing basis and regularly affect public policy, 
yet who are utterly unaccountable to the public. Americans have 
a right to know who is influencing policy decisions in the 
White House. Too often influential associates of the President 
wield power in the White House yet remain hidden in the shadows 
and unaccountable to the public. Hearings before the full 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight in the last 
Congress demonstrated that certain associates of the President 
used their access to President Clinton, the First Lady, and the 
staff of the Executive Office of the President to promote their 
own business interests, even to the extent of encouraging the 
termination of career employees of the White House.
    b. Benefits.--Redefining ``special Government employee'' 
will shine the light of publicity on back-room advisors. The 
proposed measure will expand the definition of ``special 
Government employee'' to cover unpaid, informal advisors to the 
President so that they come under the same conflict of interest 
and financial disclosure statutes as regular White House staff. 
This proposal would amend the current definition to make it 
completely clear who comes under conflict of interest and other 
disclosure requirements. This includes a functional test that 
focuses on what the advisors actually do and on whether they 
are involved in the Government's deliberative processes. The 
bill will help put a stop to abuses of power of the unelected 
and unaccountable.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of the `Presidential and 
Executive Office Financial Accountability Act of 1997' and the 
`Special Government Employee Act of 1997' '' was held on May 1, 
1997. Representative John L. Mica (R-FL), who in the last 
Congress introduced H.R. 3452 and is a strong supporter of 
accountability in the Federal Government, explained why the two 
bills are sorely needed. Gregory S. Walden, counsel, Mayer 
Brown & Platt, and former Assistant General Counsel in the 
White House, and Stephen Potts, Director, Office of Government 
Ethics, testified on the ``Special Government Employee Act of 
1997.''

9. Executive Branch Information Dissemination.

    a. Summary.--The Subcommittee on Government Management, 
Information, and Technology is a principle congressional 
guardian of access to executive branch information. The 
subcommittee's charter states that it ``will ascertain the 
trend in the availability of Government information and will 
scrutinize the information practices of executive agencies and 
officials.'' The subcommittee oversees Federal information 
dissemination. Information dissemination programs at the 
Government Printing Office include the distribution of 
publications to Federal depository libraries nationwide, 
cataloging and indexing, and distribution to recipients 
designated by law. They also include distribution to foreign 
libraries designated by the Library of Congress, in return for 
which the Library receives governmental publications from those 
countries.
    The Government Printing Office distributes about 100 
million copies of Government publications per year. 
Approximately 75 percent of all its printing needs are 
contracted out to private printers. Of the work handled in-
house, about half is for Congress. The Government Printing 
Office currently employs 3,674 employees, fewer than at any 
time in this century. There is concern that the administration 
has been reducing public access to information. Specifically, 
many executive branch agencies are not furnishing copies of the 
information they produce to the Government Printing Office for 
dissemination through the Federal depository libraries. 
Furthermore, there is concern that the administration is 
allowing many agencies to enter into restrictive distribution 
agreements that further limit the availability of agency 
information to the public.
    b. Benefits.--Access to information--especially 
governmental information--is the foundation of an educated 
citizenry and hence a free society. The Government Printing 
Office plays an essential role in making governmental 
information available to the American people. In times of rapid 
technological advance, it is important that the Government 
keeps pace with changes--both to maintain availability and to 
take advantage of time and cost saving measures. Subcommittee 
oversight in the areas of both information and technology is 
crucial to this process.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of the Government Printing Office 
and Executive Branch Information Dissemination'' was held on 
May 8, 1997. Witnesses from the Government Printing Office were 
Michael DiMario, the Public Printer, accompanied by Wayne 
Kelley, Superintendent of Documents. Other witnesses included 
Daniel S. Jones, president, NewsBank, Inc., who appeared on 
behalf of the Information Industry Association and Robert L. 
Oakley, Washington Affairs Representative of the American 
Association of Law Libraries, who appeared on behalf of a 
coalition of library associations.

10. The Medicare Transaction System.

    a. Summary.--In November 1995, the Subcommittee on 
Government Management, Information, and Technology and the 
Subcommittee on Human Resources held a joint hearing that 
considered, among other matters, how existing information 
technology processes could be incorporated into the Medicare 
claims system to more effectively identify fraud. Based on 
several reports from the General Accounting Office, the 
subcommittees had serious concerns at that time about the 
ambitious Medicare Transaction System or MTS. Congressman Horn 
feared that the Health Care Financing Administration [HCFA] was 
ill-equipped to manage such a massive and complex project, and 
that the costs would outweigh the benefits.
    Unfortunately, the fears materialized. On April 4th, the 
Health Care Financing Administration announced that it was 
``exploring other options to develop MTS.'' Moreover, the 
subcommittees learned in 1997 that HCFA has a serious year 2000 
problem. The General Accounting Office wrote a report that 
includes sharp criticism of HCFA's involvement in the year 2000 
software conversion effort of its claims contractors and 
standard systems maintainers.
    b. Benefits.--If the Medicare system is unable to process 
claims accurately in the year 2000, the impact on Medicare 
beneficiaries across the country, and indeed the entire health 
care system, could be catastrophic. Congressional oversight was 
necessary to get assurances for the American people about the 
future of Medicare transaction processing as well as the HCFA's 
management of the year 2000 problem.
    c. Hearings.--``Status of the Medicare Transaction System'' 
was held jointly with the Subcommittee on Human Resources on 
May 16, 1997. Witnesses included Joel Willemssen, Director, 
Information Resources, General Accounting Office; and Bruce 
Vladeck, Administrator, Health Care Financing Administration.

11. Total Quality Management.

    a. Summary.--Total Quality Management [TQM] is management 
philosophies that has helped many organizations become more 
efficient and effective in a very competitive environment. 
Government has many concerns other than the bottom line, but 
public and private sector services are inevitably compared in 
the consumer's mind--and in certain cases Government must 
compete directly with private companies. It is no surprise that 
in recent years voters have made abundantly clear their desire 
for a more efficient and affordable government. TQM strives to 
achieve continuous improvement of quality through organization-
wide efforts based on facts and data. Organizations use quality 
management principles to determine the expectations of all 
their customers--both external and internal--and to establish 
systems to meet those expectations. In recent years, both 
Federal and State governments have found that they could not 
attain high quality by using traditional approaches to managing 
service and product quality. The customer of the Federal 
Government is the American taxpayer. To satisfy its customer, 
the Government must design its programs, goods, and services 
for quality. Furthermore, application of quality management 
principles to the Government--an organization whose customers 
are also its owners--presents a unique set of challenges.
    The subcommittee sought ideas on how quality management 
principles might be applied to the special case of the 
Government with the overall purpose of working toward a more 
efficient and effective Federal Government. The formal 
definition of a Total Quality Management company exists in the 
criteria for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. This 
annual award, given since 1988 by the Department of Commerce, 
recognizes companies that excel in managing for and achieving 
quality.
    b. Benefits.--In our relentlessly competitive global 
economy, the only constant is rapid change. In this 
environment, organizations must adapt or perish. 
Competitiveness depends on management. The private sector has 
proven remarkably adept at organizational flexibility. The 
public sector has been distinctly less successful at changing 
with the times. The subcommittee has jurisdiction over 
management in the executive branch and is therefore responsible 
for examining management philosophies that could help to 
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Federal 
Government.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Total Quality 
Management'' was held on June 9, 1997. Witnesses included 
Steven Bailey, president of the American Society for Quality 
Control; Dr. Harry Hertz, Director, National Quality Standards, 
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of 
Commerce; Nick Juskiw, chief executive officer and president, 
Trident Precision Manufacturing; Rosetta Riley, president and 
chief executive officer Sirus 21, Inc.; Rear Admiral (Ret.) 
Luther Schriefer, senior vice president and executive director, 
Business Executives for National Security; Lawrence Wheeler, 
vice president, Programs Systems Management Co., (a division of 
Arthur D. Little, Inc.); Steve Wall, director, Office of 
Quality Services for the State of Ohio; Greg Frampton, 
executive administrator, South Carolina Department of Revenue; 
Thomas Carroll, National Director for Quality, Internal Revenue 
Service; and David Cooke, Director of Administration and 
Management, Department of Defense.

12. Electronic Funds Transfer.

    a. Summary.--The Debt Collection Improvement Act [DCIA] was 
signed into law as a part of Public Law 104-134 on April 26, 
1996. The DCIA included provisions that will move Federal 
payments toward electronic funds transfer [EFT], which includes 
direct deposit, credit cards, and other forms of electronic 
payments. This will take place by 1999 unless the EFT 
requirement represents a hardship for the recipient. Prior to 
this law, Federal payees had the option of receiving EFT or a 
paper check in payment of salary, benefit, or other Federal 
payment due the individual from the Federal Government. 
Unfortunately, these checks are often forged, counterfeited, 
stolen, or fraudulent, and are sometimes delayed in the mail or 
lost.
    ``Oversight of the Implementation of the Electronic Funds 
Transfer Provisions of the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 
1996,'' was held on June 18, 1997. During the subcommittee's 
hearing Mark Catlett, Chief Financial Officer, Department of 
Veterans Affairs, described the department's efforts to promote 
the use of electronic payments by the VA's vendors. Vendors 
have traditionally been reluctant to accept such electronic 
payments. Currently, governmentwide, only 16 percent of vendors 
are currently receiving electronic payments. However, the VA 
has aggressively promoted the use of such payments, and the 
Department has achieved rates approaching 80 percent. This has 
eliminated 10 million paper transactions, thus reducing the 
burden on VA finance office staff.
    Marcy Creque, volunteers director, American Association of 
Retired Persons, described her organization's efforts to ensure 
that senior citizens are not hurt by the EFT mandate. She noted 
a telephone survey performed by a contractor for the Financial 
Management Service. According to this survey, 18 percent of 
Federal check recipients do not have bank accounts. By way of 
comparison, 13 percent of all U.S. households do not have 
accounts with a financial institution. The reasons vary. Many 
of those without bank accounts said that they do not have 
enough money (47 percent), they do not need an account (21 
percent), and that bank fees are too high (6 percent). This 
raises the question of whether financial institutions should 
provide accounts with no minimum balance amount, and with a 
large number of free ATM withdrawals and reasonable fees.
    b. Benefits.--The EFT requirement to receive benefits 
electronically will affect millions of Americans in a number of 
ways in the coming years. It will bring individuals heretofore 
outside the financial system into the mainstream. It will 
modernize Federal payment methods. It will give new impetus to 
electronic smart card products. Above all, EFT will solve the 
problems of lost, stolen, and fraudulent checks, reduce check-
cashing charges for Federal beneficiaries in the amount of $1.6 
billion per year, and reduce Federal expenditures by $100 
million per year, according to the Department of the Treasury. 
Congressional oversight of the implementation of EFT is 
necessary to ensure that these benefits are realized.
    c. Hearings.--``Implementation of the Electronic Funds 
Transfer Provisions of the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 
1996'' was held on June 18, 1997.

13. Inspectors General.

    a. Summary.--Inspectors General serve to protect the 
integrity of Federal programs and resources. Through their 
audits and investigations, Inspectors General seek to determine 
whether program officers, contractors, Federal workers, 
grantees, and others are conforming with regulations and laws. 
The Offices of Inspectors General were established by the 
Inspector General Act of 1978. The Inspector General Act of 
1978 (IG Act) consolidated the audit and investigative units 
within major Federal agencies under a single office and 
established protections to ensure independence and objectivity. 
By merging the audit and investigation functions within a 
single office, the IG Act sought to substantially reduce waste, 
fraud, and abuse and to make the Federal Government more 
accountable.
    Originally, Offices of Inspectors General [OIGs] were 
established in the 12 largest Federal departments and agencies. 
Today OIGs exist in 27 of the largest departments and agencies 
and in an additional 30 smaller designated boards, commissions, 
corporations, and foundations (including the Government 
Printing Office, the only legislative branch statutory IG). 
These smaller ``Designated Federal Entity'' OIGs were 
established by the 1988 amendments to the IG Act.
    Inspectors General have enjoyed substantial success in 
recoveries from investigations and recommendations that Federal 
funds be put to better use. There is concern, however, that the 
success of the IGs has come at the expense of long-range 
strategies that would ultimately lead to an improved 
government. Critics of the IGs have argued that too much 
emphasis is placed on securing convictions of fraudulent 
contractors, for example, and not enough emphasis placed on 
preventing fraud and waste from occurring in the first place. 
To carry out their responsibilities, the Offices of Inspectors 
General have broad investigative authority. They have access to 
documents relating to programs and operations within their area 
of responsibility. They have the ability to administer oaths, 
affirmations or affidavits and the power of subpoena. Recently, 
questions have been raised about investigative techniques used 
by some Inspectors General. In particular, investigative 
practices by Inspectors General, especially communications with 
witnesses and witness access to counsel, have come under 
scrutiny lately.
    ``Oversight of Investigative Practices of Inspectors 
General,'' was held on June 24, 1997. The subcommittee heard 
testimony from Representatives Lee Hamilton (D-IN) and Porter 
Goss (R-FL). Four Inspectors General as well as the Assistant 
Director, Criminal Investigative Division, Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, also testified.
    On Tuesday, April 21, 1998, the subcommittee conducted a 
hearing entitled, ``The Inspector General Act of 1978: Twenty 
Years After Passage, Are the Inspectors General Fulfilling 
Their Mission?'' At this hearing the subcommittee focused on 
the role of the Inspectors General, how that role has changed 
over the last 20 years, problems and issues facing the 
Inspectors General, and how the Inspector General concept can 
be strengthened for the future. The subcommittee heard 
testimony from Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) who discussed the 
merits of S. 2167 the ``Inspector General Act Amendments of 
1998'', a bill she introduced to enhance the efficiency and 
accountability of Inspectors General. The subcommittee also 
heard from both past and present Inspectors General, former 
congressional staff and OMB officials, the General Accounting 
Office and Paul Light, Director Public Policy Program of the 
Pew Charitable Trusts.
    b. Benefits.--In fiscal year 1995, the most recent year for 
which information is available, Inspector General 
investigations and audits led to $1.5 billion in ``recoveries'' 
(fines and reimbursements from individuals and companies that 
defrauded the Government). In addition, IG recommendations led 
agency managers to cancel or seek reimbursements of $2.3 
billion from contractors or grantees in 1995. IG 
recommendations also inspired Federal managers to improve plans 
for spending $10.4 billion--maximizing the return on Federal 
dollars. In addition, IG accomplishments in fiscal year 1995 
include 14,122 successful prosecutions, 2,405 personnel 
actions, and 4,234 suspensions and debarments of persons or 
firms doing business with the Government. The effectiveness of 
the Inspectors General is therefore of obvious interest to 
Congress and to the taxpayers.
    c. Hearings.--(1) ``Oversight of Investigative Practices of 
Inspectors General'' was held on June 24, 1997; and (2) ``The 
Inspector General Act of 1978: Twenty Years After Passage, Are 
the Inspectors General Fulfilling Their Mission?,'' was held on 
Tuesday, April 21, 1998.

14. Performance-Based Organizations.

    a. Summary.--In September 1995, Vice President Al Gore 
announced that a series of agencies would be transformed into 
performance-based, customer-oriented agencies. This 
transformation will build on existing initiatives that reorient 
Government agencies away from focusing on the resources they 
receive and toward their concrete accomplishments with those 
resources. Federal agencies need to change their incentives and 
internal cultures in order to focus on customers and achieving 
results. Agencies need to be more responsive to citizens at the 
same time that they account for program costs and safeguard 
broader public interests. According to the administration, this 
can be done by creating performance-based organizations that 
set forth clear measures of performance, hold the head of the 
organization clearly accountable for achieving results, and 
grant the head of the organization authority to deviate from 
governmentwide rules if this is necessary to achieve agreed-
upon results.
    A Performance-Based Organization is a discrete management 
unit with strong incentives to manage for results. PBOs commit 
to clear objectives, specific measurable goals, customer 
service standards, and targets for improved performance. Once 
designated, a PBO must have customized managerial flexibilities 
and a competitively hired chief executive. The chief executive 
signs an annual performance agreement with the Secretary and 
has his or her pay and tenure tied to the organization's 
performance. The British Government, on which the PBO concept 
is modeled, has found that such agencies improve performance 
while cutting administrative costs.
    The President's 1998 Budget identifies nine PBO candidates. 
These candidates are in varying stages of preparing legislation 
and sending it to their respective authorizing committees in 
Congress. The administration has several prerequisites for 
becoming a PBO candidate: a clear mission, measurable services, 
and a performance measurement system in place or in 
development; a general focus on external, not internal, 
customers; operations that can be separated from policymaking 
with a clear line of accountability to an agency head; top-
level support to transform the function into a PBO; predictable 
funding levels that correspond to their business operations. In 
a PBO, the policymaking and regulatory functions are split from 
their program operations. The PBO focuses on programmatic 
operations. However, not all Government agencies are suited to 
become PBOs. Operations that do not have clear, measurable 
results should be excluded.
    The subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Christopher 
Mihm, Acting Associate Director, U.S. General Accounting 
Office, General Government Division, Federal Management and 
Workforce Issues, who described the conclusions of GAO 
regarding the British Next Step agencies, upon which the 
concept of PBO is based. Mr. Mihm stressed that (1) a lack of 
clarity in the relationship between agencies and their parent 
departments, (2) an uncertainty concerning who is accountable 
for performance, and (3) difficulties in developing and setting 
performance goals, have confronted the British, and may pose 
similar problems for the United States PBOs.
    Mr. Edward Kazenske, Deputy Assistant Commissioner for 
Patents, Patent and Trademark Office, described the Patent and 
Trademark Office's [PTO] leadership in seeking a PBO 
designation. Mr. Kazenske outlined the recent troubled history 
of the PTO. The turnaround at PTO came in 1982, with the 
enactment of legislation to increase the agency's fees, gave 
the agency access to such fees, and paved the way for self-
sufficiency. This set up a ``compact'' with inventors to: 
reduce the time required to examine and issue a patent to 18 
months; reduce the time required to issue a trademark first 
action notice to 3 months and to register a trademark by 13 
months; to automate the operations of the PTO by the 1990's; 
and to strengthen the world-wide protection of intellectual 
property. While David Sanders, Deputy Administrator, Saint 
Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation [SLSDC], described his 
agency's proposal to create a PBO by creating incentives to 
promote individual and agency performance. According to Mr. 
Sanders, this gives all employees a direct stake in the 
agency's future for the first time in history.
    Mr. Craig Bolick, president of Local 1968 American 
Federation of Government Employees [AFGE], discussed his 
organization's opposition to PBO status for the SLSDC. Mr. 
Bolick opposes the PBO legislation for SLSDC because it would 
prevent AFGE from negotiating wages and benefits and includes 
mandatory usage of alternative dispute resolution procedures. 
AFGE also opposes bonuses for the chief operating officer.
    b. Benefits.--As proposals for converting Federal agencies 
into such PBOs increase, it is extremely important to examine 
the impact that such proposals will have on the procurement and 
civil service systems, and to determine the goal of such 
changes.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Performance Based Organizations,'' on July 8, 1997.

15. Governors Island.

    a. Summary.--Located half a mile off the southern tip of 
Manhattan, Governors Island is Federal property that was 
recently declared surplus by the Federal Government. Governors 
Island consists of 204 acres, with 225 structures totaling 3 
million square feet of space ranging from residential to office 
space. A portion of the island is historic; it includes Fort 
Jay and Castle Williams, which was built to protect New York 
harbor. As part of its reorganization plan, the Coast Guard 
streamlined its base structure and in 1995, announced it would 
close Governors Island.
    As the property returns to civilian use, a number of 
disposal issues have surfaced, including how to pay for 
maintenance, and what type of access ought to be allowed. The 
1997 balanced budget agreement requires the General Services 
Administration to sell the island at fair market value. The 
Congressional Budget Office estimated that the island would 
yield $500 million if it were sold for the estimated fair 
market value.
    The subcommittee convened a hearing to examine what Federal 
actions would be necessary between now and year 2000, to ensure 
that the island does not deteriorate and possible prospects for 
future projects. Congressman Jerrold Nadler, (D-NY), expressed 
his interest in seeing increased public space such as 
hospitals, parks and other public facilities. In addition, 
Karen Alder of the General Services Adminstration outlined 
GSA's internal system of property disposal. She described the 
various possible uses of the land, and stressed that GSA would 
follow legislation enacted by Congress; however, the ultimate 
choices for reuse lay with the local authorities. An official 
from the city of New York, criticized the ``fictitious and 
unattainable $500 million'' figure estimated by the CBO.
    b. Benefits.--Governors Island is a historic landmark and 
played a key role in the defense of New York harbor in the War 
of 1812. The island played an important part in U.S. history 
and its preservation is an important responsibility of the 
Federal Government.
    c. Hearings.--On July 14, 1997, the subcommittee convened a 
hearing entitled, ``Governor's Island: Options for Reuse after 
Federal Government Departure.''

16. Government-Sponsored Enterprises.

    a. Summary.--The Federal Government established the first 
financial entity known as a Government Sponsored Enterprise in 
1916. These entities were created to direct funds to particular 
sectors of society that seemed to be inadequately served by the 
private credit markets. Private parties own most of the stock 
in GSEs, whose traditional function has been to engage in 
business operations in the private sector to increase the flow 
of credit to home buyers, farmers, students, and colleges. 
Although GSEs are authorized or established by Congress, their 
activities are not included in the Federal budget totals on the 
grounds that they are privately owned. Due to their special 
relationship with the Federal Government, however, detailed 
statements of financial operations and conditions are presented 
in the President's budget to the extent such information is 
available. These statements are not reviewed by the President; 
they are presented as submitted by the GSEs.
    There are currently 11 GSEs in operation. They were 
established by law between 1916 and 1989. Five enterprises 
operate in the housing area: the Federal Home Loan Banks; the 
Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae); the Federal 
Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); the Financing 
Corporation; and the Resolution Funding Corporation. Four 
enterprises operate in the agriculture area: the Federal 
Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (Farmer Mac); the Banks for 
Cooperatives; the Agricultural Credit Bank; and the Farm Credit 
Banks. Two enterprises operate in the education area: the 
Student Loan Marketing Association (Sallie Mae); and the 
College Construction Loan Insurance Association.
    While private parties own all of the stock of most GSEs and 
they are managed by private individuals, GSEs have strong ties 
to the Federal Government. The enabling legislation of each GSE 
specifies its general purpose and authorized transactions. For 
example, Fannie Mae is chartered to increase housing credit 
availability by engaging in secondary market and other 
transactions. The enabling legislation also identifies Federal 
agencies responsible for prescribing overall policy and 
regulations for the GSEs and usually provides that a minority 
of their board members be appointed by the President or another 
Federal official.
    GSEs typically receive their financing from private 
investors. They issue capital stock and short- and long-term 
debt instruments, sell asset backed securities (also known as 
mortgage-backed securities), and collect fees for guarantees 
and other services. Their principal source of financing is 
borrowing through the issuance of debt obligations or the sale 
of mortgage-backed securities. GSEs generally do not receive 
Federal appropriations.
    As a result of the benefits conferred upon GSEs and the 
similarity between their debt securities and those of the U.S. 
Treasury, most GSE debt and mortgage-backed securities are 
perceived by the credit markets to be guaranteed by the Federal 
Government. This perception allows GSEs to borrow in the credit 
markets at interest rates only slightly higher than the rates 
paid by the Treasury on its borrowings. Furthermore, this 
perception by the credit markets was enhanced by the 
Government's 1987 rescue of the Farm Credit System, which at 
that time was composed of three GSEs. This rescue could 
ultimately cost the Federal Government $5 billion.
    Subcommittee Chairman Horn convened the hearing to examine 
the evolving role of GSEs. Mr. Jim Bothwell, Chief Economist, 
U.S. General Accounting Office, described the five criteria for 
an effective regulator of GSEs: objectivity and arm's length 
status; prominence in government; consistency in regulation of 
similar markets; separation of the regulation of primary and 
secondary markets; and economy and efficiency. Mr. Bothwell 
noted past examples of regulatory failure, and noted that most 
GAO recommendations have gone unimplemented.
    Mr. Thomas Woodward, Economist, Congressional Research 
Service, noted that the creation of special benefits or 
privileges for a GSE are themselves a form of market 
distortion. While this may be justified in order to ensure that 
a public purpose is accomplished, it may be wise to 
periodically review whether the GSEs need their privileges, 
according to Mr. Woodward.
    Mr. Thomas H. Stanton, fellow, Johns Hopkins University, 
made three main point: (1) that safety and soundness rules must 
be designed before rather than after a GSE gains political 
power, since such political power could prevent later 
imposition of these sensible requirements; (2) the public 
benefits of a GSE depend upon the quality of ongoing public 
oversight, since in their markets, the GSE has an incentive to 
provide profitable services regardless of the presence of a 
public benefit; and (3) GSE legislation should contain an exit 
strategy and full disclosure of expenditure to influence the 
political process.
    b. Benefits.--Federal legislation confers a number of 
benefits on GSEs that are not provided to private companies. 
Most enterprises have a direct line of credit with the U.S. 
Treasury, their securities are exempt from Securities and 
Exchange Commission registration requirements, and their 
investors' interest income is exempt from State and local 
taxation. In addition, GSE debt obligations and securities have 
characteristics that are common to U.S. Treasury obligations. 
These advantages, combined with their strong impact on credit 
markets generally, make effective oversight essential.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of Government-Sponsored 
Enterprises'' was held jointly with the Subcommittee on Capital 
Banking Markets, Securities and Government Sponsored 
Enterprises of the Banking and Financial Services Committee on 
July 16, 1997.

17. Metropolitan Statistical Areas.

    a. Summary.--Metropolitan areas are geographic areas that 
have a large population center together with adjacent 
communities. The Office of Management and Budget designates and 
defines metropolitan areas following a set of official 
standards. Various categories of metropolitan areas include 
metropolitan statistical areas [MSAs], consolidated 
metropolitan statistical areas [CMSAs], and primary 
metropolitan statistical areas [PMSAs]. An MSA consists of one 
or more counties that contain a city of 50,000 or more 
inhabitants, or contain a Census Bureau-defined urbanized area 
that has a total population of at least 100,000 (75,000 in the 
six New England States).
    Additional outlying counties are included in the MSA if 
they have large numbers (generally 15 percent) of commuters to 
the central counties and they meet requirements for population 
density, urban population, percentage growth in population 
between the two previous decennial censuses, and the number of 
inhabitants within the urban area that qualifies the MSA.
    These designations are used as a framework for the Federal 
statistical system. They are also used for other reasons. For 
example, local community leaders use metropolitan area 
designation to promote the community as a business district. 
State governments use metropolitan areas to make communities 
eligible for programs that may be focused on urban or rural 
districts. The private sector uses metropolitan areas to 
develop sales territories and market new products. For example, 
according to USA Today, ``having MSA status designation is like 
having money in the bank because it puts them on marketers 
``A'' lists. Some restaurant chains and big retailers would not 
even consider coming to a city without MSA designation'' (USA 
Today, August 22, 1996).
    Testimony was received from Representatives Tim Holden (D-
PA), Bill Remond (R-NM), Duncan Hunter (R-CA), and Maurice 
Hinchey (D-NY), described the problems communities they 
represent face in obtaining designation as an MSA. The 
Honorable Sally Katzen, Administrator, Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs, noted the process by which MSAs are 
designated and the review process for proposed changes. Mr. Ed 
Spar, executive director, Council of Professional Associations 
on Federal Statistics, noted that the private sector users of 
Federal statistical data ideally want data on the lowest 
possible geographic area so that it can be aggregated according 
to the needs of the data user. Finally, Mr. Alvin Marshall, 
member of the Board of Directors, Schuylkill Economic 
Development Corp., noted that Schuylkill County was unable to 
qualify for an MSA designation since heavy strip mining left 
scarred portions of the land which were unable to support 
housing, and therefore could not meet the contiguity 
requirements for the MSA.
    b. Benefits.--Since so many private organizations and 
Government programs are based on the Federal MSA designation, 
it is important to periodically review this MSA designation 
process, especially in light of charges that some communities 
are unfairly affected by the current classifications.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight of Metropolitan Statistical Areas'' on July 29, 
1997.

18. Statistical Proposals.

    a. Summary.--The economic statistics gathered and analyzed 
by the Federal Government are integral to public and private 
decisionmaking. The financial markets rise and fall, Federal 
aid is determined and distributed, and businesses make a wide 
variety of decisions all based on the data provided by the 
Government. Although sound statistics and analysis do not by 
themselves produce sound public policy, they do provide a 
necessary foundation from which to identify problems, to 
evaluate options, and to monitor results. There is widespread 
concern that Federal statistical agencies could be working more 
efficiently. The solution may be to consolidate the three main 
statistical agencies into a single entity. Introduced last 
Congress as the Statistical Consolidation Act, this measure 
would create the Federal Statistical Service as an independent 
agency. The Service would incorporate the Bureau of the Census, 
the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Bureau of Economic 
Analysis. This proposal directly addresses the need for better 
coordination and planning among economic statistical agencies. 
The goal of this and other proposals is to improve the Federal 
statistical system by reducing the organizational and legal 
barriers to greater coordination.
    b. Benefits.--Given the importance of Federal Government 
statistics, it is crucial that this data be gathered and 
processed in the most accurate and timely manner possible. 
Changes in the structure of the Federal statistical community 
are necessary if this goal is going to continue to be met in 
the near future. Substantial changes will require a broad 
consensus in Congress and throughout the Government. The 
subcommittee's efforts on this issue are meant to help forge 
this consensus in order to preserve and improve the integrity 
and Federal statistics.
    The current Federal statistical system is an assortment of 
more than 70 different entities located within 12 Cabinet 
departments in the Federal Government. Many of these entities 
are subject to different data confidentiality requirements 
which impedes data sharing and contributes to duplicative data 
collection. Data sharing and the establishment of a Federal 
statistical service would eliminate the duplication in the 
collection of statistical data, save valuable resources, and 
improve the quality of statistical data while protecting the 
privacy of individuals.
    The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, ``Oversight of 
Statistical Proposals,'' on July 29, 1997. Witnesses included 
Sally Katzen, Administrator, Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget; Dr. Edward 
J. Sondik, Director, National Center for Health Statistics; and 
Mr. Jay Hakes, Administrator, Energy Information 
Administration, Department of Energy.
    The purpose of this hearing was to discuss various 
proposals to improve the Federal statistical service. Proposals 
included consolidating or studying the consolidation of 
statistical agencies including the Bureau of the Census, the 
Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics, into a single independent agency. Another proposal 
for improving the quality of Federal statistical data and 
information was to authorize statistical data sharing between 
designated statistical agencies.
    Representatives from the Office of Management and Budget's 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs testified on the 
merits of the ``Statistical Confidentiality Act,'' a bill 
introduced in the 104th Congress by Representative Horn (H.R. 
3924). This bill was designed to improve the efficiency of 
Federal statistical programs and the quality of Federal 
statistics by permitting limited sharing of records for 
statistical purposes under strong confidentiality safeguards. 
The benefits of allowing statistical agencies to share 
statistical data include reducing the burden on respondents of 
having to reply to multiple and duplicative requests for 
information.
    The subcommittee also heard testimony from representatives 
from Federal agencies and from the private sector. Edward 
Sondik, Director of the National Center for Health Statistics 
[NCHS] discussed efforts to coordinate statistical data both 
within the department and across the statistical system. At the 
NCHS, the Director works with the Department of Health and 
Human Services' Data Council to integrate the department's 
statistical efforts and bring a strategic focus to information 
needs. The lack of uniform medical privacy protections is a 
special concern that needs to be addressed when considering 
access to medical records for statistical purposes.
    According to Mark Wilson of the Heritage Foundation, to 
ensure accuracy of responses, respondents need assurances that 
data they provide to the Federal Government for statistical 
purposes will not be used for regulation or enforcement. Mr. 
Wilson opined that consolidation should occur on a functional 
rather than organizational basis.
    The subcommittee held a hearing on March 26, 1998, on the 
``Statistical Consolidation Act of 1998'' and S.1404, the 
``Federal Statistical System Act of 1997.'' These pieces of 
legislation were designed to improve the quality and 
reliability of Federal statistical data and statistical 
analysis through organizational consolidation and data sharing 
for statistical purposes. The bills incorporated many of the 
suggestions offered at the subcommittee's July 29, 1997 hearing 
entitled, ``Oversight of Statistical Proposals.''
    The legislation would establish a commission to study 
whether and how Federal statistical agencies, including the 
Bureau of the Census, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, and the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics, should be consolidated into a 
single statistical agency. The bills would establish uniform 
confidentiality protections and encourage data sharing among 
statistical agencies for the sole purpose of statistical 
analysis.
    The subcommittee heard testimony from Senator Patrick 
Moynihan (D-NY) in addition to representatives from the General 
Accounting Office, former officials from Federal statistical 
agencies, and representatives from the private sector. Franklin 
Raines, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, 
speaking on behalf of the Administration, offered written 
testimony which was inserted into the record.
    At the hearing, Senator Moynihan discussed the need to 
improve the quality of the Federal statistical system and the 
benefits of creating a commission to study reorganization. 
According to Senator Moynihan, the major problems with the 
current Federal statistical system include impediments to data 
sharing; burdens on those responding to requests for 
information; priority setting; difficulties within the 
dispersed system; and protecting confidentiality.
    Franklin Raines, Director of the Office of Management and 
Budget, speaking for the administration, supported 
congressional efforts to enhance the usefulness of the Nation's 
statistical information. The administration was supportive of 
provisions of the legislation which allowed statistical 
agencies to share statistical data and information for 
statistical purposes. The administration had concerns with 
proposals to consolidate Federal statistical agencies, but 
supported the concept of creating a commission to study the 
idea. Subcommittee staff met with minority staff members as 
well as the administration to discuss these concerns. The bill 
introduced by Congressman Horn, H.R. 4620, the ``Statistical 
Consolidation Act of 1998,'' incorporated many of these 
suggestions.
    The remaining witnesses were generally supportive of 
consolidation of statistical agencies. Consolidation of 
statistical agencies would cut down on duplicative efforts to 
collect statistical information. This is significant since 
statistical agencies often rely on other agency efforts to 
compile statistical data. Centralization also makes it easier 
to develop uniform standards, definitions, classification and 
integrated time schedules. Furthermore, strengthening the 
Federal statistical system is needed because responses to 
requests for information to develop statistical data are down.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight of Statistical Proposals'' on July 29, 1997; and on 
March 26, 1998, the subcommittee held a legislative hearing on 
``The Statistical Consolidation Act of 1998, and S. 1404, the 
Federal Statistical System Act of 1997.''

19. Defense Surplus Equipment.

    a. Summary.--Treatment of Federal surplus personal property 
is governed by the Federal Property and Administrative Services 
Act of 1949 [FPA]. There are two categories of surplus 
property--excess and surplus. Excess property is property that 
has been declared unnecessary by the owning agency. Once 
property is declared excess, it is screened for further reuse. 
If another agency determines that it can use the property, it 
is reused. If it cannot be used or is not desired by another 
Federal agency, the property is declared surplus. Once it is 
declared surplus, the property can be donated for any number of 
public purposes, such as education or drug interdiction or to 
municipalities. The FPA authorized State Agencies for Surplus 
Property to receive equipment as an intermediary for ultimate 
use by State governments and other entities within a State. The 
State agencies are funded by charges on recipients of the 
donated property. Property not donated may be sold.
    The Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service [DRMS] was 
established in 1972 and is part of the Defense Logistics 
Agency. Its purposes are: (1) to receive personal property 
(everything except real estate, from battleships to paper 
clips) from defense units that no longer need the property; (2) 
to inspect personal property to verify the condition code 
reported by the reporting agency, to determine whether it needs 
to be demilitarized (i.e., the military capacity of the item 
destroyed), and to identify any property needing special 
handling, such as hazardous waste; (3) to transfer the 
property, at no cost, to other organizations that can use it; 
and, (4) to sell the remainder of the property unless it has no 
value or is still a military item. Items with no value can be 
scrapped and military items need to be demilitarized prior to 
disposal.
    The agency received $25 billion of property last year at 
its 148 facilities, and employs about 2,500 people. 
Approximately 50 percent of the property is unusable and must 
be demilitarized. About 60 facilities handle two-thirds of the 
volume. The amount of property declared surplus has increased 
due to base closure and the post-Cold war drawdown. Property 
sold in fiscal year 1996 by DRMS yielded 1.9 percent of the 
original acquisition cost.
    The subcommittee heard from Representative Nick Smith (R-
MI), Bob Lieberman, Assistant Inspector General for Auditing, 
Department of Defense, and David Warren, Director, Defense 
Management Issues, General Accounting Office. Noting that the 
headquarters of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service 
is located in the district of Representative Smith, he asserted 
that the donation program is inherently unfair, since many 
States have very small military organizations within them and 
therefore do not generate substantial volumes of surplus 
property. Mr. Lieberman described the complexities of balancing 
the need for maximizing disposal sales and ensuring that 
dangerous military equipment does not get into the hands of 
purchasers. The Inspector General has assigned a high priority 
to logistics issues, and this has led to close scrutiny of the 
Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service, and Mr. Lieberman 
points out that many problem areas remain. GAO officials 
described the disposal process which the Defense Reutilization 
and Marketing Service follows. This process is governed by laws 
and regulations that require the Department of Defense to make 
the best property available to other DOD agencies, other 
Federal agencies, and a host of other eligible donees who 
represent State agencies, prior to the sale. This resulted in 
low market returns.
    b. Benefits.--Between $20 and $30 billion in defense 
personal property is declared surplus each year. The use of 
this property by the subsequent owner should be a concern of 
all taxpayers, since the efficiency of the Defense 
Reutilization and Marketing Service can significantly affect 
the value of the property.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of Defense Surplus Equipment and 
the Activities of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing 
Service'' hearing was held on September 12, 1997.

20. U.S. Customs Service.

    a. Summary.--The First Congress passed and President George 
Washington signed the Tariff Act of July 4, 1789, which 
authorized the collection of duties on imported goods. It was 
called ``the second Declaration of Independence'' by the news 
media of that era. Four weeks later, on July 31, the fifth act 
of Congress established the Customs Service and its ports of 
entry. For nearly 125 years, the Customs Service funded 
virtually the entire Government, and paid for the Nation's 
early growth and infrastructure. The territories of Louisiana 
and Oregon, Florida and Alaska were purchased with Customs 
revenue. By 1835, Customs revenues alone had reduced the 
national debt to zero. The Customs Service currently collects 
about $20 billion for the Federal Treasury with 19,000 
employees.
    The agency was restructured in 1995 as a three-tiered 
organization modelled of people, processes, and partnerships, 
with the emphasis on service delivery at ports of entry. The 
Commissioner of Customs, by authority delegated by the 
Secretary of the Treasury, establishes policy and supervises 
all activities from the Service Headquarters in Washington, DC. 
The Customs Service ensures that all imports and exports comply 
with U.S. laws and regulations. The Service collects and 
protects the revenue, guards against smuggling, and is 
responsible for the following: (1) assessing and collecting 
Customs duties, excise taxes, fees and penalties due on 
imported merchandise; (2) interdicting and seizing contraband, 
including narcotics and illegal drugs; (3) processing persons, 
baggage, cargo and mail, and administering certain navigation 
laws; (4) detecting and apprehending persons engaged in 
fraudulent practices designed to circumvent Customs and related 
laws; (5) enforcing U.S. laws intended to prevent illegal trade 
practices, including provisions related to quotas and the 
marking of imported merchandise; the Anti-Dumping Act; (6) 
enforcing import and export restrictions and prohibitions, 
including the export of critical technology used to develop 
weapons of mass destruction, and money laundering; and (7) 
collecting accurate import and export data for compilation of 
international trade statistics.
    California has traditionally received fewer resources and 
personnel than ports of entry on the East Coast for the same 
workload. The North American Free Trade Agreement will bring 
increased trade with Mexico. The growing economies of the 
Pacific Rim will bring increased trade with Asia. This makes it 
more difficult to enforce trade laws and intercept illegal 
narcotics. When he testified before the subcommittee, Bob 
Trotter, Assistant Commissioner, Field Operations, U.S. Customs 
Services, Department of the Treasury, described the agency's 
strategic plan and its performance-based management 
initiatives. Mr. Trotter denied that there was a regional 
disparity in staffing at the Customs Service. John Heinrich, 
Director, Customs Management Center, U.S. Customs Services, 
Department of the Treasury, described the challenges to the 
trade services area from the growth in volume from the Asia-
Pacific region and Latin America. Mr. Heinrich described the 
opportunities of the past few years to increase staffing at 
airports due to the Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act 
fees. Ms. Judy Grimsman, president, Los Angeles Customs and 
Freight Brokers Association, described the need for additional 
resources in the southern California area and the changes 
wrought by NAFTA in terms of promoting automation in the trade 
servicing area. This automation has placed additional duties on 
importers, according to Ms. Grimsman, but the Customs Service 
has not completed the automation process. Ms. Grimsman asserted 
that the Service must complete the automated bonding and air 
manifest processes in order for such automation to be fully 
implemented.
    In April 1998, the General Accounting Office issued a 
report examining the allocation of inspectional personnel. In 
this report, GAO noted that: (1) Customs does not have an 
agencywide process for annually determining its need for 
inspectional personnel--such as inspectors and canine 
enforcement officers--for all of its cargo operations and for 
allocating these personnel to commercial ports of entry 
nationwide; (2) while Customs has moved in this direction by 
conducting three inspectional assessments, these assessments: 
(a) focused exclusively on the need for additional personnel to 
implement Operation Hard Line and similar initiatives; (b) were 
limited to land ports along the Southwest Border and certain 
sea and air ports considered to be at risk from drug smuggling; 
(c) were conducted each year using generally different 
assessment factors; and (d) were conducted with varying degrees 
of involvement by Customs headquarters and field units; (3) 
Customs conducted the three assessments in preparation for its 
fiscal year 1997, 1998, and 1999 budget request submissions; 
(4) for fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 1999, Customs 
officials stated that they used factors such as the number and 
location of drug seizures and the perceived threat of drug 
smuggling, including the use of rail cars to smuggle drugs; (5) 
focusing on only a single aspect of its operations; not 
consistently including the key field components in the 
personnel decisionmaking process; and using different 
assessment and allocation factors from year to year could 
prevent Customs from accurately estimating the need for 
inspectional personnel and then allocating them to ports; (6) 
the President's budgets did not request all of the additional 
inspectional personnel Customs' assessments indicated were 
needed; (7) the President's fiscal year 1997 budget ultimately 
requested 657 additional inspection and other personnel for 
Customs; (8) Customs and Department of the Treasury officials 
cited internal and external budget constraints, drug 
enforcement policy considerations, and legislative requirements 
as the primary factors affecting the number of additional 
personnel that Customs could ultimately request and the manner 
in which it could allocate or reallocate certain personnel; (9) 
further, for fiscal year 1998, the Office of National Drug 
Control Policy directed Customs to reallocate some of the 
additional 119 inspectors it requested and was appropriated 
funds for Southwest Border ports in accordance with the 
priorities in the National Drug Control Strategy; and (10) 
finally, Customs could not move certain existing positions to 
the Southwest Border because Congress had directed Customs to 
use them for specific purposes at specific ports.
    The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, ``The Customs 
Service: Allocation of Inspectional Personnel,'' on August 14, 
1998. At the hearing, the General Accounting Office reported on 
the allocation of inspectional personnel at Custom Service 
facilities at various locations around the country. GAO 
described how inspectional personnel are allocated, recent 
changes in allocations, and how workloads compare with the 
allocation of such personnel.
    These issues are particularly important because there has 
been a revolution in the past 50 years with respect to world 
trade. Any visit to the Ports of New York and New Jersey will 
show the importance of trade to the region. The massive growth 
of world trade has led to many high-paying export industries in 
the United States. Jobs in trade typically pay more than the 
average job. This huge volume of trade, however, has not been 
without its difficulties.
    For example, the trade in ``goods'' has also been 
accompanied by trade in illegal narcotics and herbs; pirated 
fakes of intellectual property, including video and music 
cassettes; and illegal weapons designed for use by 
international and domestic terrorists. The primary Federal 
agency with responsibility in these areas is the U.S. Customs 
Service. The Customs Service ensures that traded goods can be 
purchased by Americans, and attempts to minimize the illegal 
imports and exports that threaten our citizens in many ways. 
The Customs Service assesses the correct duties on trade, 
bringing in billions of dollars per year, enforces trade quotas 
for certain sensitive goods, and generally enforces U.S. trade 
laws.
    Each area of the country faces unique threats based upon 
its proximity to drug source countries and the nature and scope 
of the trade flows coming into the United States. The 
subcommittee examined the process by which the Custom Service 
allocates inspectional personnel, and how those allocations 
connect to workloads at the various air and seaports.
    b. Benefits.--Given the rapid changes inherent in a 
globalizing economy and the vital role of the Customs Service, 
it is crucial that this agency is well-managed. Close 
congressional scrutiny is necessary at this point to ensure 
that the agency is prepared to adjust to important economic and 
demographic changes.
    c. Hearings.--A field hearing was held in Long Beach, CA, 
entitled, ``Oversight of the Management Practices of the U.S. 
Customs Service,'' on October 16, 1997; and ``The Customs 
Service: Allocation of Inspectional Personnel,'' was held 
August 14, 1998 in New York City.

21. U.S. Forest Service.

    a. Summary.--In the last Congress, a pilot program was 
authorized for the Forest Service to allow visitors to pay a 
fee to use park amenities. This pilot is similar to the 
permanent authority which the National Perk Service possesses 
to charge fees for visits to National Parks. Previously, the 
Forest Service had argued that the large number of entry points 
to National Forests, in contrast to the more controlled 
National Parks, makes a program of fee collection 
administratively infeasible.
    The Forest Service was created in 1905 to manage public 
forests and rangelands. Recent legislation reflects the 
agency's renewed commitment to managing healthy ecosystems and 
creates more avenues for public participation in agency 
decisionmaking. Other legislation has strengthened the Forest 
Service's ability to provide technical, financial, and economic 
assistance to State and private land owners and other 
countries. The Subcommittee on Government Management, 
Information, and Technology has conducted three field hearings 
discussing topics such as the results of the Forest Service's 
Consolidated Financial Statement, the status of Forest Service 
timber sales, the Forest Service's custodianship of the 
Knutson-Vandenberg Fund (K-V Fund), and the implementation of 
the Recreation Fee demonstration project.
    Representative Charlie Bass, (R-NH), testified that it is 
important to take into account the views of the local citizens, 
review services provided within the National Forests by State 
governments, and ensure that payment-in-lieu of taxes [PILT] 
are fully funded. Since PILT funds services in which there is a 
large Federal presence, including roads and fire protection, it 
is a key funding priority for States with a large Federal 
presence. However, according to Mr. Bass, PILT has not been 
fully funded.
    Donna Hepp, Forest Supervisor, White Mountain National 
Forest, U.S. Forest Service, described her agency's 
implementation of the pilot fee program at the White Mountain 
National Forest, citizen comment and reactions to the fee. 
Generally, respondents to a poll support the notion of fees by 
a wide margin.
    The Government Management Reform Act of 1994 required the 
Forest Service to produce an audited financial statement. In 
past work, the General Accounting Office has noted that the 
Forest Service has taken some positive steps to address the 
accounting deficiencies cited in the IG's fiscal year 1995 
audit report, but that serious problems have been encountered 
in the initial implementation of a new financial accounting 
system. Financial management was a major focus of the 
subcommittee's field hearings in Bellflower, CA and Wenatchee, 
WA in July 1998. Linda Calbom and Jim Meissner of the General 
Accounting Office discussed the Forest Services significant 
financial management problems. The Inspector General of the 
Forest Service testified that the Forest Service's financial 
management is so disturbing that it is borderline whether the 
audit should be considered anti-deficient.
    In addition to the Forest Service's financial management, 
at the field hearings in Bellflower and Wenatchee, the 
subcommittee also discussed the status of the Forest Service's 
timber sales, as well as their disbursement and use of trust 
fund moneys, such as the Knutsen-Vandenberg Trust Fund (K-V 
Fund). The timber sales program, since it involves the sale of 
Federal property and the custodianship of funds paid to a 
Federal Agency, have a strong bearing on the financial audit. 
The subcommittee heard discussions, in particular, as to how 
accounting systems that do not accurately capture costs on the 
timber sales program could create problems when auditors seek 
to reconcile accounts and determine costs. While the missing or 
inaccurate data from timber sales can directly affect a 
financial audit, the Forest Service's disbursement of the 
Knutson-Vandenberg Fund moneys can also affect a financial 
audit. The discussions of the K-V Fund at each of these 
hearings revolved around whether the Forest Service can use the 
K-V Fund for overhead costs in the central office and for 
purposes unrelated to Wenatchee, WA. The Forest Service 
answered concerns that these funds might be administered 
improperly. Forest Service officials were present at each of 
these hearings to answer questions regarding the timber sales 
program and the K-V Fund, as was the General Accounting Office, 
who have done work in this area and was present for their added 
expertise.
    Many of the witnesses at the three field hearings, 
including the hearing on October 20, 1997 in Conway, NH, 
discussed the implementation of the Recreation Fee 
Demonstration Program to test the collection, retention, and 
reinvestment of new recreation admission and user fees. The 
Forest Service declared that this demonstration project tests 
the feasibility of user fees as a way of helping finance 
recreation programs on Federal lands. This procedure helps 
officials determine whether charging fees in this manner 
provides adequate funding for projects that do not produce 
enough revenue to help meet their recreation needs.
    On the contrary, many witnesses were represented at each of 
the field hearings in the areas of the Angeles National Forest 
in California, the White Mountains of New Hampshire, and the 
Wenatchee National Forest in the State of Washington to discuss 
the merits or demerits of the Recreation Fee Demonstration 
Program. Many contest Congress' legislation and the Forest 
Services implementation of the project, because they feel that 
these user fees are just another avenue for the government to 
get money other than taxes, merely a double tax.
    b. Benefits.--As Federal agencies move toward more funding 
through user fees, it is important to examine public 
accessibility, the use of proceeds, and accountability to 
taxpayers.
    Users of Federal forests have expressed mounting 
frustration with management at the Forest Service. Subcommittee 
actions served to review the management issues and respond to 
genuine concerns among those who value Federal forests. As a 
result of subcommittee actions, there is heightened awareness 
of these management issues both in Congress and at the Forest 
Service itself.
    c. Hearings.--A field hearing was held in Conway, NH, on 
``Management Practices of the U.S. Forest Service: Review of 
the User Pilot Program'' on October 20, 1997; and two 
additional field hearings on ``Management Practices at the 
United States Forest Service'' in Bellflower, CA and Wenatchee, 
WA on July 7 and 9, 1998.

22. Clinger-Cohen Act.

    a. Summary.--The Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 [CCA] is now 1 
year old and the subcommittee held the first congressional 
oversight hearing on its implementation. (CCA was originally 
passed as the Federal Acquisition Reform Act of 1996 and the 
Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996. These 
acts are Divisions D and E, respectively, of Public Law 104-
106.) The intention of CCA is to significantly improve the 
effectiveness and efficiency of Information Technology [IT] 
throughout the Federal Government. CCA has several major 
components: (1) procurement reform for IT hardware and software 
acquisition; (2) the requirement for a set of IT plans 
including a business-driven IT strategic plans and an IT 
Architecture; and (3) the establishment of the Chief 
Information Officer [CIO] as a statutory position throughout 
the Federal Departments and agencies.
    CCA procurement reform is moving forward and has been 
reflected in the Federal Acquisition Requirements that regulate 
all Federal purchases. Business-driven IT strategic plans and 
architecture have made little if any progress. The positions of 
CIO have in general been implemented, however, the quality of 
work produced by the various offices of CIO is inconsistent. 
This concern was the subject of a subcommittee hearing.
    Further, there is a particular class of IT projects with 
tremendous potential benefit to the Federal Government that are 
not being utilized, specifically, cross-cutting IT projects. An 
example cross-cutting IT project, the International Trade Data 
System [ITDS], was examined in this hearing. The ITDS project 
has the potential to deliver a $25 billion a year tax cut to 
American business involved in international import and export. 
ITDS would also result in cost savings of hundreds of millions 
of dollars per year for the Federal Departments and agencies. 
Plus, ITDS would improve the effectiveness of Federal agency 
regulatory enforcement in areas such as illegal immigration, 
unsafe imported foods, and drug trafficking.
    The Federal Government does not have a process whereby such 
cross-cutting IT projects can be identified, evaluated, funded, 
housed, supported, coordinated, and implemented. Every aspect 
is missing. Consequently, the likelihood of such projects being 
successful or even getting started is very low. The 
subcommittee made recommendations for improving cross-cutting 
IT projects based upon the experiences of the ITDS project.
    Mr. Gene Dodaro, Assistant Comptroller General, Accounting 
and Information Management Division of the General Accounting 
Office, testified about the current shortcomings in CIO 
positions and incumbents. He further testified to the 
difficulty of obtaining qualifications information about CIOs. 
This information has not been forthcoming from OMB. GAO 
recommended Congress, OMB, and the Federal agencies take action 
to rectify the situation because of the high leverage impact 
the CIOs could have upon the effectiveness and efficiency of IT 
throughout the Federal Government.
    The second panel of witnesses represented CIO success 
stories in selective Federal agencies. Mr. Alan P. Balutis, 
Deputy Chief Information Officer of the Department of Commerce, 
testified about a collection of 25 successful IT projects 
published by the CIO Council. These successful IT projects 
prove that it can be done. The next step is to understand why 
these projects were successful when so many others are not.
    Ms. Liza McClenaghan, Chief Information Officer for the 
Department of State, testified about the accomplishments of the 
CIO Council in setting training requirements and skill targets 
for IT professionals. This work has lead to improvements in 
training programs, classroom curriculum, and identification of 
automated training tools. The next step is to understand the 
component training plays in developing and retaining an IT 
workforce in face of increasing competition from the private 
sector for technically competent employees.
    Ms. Anne Reed, Chief Information Officer for the Department 
of Agriculture, testified about the IT architecture standards 
that are being established by the CIO Council. There is a long 
way to go, and nobody wants to create one governmentwide 
standard, but the start has been well made. The Clinger-Cohen 
Act requires each Federal agency to develop an IT architecture. 
The CIO Council is attempting to establish selective IT 
architecture components across multiple Federal agencies.
    The subcommittee also heard testimony on the International 
Trade Data System [ITDS], a cross-cutting IT project, that 
could save $25 billion a year of unnecessary paperwork expenses 
for American businesses. Mr. John P. Simpson, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary of Treasury for Regulatory, Tariff, and Trade 
Enforcement of the Department of the Treasury, testified about 
the national benefits that could accrue from this system. Mr. 
Michael D. Cronin, Assistant Commissioner of Inspection of the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service, testified about the 
increases in productivity and quality that Customs could 
achieve because of the ITDS project. Mr. Robert W. Ehinger, 
Director, ITDS Project Office of the Department of Treasury, 
testified about the difficulties of getting all relevant 
Federal agencies to participate in the ITDS project; the 
improved productivity in the 6 pilot sites already up and 
running; and planned subsequent steps.
    Subcommittee Chairman Horn summarized the lessons learned 
from the hearing and made recommendations for OMB and Federal 
agencies to improve IT effectiveness and efficiency for the 
benefit of Federal programs, their beneficiaries, and the 
American taxpayer.
    b. Benefits.--The Federal Government spends at least $26 
billion every year on information technology. This figure 
represents only the direct cost of IT. It does not count the 
millions of labor hours spent using IT systems. It does not 
consider the effects of these IT systems on Federal programs or 
the American citizens those programs serve.
    Private sector experience is that 24 percent of large IT 
projects are significantly over budget and behind schedule. 
Experience in the Federal sector is considerably worse--so bad, 
in fact, that no official figures have even been collected. 
Subcommittee Chairman Horn has repeatedly asked, ``Why do we 
cancel these projects at the $4 billion level instead of the 
$400 million or $40 million level. Why can't we cancel these 
failures at $4 million and save everybody not only billions of 
dollars but years of frustration and unfulfilled citizen 
needs?''
    The Chief Information Officers are now in place throughout 
the Federal agencies. By law they are required to report to the 
head of the agency, to be dedicated full-time to information 
technology, and to be qualified in terms of large organization 
and technical experience. Unfortunately, these requirements are 
not met by well over half of the current CIOs. The subcommittee 
is pressuring OMB and the Federal agencies to rectify this 
situation. The effectiveness of the CIOs can make a difference 
in the billions of dollars of IT expenditures, the success of 
hundreds of IT projects, and the efficiency improvements 
achieved by IT in agency programs and service delivery to the 
American taxpayers.
    The International Trade Data System [ITDS] was selected as 
an example cross-cutting IT project because it has the 
potential to save American business approximately $25 billion a 
year in unnecessary paperwork costs. This is the equivalent to 
a $25 billion a year tax cut or $125 billion over the typical 5 
year Federal budgetary planning horizon. The subcommittee made 
recommendations to Federal agencies in general and this project 
in particular. The subcommittee was at least partially 
influential in another congressional committee funding the ITDS 
project for the first time.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of the Implementation of the 
Clinger-Cohen Act'' was held on October 27, 1997.

23. Management Practices in State and Local Governments.

    a. Summary.--Governments of all sizes throughout the ages 
have been susceptible to waste, corruption, and inefficiency. 
The problem has seemed especially bad lately, probably more due 
to the contrast with our extraordinarily productive and 
efficient private sector than for any other reason. The 
challenge for the Subcommittee on Government Management is how 
to articulate the practices that make government work to its 
maximum potential.
    The Innovations in American Government Awards Program is 
funded by the Ford Foundation and administered by the Kennedy 
School of Government in partnership with the Council for 
Excellence in Government. It is designed to promote a national 
conversation about what works in Government. Each year the 
program receives applications from more than 1,500 Federal, 
State, and local government programs around the country. Of 
these, 25 programs are chosen as finalists and 10 of these are 
selected as winners by the National Committee on Innovations in 
American Government. The committee makes its selections on the 
basis of four criteria: (1) originality of approach; (2) 
effectiveness in addressing important public problems; (3) 
value to clients; and (4) potential replication in other 
jurisdictions. The National Committee is chaired by David 
Gergen, editor-at-large at U.S. News and World Report, and its 
members include former elected officials, private industry 
leaders, and journalists.
    Innovations awards finalists and winners each receive 
grants. The awards grant is intended to help successful 
programs disseminate information to the public as well as to 
other government agencies looking for ways to address similar 
problems or to make similar programs work better. The 1997 
Innovations winners were announced on October 8.
    b. Benefits.--The programs singled-out by the Innovations 
Program provide an excellent opportunity to consider what works 
in results-oriented management. The 105th Congress and 
especially the Government Reform and Oversight Committee have 
been working hard to oversee and encourage implementation of 
the Government Performance and Results Act. Another important 
element of government reform involves looking at successful 
programs, seeing what factors make them successful, and asking 
whether those factors can be applied elsewhere. Innovative and 
effective State and local government programs throughout the 
country can be seen as laboratories of good governance. The 
hearing will provide Congress with the occasion to learn from 
this array of experience.
    c. Hearings.--``Management Practices in State and Local 
Governments: Lessons for Federal Government'' was held on 
October 31, 1997. Witnesses included Susan Berresford, 
president, the Ford Foundation; David Gergen, chair, National 
Selection Committee, Innovations in American Government Awards 
Program; Alan Altshuler, director, Innovations in American 
Government Program, John F. Kennedy School of Government, 
Harvard University; Patricia McGinnis, president and chief 
executive officer, Council for Excellence in Government; Jeff 
Tryens, executive director, Oregon Progress Board; Paul Evans, 
commissioner, Boston Police Department; and Elijah West, Jr., 
Pathways to Teaching Scholar, College of Education, Armstrong 
Atlantic State University.

24. Federal Advisory Committee Act.

    a. Summary.--When it passed FACA in 1972, Congress was 
explicit in its intention that the law not apply to the 
National Academy of Sciences [NAS] and similar organizations, 
such as the National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA]. 
For the last 25 years, it has been the operating assumption of 
the Academies, Congress, and the executive branch that FACA did 
not apply to these organizations.
    The Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 governs the 
activities of advisory committees created by the Government to 
obtain expert views and advice and to solicit input from 
citizens on local issues. The act was designed to address two 
major concerns. One, advisory committees seemed to be 
disorganized, duplicative, and generally in need of oversight. 
Two, committee activities often took place without public 
participation, making it hard to know whether the committees 
were really acting in the public interest.
    The act addressed these concerns by requiring, among other 
things, open meetings, involvement by Government officials, 
balanced membership, and oversight located in the General 
Services Administration [GSA]. It also established termination 
dates for committees unless their charters are renewed.
    The Committee Management Secretariat at GSA prescribes 
administrative guidelines and management controls 
governmentwide; consults with agencies on the establishment of 
committees; and consults with agencies on comprehensive reviews 
of advisory committees.
    Specific requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
include: a determination of need by an agency before it creates 
a new advisory committee; a committee charter for each 
committee (written in consultation with GSA, noticed in the 
Federal Register, and filed with Congress, GSA, and the Library 
of Congress). In addition, the agency must make plans for 
fairly balanced membership, place notice of committee meetings 
in the Federal Register, set procedures for closing meetings, 
and provide for public access.
    The head of each agency that makes use of advisory 
committees must designate a committee management officer as 
well as a Federal officer to oversee each committee's 
activities. The agency head must also conduct an annual review 
of the need to continue existing committees, ensure that 
meetings are held at reasonable times and places, and review 
committee members' compliance with conflict-of-interest 
statutes.
    There are four types of Federal advisory committees: (1) 
those authorized (but not required) by statute; (2) those 
required by statute; (3) those created by Presidential 
directive; (4) those created by an agency under its own 
authority where the agency determines that a committee is 
needed to advance the public interest. Currently, 24 percent of 
advisory committees are authorized by statute; 44 percent are 
required by statute; 5 percent are created by Presidential 
directive; and 27 percent exist under agency authority.
    In a recent court case brought by the Animal Defense League 
Fund [ADLF], FACA was interpreted as applying to NAS and by 
logical extension to NAPA and perhaps to an unknown number of 
other groups like the American Bar Association that are 
utilized by the Federal Government. The ADLF and other 
interested parties sought more public participation in NAS 
committee processes.
    Both Houses of Congress were in favor of clarifying through 
legislation that FACA does not apply to the NAS. OMB Director 
Franklin Raines also expressed support for a legislative 
remedy. The primary litigants met with the House majority and 
minority staffs to identify committee process for NAS and NAPA 
that would provide more public participation without 
inappropriate requirements for a Federal Government committee 
as per FACA. NAS and NAPA agreed to modify their committee 
processes as follows:
          1. Post to the Internet for public comment the 
        committee members names, biographies, and brief 
        conflict of interest disclosures when nominated.
          2. Invite public attendance at all data gathering 
        committee meetings by posting notice to the Internet.
          3. Make public the names and biographies of reviewers 
        of draft committee reports by posting this information 
        to the Internet.
          4. Make available summaries of formal committee 
        meetings that are not open to the public.
    NAS and NAPA already made their final reports available to 
the public via the Internet and both will continue to do so. 
They simply anticipated adding the above to their same Internet 
web databases. The only remaining issue for resolution was the 
location of the above list and its exact wording.
    In February 1993, President Clinton issued Executive Order 
12838. This order directed agencies to reduce by at least one-
third the number of discretionary advisory committees (those 
created under agency authority or authorized by but not 
mandated by Congress) by the end of fiscal year 1993. Since 
that time, the number of advisory committees has dropped from 
1,305 to 963. Over the same period, however, the cost of these 
committees has increased by almost 50 percent in constant 
dollars. The Government spent $178 million on advisory 
committees last year.
    A hearing was held on November 5, 1997. A bill was drafted 
in consultation with a team of majority and minority staff from 
both the House and the Senate. The bill, H.R. 2977, was 
introduced by Mr. Horn on November 9 and passed the House under 
suspension of the rules on November 10 by voice vote. The bill 
was then considered by the Senate and passed without amendment 
by unanimous consent on November 13. The bill was signed into 
law on December 17, 1997, Public Law 105-153.
    In June, the General Accounting Office released a report 
entitled ``Federal Advisory Committee Act: General Services 
Administration's Oversight of Advisory Committees.'' GAO found 
GSA deficient in four main responsibilities: (1) GSA did not 
ensure that advisory committees were established with complete 
charters and justification letters; (2) advisory committees 
were not comprehensively reviewed annually; (3) annual reports 
were not submitted to the President in a timely manner; and (4) 
GSA did not ensure that follow-up reports to Congress on 
Presidential committee recommendations were prepared.
    GAO issued a second report that was based on a survey of 
both Federal officers involved in administering FACA and 
advisory committee members. The majority of advisory committee 
members stated that the committees were well balanced in 
membership, had access to all information that was needed for 
decisions, and were not asked by agency officials to make 
decisions based on inadequate or inaccurate data. Of the 19 
agencies surveyed, 10 stated that FACA requirements were more 
helpful than burdensome. Also, the agencies reported a total of 
26 advisory committees that should be terminated.
    The subcommittee held a hearing on the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act on July 14, 1998. Witnesses included L. Nye 
Stevens, Director, Federal Management and Workforce Issues, 
General Government Division, U.S. General Accounting Office; G. 
Martin Wagner, Associate Administrator for Governmentwide 
Policy, General Services Administration; Ruth L. Kirschstein, 
Deputy Director, National Institutes of Health; Jim Solit, 
Committee Management Officer, Department of Energy; John 
Applegate, professor, University of Indiana, and Chair, Fernald 
Citizens Advisory Board; Clarence J. (Terry) Davies, director, 
Center for Risk Management, Resources for the Future, 
accompanied by Thomas C. Beierle, research associate; and Dr. 
Bruce Alberts, president, National Academy of Sciences.
    b. Benefits.--The American people benefit from the 
expertise and experience of the committees created by the 
National Academy of Sciences. When confronted by an important 
problem with key scientific aspects, the Federal Government can 
commission a study by NAS. At any given point in time 
approximately 400 such studies may be simultaneously under way. 
These studies are commissioned by Federal Departments and 
agencies, Congress, State governments, international bodies, or 
private organizations. NAS then selects a committee of the most 
qualified scientists who work for free. These scientific 
committees are independent of the various parties that may have 
a vested interest in the outcome of their study, including the 
Federal Government.
    The expertise, experience and independence of the best 
scientists for each particular problem delivers high quality, 
objective findings and recommendations. This benefits the 
Federal agency that commissioned the NAS study and the American 
people, who are assured that the scientific aspects of the 
problem are studied free of political pressures. All NAS 
studies result in a report that is readily available to the 
public--either by writing NAS or from the Academy's Internet 
web site.
    The National Academy of Public Administration operates in a 
manner similar to NAS but specializes in matters of public 
administration rather than science. Again the best expertise 
and experience is brought to bear for a commissioned study of 
an important administrative problem. The benefits of NAPA 
accrue to the Federal agency requesting the study and the 
American people. Their reports are also publicly available by 
writing NAPA or from their Internet web site.
    The benefits of this particular amendment to FACA are 
twofold. First, the Federal Government and the American people 
will continue to benefit from the independent high-quality 
studies of NAS and NAPA without undue restrictions. Second, the 
processes used by NAS and NAPA will be more open to scrutiny by 
all interested parties. The American people can be assured that 
all NAS and NAPA studies will be conducted in a balanced and 
objective manner.
    Subcommittee actions raised awareness in Federal agencies 
that many are not making the best possible use of advisory 
committees. Furthermore, subcommittee oversight of the General 
Services Administration helped to improve administration of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on November 
5, 1997, entitled, ``Oversight of the Federal Debt Collection 
Practices,'' and ``Oversight of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act,'' July 14, 1998.

25. The Federal Election Commission

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee investigated management 
problems at the Federal Election Commission [FEC]. The FEC was 
established in 1975 as an independent regulatory agency with 
the mission of improving the public's confidence in the 
campaign finance system following the Watergate scandal. 
Congress created the FEC to administer and enforce the Federal 
Election Campaign Act [FECA]--the statute that governs the 
financing of Federal elections. Pursuant to the FECA, the FEC's 
primary objectives are to disclose campaign finance information 
to the public; enforce campaign finance laws; administer the 
public funding of Presidential elections; and to assist State 
and local governments on election administration.
    The FEC has exclusive civil jurisdiction to enforce 
campaign finance laws. Criminal violations of campaign finance 
laws are handled by the Department of Justice's Public 
Integrity Section. In 1993, to address the backlog of 
enforcement cases and to deal with the increasing complexity of 
campaign finance law, the FEC established an enforcement 
priority system. Under this system, the Office of General 
Counsel ranks cases based on a set of criteria which include 
the identity of the parties, the nature and complexity of the 
case, and the importance of the issues involved. Cases that do 
not meet the criteria are automatically dismissed. Cases that 
do meet the criteria and involve significant issues can also be 
dismissed if they linger in the system and become ``stale.''
    The FEC has been criticized for its record on enforcing 
campaign finance laws. Under the FEC's enforcement priority 
system, more than two-thirds of compliance cases are dismissed 
each year. The purpose of the enforcement priority system was 
to focus the FEC's enforcement resources on the more 
significant campaign finance issues. Many of these dismissed 
cases, however, involve significant campaign finance issues. 
The hearing addressed whether the enforcement priority system 
has been effective in enforcing the provisions of the FECA.
    The FEC also has the responsibility to disclose the sources 
and amounts of funds used to finance Federal elections. 
Disclosure helps citizens evaluate the candidates running for 
Federal office and enables them to monitor committee compliance 
with election law. The major concern with the FEC's Disclosure 
Division has been its reluctance to embrace modern technology 
to maximize efficiency and improve public disclosure. Over the 
years, Congress has allocated massive amounts of new funds for 
automation and computerization. Congress has earmarked funding 
for digital imaging, an automated case management system, and 
electronic filing. Unfortunately, the FEC has been slow to 
implement these initiatives.
    On March 5, 1998, the subcommittee held an oversight 
hearing on the management practices of the FEC. The 
subcommittee was particularly interested in learning how well 
the FEC is carrying out its disclosure and enforcement 
responsibilities. Representative Rick White (R-WA) offered 
suggestions on how to improve the public disclosure of campaign 
finance activity by increased utilization of modern technology. 
He discussed the merits of a bill he introduced requiring the 
FEC to develop a searchable web-site where anyone with access 
to the Internet could conduct a search of campaign finance 
activity. The bill would also require campaigns raising over 
$25,000 to file reports electronically.
    The subcommittee also heard from former FEC officials, 
election law attorneys, and individuals from non-profit 
organizations. These witnesses testified that automation of the 
disclosure process would enhance the accuracy of reporting. 
Political action committee and campaign reports filed with the 
FEC should be cross-referenced to check for accuracy. For 
example, if a candidate returns an unsolicited check from a 
political action committee [PAC], the information needs to 
appear in the political action committee report as well as 
candidate report at the FEC.
    Kent Cooper, executive director of the Center for 
Responsive Politics testified that improved disclosure is vital 
because campaign finance activity moves very quickly and 
enforcement actions, when undertaken, are completed well after 
an election is over. Mr. Cooper called for the FEC to do a 
better job at promoting electronic filing of campaign reports 
and encouraging the timely notification by political action 
committees and other contributors if they get a check returned.
    FEC Staff Director John Surina testified that two things 
could be done to improve the accuracy of information on 
candidate reports and PAC reports. The first would be to 
harmonize the reporting frequency so PACs and candidate 
committees are reporting on the same timeframe. Second, 
electronic filing would cut down on the lag time in data 
capture and would improve efficiency. The FEC currently is 
considering a rule which would amend the disclosure forms to 
separate PAC contributions from other candidate committee 
contributions.
    FEC Chairman Joan Aikens testified that in fiscal year 
1998, the FEC received an appropriation of $31,650,000, with 
$3.8 million earmarked for computerization, and $750,000 
earmarked to be transferred to the General Accounting Office 
for an independent audit of the agency. Chairman Aikens 
acknowledged that there is room for improvement in the 
enforcement division of the Office of General Counsel. General 
Counsel Lawrence Noble defended the FEC's enforcement record 
and testified that enforcement problems are primarily due to a 
lack of resources.
    Chairman Dan Burton (R-IN) submitted a line of questions on 
an enforcement case against Howard Glicken (a prominent fund-
raiser for the Democratic party and a close friend of Vice 
President Gore) that was dismissed by the FEC. General Counsel 
Noble testified that the case against Mr. Glicken was dismissed 
because the 5 year statute of limitations was due to expire; 
the evidence against Mr. Glicken was not solid; and according 
to Mr. Noble, ``given Mr. Glicken's high profile as a prominent 
Democratic fund-raiser, including his potential fund-raising 
involvement in support of Gore's expected Presidential 
campaign, it is unclear Mr. Glicken would settle the matter 
short of litigation.''
    The events surrounding the Glicken case became the subject 
of a Government Reform and Oversight Committee hearing in March 
1998, as part of the committee's campaign finance 
investigation. In July 1998, Mr. Glicken, a Miami businessman 
and prominent Democratic fund-raiser and friend of Vice 
President Gore, pled guilty to two criminal violations of the 
Federal Election Campaign Act for soliciting foreign money for 
Democratic campaigns.
    b. Benefits.--The FEC was established in 1975 to restore 
faith in the integrity of the Nation's political process. 
Despite these ambitious origins, the FEC has not been at center 
stage in the increasingly intense debate over campaign finance 
reform. Oversight is necessary to make the FEC more effective. 
The subcommittee's activity in this area promoted a better FEC 
and therefore a better political process. For example, 
comprehensive and accurate disclosure is essential to the 
democratic process. In order to make an informed decision about 
which candidate to support, voters need and are entitled to all 
available information relating to campaign finance activity. 
Further, they need this information before the election. That 
makes speedy disclosure essential. The subcommittee's efforts 
encouraged more effective disclosure.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of the Federal Election 
Commission'' was held on March 5, 1998. Witnesses included 
Representative Rick White (R-WA); Kent Cooper, executive 
director, Center for Responsive Politics; Frank Reiche, former 
FEC Commissioner; Robert Dahl, director, Fair Government 
Foundation; Danielle Brian, executive director, Project On 
Government Oversight; Becky Cain, president, League of Women 
Voters; Joan Aikens, FEC Chairman; John Surina, FEC Staff 
Director; Lawrence Noble, FEC General Counsel; and Lynn 
McFarland, FEC Inspector General.

26. Office of Workers' Compensation

    a. Summary.--The Office of Workers' Compensation Programs 
[OWCP] at the Department of Labor is responsible for processing 
injured employee compensation claims for most Federal workers. 
The subcommittee investigated the management of OWCP, including 
whether the Federal Employees' Compensation Act [FECA] is being 
administered in a fair, timely, and efficient manner.
    The subcommittee held a field hearing that addressed the 
management practices at the Office of Workers' Compensation 
Programs and its administration of the Federal Employees' 
Compensation Act. The hearing focused on the timely 
adjudication of a Federal injured worker's claim and the 
process of a fair and just appeal. The hearing took place on 
July 6, 1998 in Long Beach, CA. Joseph Perez and William Usher, 
hearing representatives from the Office of Workers' 
Compensation Programs, presented testimony on the first panel. 
These two witnesses expressed their frustrations and criticism 
for the way in which the Department of Labor administers its 
Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, the slowness of the 
adjudication process, as well as existing waste, fraud, and 
abuse within the agency. The second panel consisted of injured 
Federal workers from the U.S. Postal Service and the Navy. 
Witnesses described their personal strifes with the Department 
of Labor, in particular the Office of Workers' Compensation 
Programs. The third panel consisted of officials from the 
Department of Labor that gave a status update on any 
questionable management practices at the Office of Workers' 
Compensation Programs. Michael Kerr, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs testified 
on the third panel. The hearing was conducted to determine 
whether injured Federal employees received timely and equitable 
adjudication of their compensation claims and to determine 
methods to improve the compensation system.
    b. Benefits.--Subcommittee action responded to widespread 
concerns among injured Federal workers about management at 
OWCP.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of the Management Practices at 
the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs,'' held in Long 
Beach, CA, on July 6, 1998.

27. H.R. 1966, the Special Government Employee Act of 1997

    a. Summary.--The continuing spate of allegations about 
mismanagement at the White House have been frequent reminders 
of the need for serious, statutory changes in the way the White 
House is run. H.R. 1966, the ``Special Government Employee Act 
of 1997,'' updates the definition of a ``special Government 
employee'' to cover unpaid, informal advisors. Foremost is the 
need for accountability and adherence to conflict-of-interest 
and other disclosure requirements. This includes a functional 
test that focuses on what the advisors actually do and on 
whether they are involved in the Government's deliberative 
processes.
    The White House has a history of using informal associates 
and advisers who are present in the White House on an ongoing 
basis and regularly affect public policy, yet who are utterly 
unaccountable to the public. Americans have a right to know who 
is influencing policy decisions in the White House.
    b. Benefits.--Subcommittee action responded to the need for 
increased accountability of informal White House advisors and 
called for a full disclosure of Special Government Employee 
activities.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Presidential and 
Executive Office Financial Accountability Act of 1997 and 
Special Government Employee Act of 1997,'' was held on May 1, 
1997. Representative John L. Mica (R-FL), who is a strong 
supporter of accountability in the Federal Government, 
explained why the bill is sorely needed. Gregory S. Walden, 
counsel, Mayer Brown & Platt, and former Assistant Counsel in 
the White House, and Stephen Potts, Director, Office of 
Government Ethics, also testified on the ``Special Government 
Employee Act of 1997.''

                    Subcommittee on Human Resources

1. Food and Drug Administration [FDA] Steps Against the Health Threat 
        Posed by ``Mad Cow Disease'' and Other Transmissible Spongiform 
        Encephalopathies [TSEs].

    a. Summary.--The Human Resources Subcommittee reviewed the 
timing and effectiveness of the FDA proposal to prohibit the 
use of certain rendered animal parts in feeds for other 
ruminant animals as a means of protecting the U.S. food supply 
from TSE-infection. It also examined current blood safety and 
risk assessment standards designed to guard against the 
transmission of TSEs through blood and blood products.
    The subcommittee considered FDA, USDA, CDC, and NIH efforts 
to understand and prevent the spread of TSEs; the monitoring of 
agricultural health situations of U.S. trade partners; the lack 
of any known U.S. TSE that is transmissible to humans; and the 
differences between animal-to-animal transmission of bovine 
spongi-form encephalopathy [BSE], or ``Mad Cow Disease,'' and 
human-to-human transmission of Creutzfeldt-Jacob Disease [CJD], 
a variant form of the human TSE. Members also discussed the 
risk analysis as the vehicle for establishing a rational policy 
for dealing with a little understood disease, as well as the 
methodology used by the agencies in revealing blood 
contamination.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation informed Members and the 
public about the nature and scope of the threat TSE poses to 
the Nation's food supply and blood and animal products. It also 
exposed the challenges presented by the need to develop an 
appropriate response to a public health threat where there is 
little conclusive evidence but theoretical risks of serious or 
even calamitous spread of infection.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Potential Transmission 
of Spongiform Encephalopathies to Humans: The Food and Drug 
Administration's [FDA] Ruminant to Ruminant Feed Ban and the 
Safety of Other Products'' was held on January 29, 1997. 
Testimony was received from the FDA, the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's [USDA] Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 
the National Institutes of Health [NIH], the University of 
Southern Alabama School of Medicine, and the Virginia-Maryland 
College of Veterinary Medicine.

2. The Need for Better Focus in the Rural Health Clinic Program.

    a. Summary.--The Human Resources Subcommittee looked into 
the administration of, and allocation of resources in, the 
Nation's rural health clinic [RHC] program, with special 
emphasis on the General Accounting Office [GAO] report 
entitled, ``Rural Health Clinics: Rising Program Expenditures 
Not Focused on Improving Care in Isolated Areas'' and the 
Office of Inspector General [OIG] of the Department of Health 
and Human Services [HHS] report entitled, ``Rural Health 
Clinics: Growth, Access, and Payment.''
    The subcommittee focused on Medicare and Medicaid 
reimbursement policies for RHCs, administered by the HHS Health 
Care Finance Administration [HCFA], and program eligibility 
criteria. It also addressed how rural health care access can be 
measured more accurately and more often, and how to extend the 
reach of Medicare and Medicaid into isolated rural areas more 
efficiently and effectively.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee inquiry exposed the RHC 
program's lack of focus on those people who have difficulty 
obtaining primary care. It also highlighted a growing consensus 
that HCFA ought to revise its Medicare payment policy to hold 
all RHCs to payment limits, or caps, and generated a dialog 
about other tools that would help set the RHC program back on 
track.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``The Need for Better 
Focus in the Rural Health Clinic Program'' was held on February 
13, 1997. Witnesses included representatives from GAO, the IG 
for HHS, HCFA, the HHS Health Resources and Services 
Administration [HRSA], the National Association of Rural Health 
Clinics and the National Rural Health Association. A hearing 
entitled, ``The Need for Better Focus in the Rural Health 
Clinic Program--Part II'' was held on September 11, 1997. 
Testimony was received from private physicians and 
representatives from GAO and HRSA.

3. Cabinet Department and Agency Oversight.

    a. Summary.--The Human Resources Subcommittee, which has 
oversight jurisdiction over those departments and agencies of 
Government managing human service programs, conducted an 
oversight investigation examining the most pressing management 
and programmatic problems facing those departments and agencies 
in the 105th Congress. It also explored the extent to which 
they are able to comply with the requirements of the Government 
Performance and Results Act [GPRA]. Over the course of its 
investigation, the subcommittee reviewed budget data, Inspector 
General [IG] reports and audits, and General Accounting Office 
[GAO] studies and recommendations. The undertaking culminated 
in oversight hearings with the Secretaries of the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development [HUD] and the Department of 
Labor, as well as representatives of the five Cabinet and 
National Labor Relations Board [NLRB] IG offices, and the GAO.
    The HUD inquiry focused on the problems and challenges that 
led the $40 billion department to be rendered a ``high-risk'' 
agency by the GAO--namely weak internal controls, inadequate 
information and financial management systems, and an 
ineffective organizational structure. In addition, the 
subcommittee addressed IG Susan Gaffney's concern that HUD has 
yet to resolve three major issues: the mismatch of HUD's 
numerous programs and diminishing staff and work capacity; the 
inability of certain offices to oversee the most efficient use 
of taxpayer funds; and the incompatibility of its ``place-
based'' program delivery goals and its program-based 
organizational structure. In response to the subcommittee's 
probe for answers, Secretary Cuomo pointed to downsizing and 
streamlining of the Department and implementation of management 
and legislative reforms as possible solutions.
    The subcommittee's investigation into the Department of 
Labor began with an examination of the Secretary's plans for 
reform of the $38 billion Department, including investment in 
learning and skill development, the movement of people from 
welfare to work, pension protection and the initiation of 
greater pension portability, improved enforcement, and an 
appreciation of family needs. The subcommittee also considered 
the GAO's suggestion that the Department improve management and 
develop new regulatory strategies that are less burdensome and 
more effective than the ones that are currently in place, as 
well as IG Charles Masten's insistence that it improve the 
effectiveness of DOL's employment and training system, 
safeguard pension assets, implement significant new statutory 
mandates, and ensure the integrity of the unemployment 
insurance [UI] system. Masten also cited opportunities for 
savings in the Department's foreign labor programs.
    The oversight inquiry into the Department of Health and 
Human Services [HHS] focused on the IG's concern about three 
program areas in Medicare found to be particularly susceptible 
to waste, fraud and abuse: home health, hospice and durable 
medical equipment. The subcommittee also considered program-
wide issues raised by the GAO such as the need to improve 
accountability, coordination and oversight, generate timely and 
reliable information, identify and correct program 
vulnerabilities, and integrate its information management needs 
as part of its overall process of developing a strategic plan 
in compliance with the GPRA.
    The inquiry into the Department of Veterans Affairs 
generated positive messages about the Department's willingness 
and ability to streamline its focus to reduce the vulnerability 
to waste, fraud and abuse, as well as its attempts to comply 
with the GPRA. However, the subcommittee did find problems in 
its outdated health care system, large backlog in claims and 
appeals, and workman's compensation program.
    In carrying out its oversight responsibility for the 
Department of Education, the subcommittee looked into how well 
the Department satisfied its mission, worked with State and 
local educators, and managed its budget. The subcommittee found 
the areas needing the greatest improvement to be student 
financial aid programs at ``high risk'' of waste, fraud, and 
abuse, persistent data system problems, an inability to curtail 
fraud in grant applications, and a failure to meet the 
performance measure criteria for the GPRA.
    The oversight investigation into the NLRB focused on recent 
efforts to improve the resolution of labor-management disputes, 
the size of the case backlog, the speed of case processing, the 
number of case settlements, and the effectiveness of compliance 
enforcement. It also looked at why the agency has difficulty 
fulfilling the requirements of the GPRA.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's review of Department and 
agency problems and weaknesses provided valuable information 
regarding where and how the Government might reign in the 
capacity for waste, fraud, and abuse. In so doing, the hearings 
gave Members a valuable overview and insight into how to best 
focus their energies as an oversight body and helped lay the 
groundwork for future reform and savings.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a series of oversight 
hearings covering each of the five Cabinet agencies under its 
jurisdiction. ``Oversight of the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development [HUD]: Mission, Management, and Performance'' 
was held on February 27. ``Agency Oversight--the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Labor: 
Mission, Management, and Performance'' was held on March 6, 
1997. ``Agency Oversight--the Department of Health and Human 
Services and the Department of Veterans Affairs: Mission, 
Management, and Performance'' was held on March 18, 1997. 
``Oversight of the Department of Education: Mission, Management 
and Performance'' was held on March 20, 1997. ``Department of 
Labor: Mission, Management and Performance'' was held on June 
10, 1997. ``Oversight of the National Labor Relations Board: 
Mission, Management and Performance'' was held on July 24, 
1997.

4. Oversight of the Department of Health and Human Services' Healthy 
        Start Program.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee conducted an investigation 
into the Healthy Start Program, a 5-year demonstration 
initiative designed to fight infant mortality. The purpose was 
to explore the extent to which the initiative accomplished its 
mission, HHS's management of the program, and the lessons 
learned.
    Healthy Start began in 1991 with the goal of reducing 
infant deaths by 50 percent in selected communities with infant 
mortality rates above the national average, and emphasized 
innovative approaches to health and other support services to 
combat the problem. The inquiry was intended to draw 
conclusions about the program's strengths and weaknesses in the 
wake of the President's proposal to expand the program to 30 
more sites.
    b. Benefits.--The inquiry generated valuable information 
regarding the potential impact of Healthy Start's community-
driven strategies on the leading causes of infant mortality, 
low birth weight, birth defects, and sudden infant death 
syndrome, as well as how to measure the program's effectiveness 
given the absence of long-term data. The information will prove 
useful to lawmakers, health care professionals, and other 
interested parties as they begin to debate the wisdom of 
expanding this and other related programs.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Healthy Start: Implementation Lessons and Impact on Infant 
Mortality'' on March 13, 1997. Testimony was received from 
representatives from HHS' Health Resources and Services 
Administration [HRSA], the Agency for Health Care Policy and 
Research, the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention, as well as community project 
directors from the District of Columbia, Baltimore, Cleveland, 
and the Mississippi Delta.

5. Nursing Home Fraud.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee reviewed reports of waste, 
fraud, and abuse in the nursing home industry in hopes of 
determining how to improve nursing home regulation for maximum 
taxpayer benefit. During the course of its investigation, the 
subcommittee considered the extent of waste, fraud, and abuse, 
the impact on State Medicaid programs, the effectiveness of 
Medicaid Fraud Control Units [MFCUs] and private industry 
programs in detecting and preventing waste, fraud, and abuse, 
the complexity of reimbursement policies, and options for 
coordinating care for beneficiaries eligible for both Medicaid 
and Medicare.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation culminated in two hearings 
which demonstrated the need for greater vigilance over nursing 
home practices and improved enforcement of waste and fraud 
control programs. The undertaking also made complex 
reimbursement and ``pay and chase'' processes, as well as other 
practices that enable over billing and improper claims to slip 
by current control measures, easier to understand and control.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``The Extent, Causes, and 
Effects of Fraud and Abuse in Nursing Homes'' was held on April 
16, 1997. Testimony was received from the Medicaid director for 
operations for the State of Connecticut, the vice president of 
the National Association of Medicaid Fraud Control Units 
[NAMFCU] and the director of Maryland MFCU, the assistant 
attorney general and director of AHCCS Fraud Unit in Arizona 
MFCU, the HHS Deputy Inspector General for Evaluations and 
Inspection, the GAO Associate Director of Health Financing and 
Systems Issues, the executive vice president of the American 
Health Care Association, and the vice president for Public 
Policy for the American Association of Homes and Services for 
the Aging. A hearing entitled, ``Health Care Fraud in Nursing 
Homes--Part II'' was held on July 10, 1997. Testimony was 
received from the Health Care Financing Administration, the 
California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform, the American 
Association of Retired Persons, and the National Long Term Care 
Ombusdman.

6. Fixing the Consumer Price Index [CPI].

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee examined proposals by the 
Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS] to 
improve the accuracy and maintain the integrity of the CPI. As 
the Government and private sector's tool for measuring 
inflation, the CPI is used in the calculation of cost of living 
adjustments [COLAs] for major Federal entitlement programs and 
private pension benefits, giving it the power to wield enormous 
consequences for the economy at large. The subcommittee focused 
its investigation on conflicting views regarding the degree of 
bias in the current CPI, difficulties in quantifying the impact 
of new products and quality improvements on the economy, as 
well as the BLS' ability to create and implement an impartial, 
effective, and timely process to make the changes.
    b. Benefits.--The inquiry taught Members and other 
interested parties about the nature, extent, and source of the 
problems and challenges faced by the BLS as it begins the 
process of adjusting the CPI. The investigation and subsequent 
hearing also shed light on the degree to which the BLS is 
capable of resolving these issues, and whether any immediate 
adjustments can be made pending long-term legislative changes.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Bureau of Labor 
Statistics Oversight: Fixing the Consumer Price Index'' was 
held on April 30, 1997. Testimony was received from the 
Department of Labor's Commissioner of Labor Statistics and 
private economists.

7. Bio-Ethics and Informed Consent.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee reviewed the Federal 
Government's approach to biomedical ethics issues in research 
involving human subjects and the adequacy of informed consent. 
The subcommittee considered the emerging parameters of informed 
consent in view of recent scientific advances in areas such as 
cloning and gene therapies and increased research budgets, with 
particular attention to vulnerable patient populations 
including children, mentally ill and drug addicted individuals, 
as well as current procedures used to address bioethics 
questions and disputes.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation revealed deficiencies in 
the evaluations and oversight needed to maintain a rigorous 
bioethical review system, institutional barriers and logistical 
obstacles in the policing of thousands of research projects, 
and a false sense of security that difficult issues are being 
confronted. The ensuing hearing then sharpened questions 
regarding the mechanism used to address these ethical issues, 
and provided information that will prove valuable in future 
reform efforts.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Oversight of the NIH 
and FDA: Bio-Ethics and the Adequacy of Informed Consent'' was 
held on May 8, 1997. Testimony was received from 
representatives of the Department of Health and Human Services, 
the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the 
National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, and scholars from the 
University of Pennsylvania, the University of California-San 
Francisco, and the University of Arizona.

8. Analysis of the Medicare Transaction System [MTS].

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee, working in conjunction with 
the Government Management, Information, and Technology 
Subcommittee, reviewed problems associated with the Health Care 
Financing Administration's [HCFA] multi-million dollar 
development of MTS. The investigation looked at a cost-benefit 
analysis of MTS, projected overall costs of design and 
implementation of the system, and the adequacy of HCFA's 
management and oversight of the project. Other issues addressed 
were HCFA's management of Medicare's nine claims processing 
systems that are being used while MTS is being developed, and 
the agency's preparations for ``the millennium problem'' when 
computers may not recognize dates after the year 2000.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation revealed the nature and 
extent of critical managerial and technical weaknesses that 
continue to delay and undermine the MTS effort, the process 
through which HCFA is reassessing the MTS project, and 
prospects for its completion by the year 2000. This information 
will prove useful to those engaged in efforts to contain HCFA's 
spiraling costs.
    c. Hearings.--A joint hearing with the Government 
Management, Information, and Technology Subcommittee entitled, 
``Status of the Medicare Transaction System'' was held on May 
16, 1997. Testimony was received from the Director of 
Information Resources at the General Accounting Office, the 
Administrator of the Health Care Financing Administration, the 
vice president and general manager of the Information Systems 
Division at GTE, and the vice president of Intermetrics Systems 
Services Corp.

9. Food and Drug Administration's [FDA] Enforcement of Blood Safety 
        Regulations.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee examined the effectiveness of 
the FDA's enforcement practices in ensuring the safety of the 
blood supply. Members considered the adequacy of the FDA's 
inspection and enforcement practices for the blood and plasma 
industries, the response to accident and error reports, the 
effectiveness of the Blood Products Advisory Committee [BPAC] 
and the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy [TSE] Advisory 
Committee, and the agency's recall and notification practices. 
The subcommittee also reviewed the current regulatory approach 
to the risks associated with pooled plasma products, with 
particular attention to the relationship between the size of 
the plasma pool and the risk of infectious disease 
transmission.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation demonstrated the need for 
continued systemic improvements in the inspection of blood 
facilities and in the methods used to notify practitioners and 
patients of potentially unsafe products. It also helped 
elucidate Members and others as to the risks associated with 
the possible transmission of Creutzfeldt-Jacob Disease [CJD] 
through blood transfusion and the effectiveness of surveillance 
efforts to detect the presence of CJD in the blood supply.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``FDA Regulation of Blood 
Safety: Notification, Recall and Enforcement Practices'' was 
held on June 5, 1997. Testimony was received from 
representatives of the General Accounting Office, the Office of 
Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human 
Services, and the Food and Drug Administration. A hearing 
entitled, ``Food and Drug Administration [FDA] Oversight: Blood 
Safety and the Implications of Pool Sizes in the Manufacture of 
Plasma Derivatives'' was held on July 31, 1997. Testimony was 
received from representatives of the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the 
Food and Drug Administration, the National Hemophilia 
Foundation, the Immune Deficiency Foundation, the American Red 
Cross, and all the major plasma fractionators.

10. Reducing Education Mandates.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee looked at the regulatory 
burdens and mandates on schools that may detract from 
educators' mission of teaching children. The investigation 
explored how education could be deregulated to achieve maximum 
flexibility in using Federal education dollars to improve 
teaching and learning. The inquiry explored the scope and 
effects of existing Federal mandates, potentially conflicting 
Federal, State, and local government mandates, current options 
for mandate relief, and alternative models of regulatory 
flexibility.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation revealed how mandates 
affect educators and how their requirements and restrictions 
might be eased or facilitated. It also brought to light the 
need for schools and school districts to have greater access to 
technical assistance to make educators aware of existing 
flexibility provisions. Finally, it demonstrated a tendency of 
mandates to have a disproportionate impact on disadvantaged 
urban districts that find it hard to raise money through 
increased property taxes, and suggested ways in which this 
inconsistency might be resolved.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Reducing Regulatory 
Mandates on Education'' was held on June 12, 1997. Testimony 
was received from Representatives Rob Portman (R-OH), Kay 
Granger (R-TX), and Gary Condit (D-CA), and representatives 
from the National School Boards Association, the American 
Association of School Administrators, the Association of School 
Business Administrators, the Texas Association of School 
Boards, and the National Education Association.

11. Restructuring the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] Medical 
        Services.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee explored the impact of VA 
health services restructuring and resource allocation on the 
quality of care at VA facilities, with particular attention to 
hospitals in Castle Point and Montrose, NY. The subcommittee 
considered how the VA measures the quality of health care 
provided to veterans, the impact of budget cuts imposed under 
the Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation [VERA] system, as 
well as how the VA plans to assure the consistent quality of 
medical care in the new ``integrated'' structure.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation demonstrated the existence 
of financial incentives for Senior Executive civil servants 
awarded according to their progress in meeting VA goals, 
including the achievement of Veterans Integrated Service 
Network [VISN] savings. It also gave the subcommittee and 
general public the opportunity to review the extent to which VA 
reform measures were examined prior to their implementation, 
the degree to which they have helped or hurt veterans, and the 
way in which they are viewed by the men and women they are 
supposed to aid.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Restructuring VA 
Medical Services: Measuring and Maintaining the Quality of 
Care'' was held on August 4, 1997, at the Wallkill Community 
Center in Middletown, NY. Testimony was received from 
representatives of VISN 3, the VA Office of Performance 
Management, the New York State Division of Veterans Affairs, 
the Orange County Veterans Service Agency, the Rockland County 
Veterans Service Agency, the Sullivan County Veterans Service 
Agency, the Dutchess County Veterans Service Organization, and 
a large number of public witnesses.

12. Pfiesteria and Public Health.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee reviewed State and Federal 
public health responses to outbreaks of Pfiesteria piscicida, 
the alleged source of fish kills and human illness in Maryland, 
North Carolina and other areas, to determine Federal and State 
governments' ability to respond to new public health threats 
presented by emerging infectious agents and toxins.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation and ensuing hearings 
suggested ways to improve the sensitivity and effectiveness of 
State and national programs, policies, and practices designed 
to prevent and reduce the Pfiesteria threat. It also revealed 
unprecedented ways in which leaders in Government, science, 
medicine, agriculture might work together to design and 
implement a more unified response.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Pfiesteria and Food 
Safety: the State Response'' was held on September 25, 1997. 
Testimony was received from the Governor of Maryland and 
representatives from North Carolina State University and the 
University of Maryland School of Medicine, the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services for the State of North Carolina, the 
Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources for the State of 
North Carolina, the commissioner of the Department of Health 
for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and author Rodney Barker. A 
hearing entitled, ``Pfiesteria and Food Safety: the Federal 
Response'' was also held on September 25, 1997. Testimony was 
received from representatives from the Department of Commerce, 
the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug 
Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
and the Environmental Protection Agency.

13. Job Corps.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee examined Job Corps' success 
in training people for employment, including the degree to 
which the program ensures client commitment, removes barriers 
to employment, improves employability skills, and links skill 
training to the local job market. The investigation drew 
heavily from the results of a General Accounting Office [GAO] 
examination of the Department of Labor's management of Job 
Corps recruitment and placement contractors in terms of how 
they demand and measure success in client commitment and long 
term job potential.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation unearthed a need for Job 
Corps to generate more data in order to maintain a stronger 
focus on performance and accountability, with hearing witnesses 
providing suggestions as to how this might be achieved. 
According to GAO and the Department of Labor Inspector General, 
high program drop-out rates may indicate contractors need to 
revise Job Corps admissions standards, while poor job placement 
prevents the Government from determining the program's 
benefits.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Job Corps Oversight: 
Recruitment and Placement Standards'' was held on October 23, 
1997. Testimony was received from representatives from GAO, the 
Office of Inspector General for the Department of Labor, Job 
Corps, the Clearfield Job Corps Center, the Hubert H. Humphrey 
Job Corps Center, the David L. Carrasco Job Corps Center, as 
well as a Job Corps graduate.

14. Privatization of Child Support Enforcement Services.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee looked at the benefits, 
challenges, and future course of State and local efforts to 
privatize social service programs, with special emphasis on 
child support enforcement. The investigation considered 
testimony and data from various sources, including a report by 
the General Accounting Office [GAO] on the benefits, problems, 
performance, and cost effectiveness of efforts to privatize 
child support enforcement services [CSE].
    The subcommittee also reviewed H.R. 399, the ``Subsidy 
Termination for Overdue Payments [STOP] Act'' introduced by 
Congressman Michael Bilirakis (R-FL). The legislation would 
require parents to pay child support obligations or face loss 
of Federal financial assistance, with a ``good cause'' 
exception to avoid penalizing parents in situations where they 
are unable to satisfy their child support obligation due to 
factors beyond their control.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation injected the debate over 
the CSE privatization efforts of State and local governments 
with a historical perspective, as well as an understanding of 
the key issues surrounding State and local privatized services, 
with particular attention to implications for Federal policy. 
The inquiry also yielded an appreciation of the negative 
effects that the absence of robust competition, lack of 
experience specifying contract results, or failure to monitor 
performance can have on privatization benefits and program 
quality.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Social Services 
Privatization: the Benefits and Challenges to Child Support 
Enforcement Programs'' was held on November 4, 1997. Testimony 
was received from Congressman Michael Bilirakis (R-FL) and 
representatives from the GAO, Policy Studies Inc., Lockheed 
Martin IMS, Maximus Inc., G.C. Services, the Ventura County 
District Attorney's Office, and the Association for Children 
for Enforcement of Support.

15. Department of Labor Enforcement of the Employee Retirement Income 
        Security Act [ERISA] and the Limited Scope Audit Exemption.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee investigation highlighted a 
loophole in the pension security system. The limited scope 
audit exemption puts assets held by banks and other regulated 
entities beyond the direct view of plan auditors, based on the 
assumption that those funds are already sufficiently protected. 
Since sound accounting standards no longer acknowledge the 
validity of limited audit opinions, the limited scope audit 
exemption effectively puts all such a plan's assets outside the 
protection of an unqualified opinion.
    b. Benefits.--The limited scope audit exemption shields 
from full view $939 billion in pension assets held for more 
than 29 million beneficiaries. The average cost increase of 
requiring full scope audits to protect these assets is 
estimated to be less than $4 per participant.
    c. Hearings.--``Pension Security: Department of Labor [DOL] 
Enforcement of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 
[ERISA] and the Limited Scope Audit Exemption,'' February 12, 
1998.

16. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for 
        Children and Families, ``Early Head Start: Linking Early 
        Childhood Programs to Success.''

    a. Summary.--The Department of Health and Human Services 
[HHS] has begun to award grants and expand the Head Start 
program to include child care services for infants and 
toddlers. This new program is called Early Head Start [EHS]. 
Early Head Start has very limited program data to measure 
results and effectiveness. Currently, HHS is conducting an 
evaluation of the program which has slipped 2 years behind the 
expected completion date in 2000.
    The Early Head Start program seeks to change the course of 
children's lives. As physical science now supports, well 
designed programs can enhance the physical, emotional and 
cognitive development of at-risk children. As one witness 
stated, ``Public hope and confidence in the promise of such 
programs is a scarce commodity that we dare not squander on 
approaches that are not likely to succeed. I believe that it 
makes sense to begin with programs that have been tested, 
replicated and found to work.''
    Early Head Start grantees are concerned Early Head Start 
will become a separate program drying up funds meant for the 
older program. They base their concern on the proposal that 5 
percent of Head Start funds are automatically earmarked for 
Early Head Start programs. In addition, they have raised the 
issue that HHS is not doing enough to link EHS and Head Start 
to ensure a seamless transition from Early Head Start, through 
Head Start, and into the classroom. They point to the fact that 
non-Head Start programs (e.g. Parent and Child Centers) 
received Early Head Start grants over existing Head Start 
programs. HHS defends this by pointing out the EHS grants are 
awarded on a competitive basis.
    b. Benefits.--To ensure cost effective, reliable, quality 
child care.
    c. Hearings.--``Early Head Start: Goals and Challenges'' 
and ``Early Childhood Interventions: Public-Private 
Partnerships,'' February 19, 1998 and July 16, 1998.

17. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Fixing the 
        Consumer Price Index.''

    a. Summary.--The Consumer Price Index [CPI] is one of the 
most important and widely used economic indices produced by the 
U.S. Government. The rendering of so prominent a measure must 
be based on sound principles and current data, and should be 
immune to external and internal political manipulation.
    In view of recent estimates of CPI upward bias of more than 
1 percent, and subsequent calls for one-time or permanent CPI 
adjustments, the Subcommittee on Human Resources conducted an 
oversight inquiry to determine the degree to which the BLS is 
implementing an impartial, on-going and effective process to 
enhance CPI methodology and data.
    b. Benefits.--To maintain the integrity and improve the 
accuracy of the CPI.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics: Fixing the Consumer Price Index'' and ``Bureau of 
Labor Statistics Oversight: Fixing the Consumer Price Index 
(Part II),'' April 30, 1997 and April 29, 1998.

18. AIDS: Availability, Cost and Access to Long-Term Treatment Options.

    a. Summary.--The range of emerging HIV-AIDS therapies and 
treatments were investigated and reviewed as were recent 
Federally funded research initiatives. Reports from the Centers 
for Disease Control were reviewed which highlight recent 
findings that the rate of death from HIV-AIDS has decreased, 
particularly in certain population groups. The investigation 
explored policy implications of new treatments and therapies 
now available which improve and prolong the lives of HIV-AIDS 
infected persons. A review of literature was conducted on how 
local providers and advocates are working to ensure the new 
treatments are equally available to hard-to-reach and emerging 
populations due to the high costs and complications of 
treatment associated with possible homelessness, mental illness 
or substance abuse. There is increasing concern by certain 
advocates that the high cost of the current triple drug regime 
results in the disproportionate unavailability of the treatment 
in the low-income, minority populations.
    b. Benefits.--The hearing discussion raised awareness of 
the difficulty of certain AIDS-infected populations accessing 
current successful treatments which permit people to live 
longer and improve their quality of life. The mix of State, 
city and local witnesses facilitated an informative discussion, 
resulting in improved coordination among policymakers, funding 
sources, care providers, and HIV-AIDS advocates. The hearing 
highlighted the fact that allocation of resources to assist 
with the high cost treatments needs to be better coordinated to 
ensure equity in distribution. Hearing follow-up with care 
providers and advocacy groups contributed to an improved dialog 
among the range of providers and advocates.
    c. Hearings.--``AIDS: Toward Long-Term Treatment Options,'' 
February 20, 1998.

19. Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses: The Research Agenda.

    a. Summary.--In 1998, the subcommittee continued its 
oversight investigations and hearings, which began in March 
1996, on the diagnosis, treatment and compensation of sick 
veterans who served in the Persian Gulf war. The focus of this 
particular investigation was the Federal Government's approach 
to research into the health concerns of veterans, with 
particular emphasis on the research strategy, objectives and 
agenda of the Persian Gulf Veterans Coordinating Board [PGVCB]. 
Since the 1991 Gulf war, the government has sponsored a variety 
of research projects on Gulf veterans' illnesses. The PGVCB, 
composed of representatives from the VA, DOD and HHS, has 
responsibility for coordinating and managing research into Gulf 
war illnesses. Questions have been raised by medical experts 
whether the government's research program--including its 
emphasis on epidemiological studies and de-emphasis of studies 
on the health effects of low-level chemical exposures--is 
likely to produce valid case definitions of veterans' 
illnesses.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee investigation identified 
major flaws in the government's approach to research on Gulf 
war veterans' illnesses. The vast majority of Federal research 
was initiated during or after 1994, and few studies have been 
completed. Some studies are behind schedule, and many will not 
be completed until after the year 2000. A majority of the 
studies fall into two areas: neurological and psychological 
with a focus on stress and post-traumatic-stress-disorder; and 
epidemiologic studies on veterans' symptoms and diagnosable 
diseases, and possible causes. Conclusions reached on Federal 
research include: it lacks a coherent approach; formidable 
methodological problems are likely to prevent researchers from 
providing precise, accurate and conclusive answers regarding 
the causes of veterans' illnesses; and neither the VA nor DOD 
has systematically attempted to determine whether ill Gulf 
veterans are any better or worse today than when they were 
first examined.
    c. Hearings.--``Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses: The Research 
Agenda,'' February 24, 1998.

20. Department of Health and Human Services, ``Oversight of the 
        National Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.''

    a. Summary.--Since the enactment of the National Organ 
Transplant Act of 1984 [NOTA], American medicine has been a 
world leader in organ transplantation. In 1996, some 20,000 
Americans, about 55 a day, had transplants. Demand for organs 
exceeds supply. About 4,000 people die in the United States 
while waiting for a donated kidney, liver, heart, lung or other 
organ. This March, approximately 54,500 people were on the 
transplant waiting list and the list grows by about 500 per 
month. According to HHS, the system for allocating scarce 
organs is weighted to local organ allocation, instead of 
broader regional or national allocation related to medical 
need.
    HHS proposed new regulation ``to improve the nation's organ 
transplantation system, to assure that allocation of scarce 
organs will be based on common medical criteria, not accidents 
of geography.'' The new rule, according to HHS, calls on the 
Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network to develop 
revised organ allocation policies that will reduce the current 
geographic disparities in the amount of time patients wait for 
an organ. Many nonprofit organizations responsible for the 
coordination, collection and distribution of organs have 
reacted negatively to HHS's call for a new regulation.
    b. Benefits.--To ensure fair distribution of scarce human 
organs to all Americans in every region of the country.
    c. Hearings.--``Oversight of the National Organ Procurement 
and Transplantation Network,'' April 8, 1998.

21. The Complexity of the Medicare Program: The Evolution of the 
        Program, the Effects of Complexity, and Impact on Waste, Fraud 
        and Abuse.

    a. Summary.--After nine hearings on various aspects of 
waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare and Medicaid programs 
over the past 4 years, the subcommittee looked at program 
complexity as a possible element contributing to waste, fraud 
and abuse. The investigation documented the problems associated 
with program complexity which is an unintentional outgrowth of 
program expansion, benefit enhancement, financing changes, 
modifications in reimbursement and program alterations as a 
result of medical speciality interests. The review focused on 
Medicare and followed the evolution of the program from its 
inception in 1965, through several program expansions, benefit 
enhancements, and overall growth both in terms of eligible 
population and program costs. The review examined the impact of 
complex Medicare billing and coding requirements on the 
practice of medicine, including how health care anti-fraud 
programs distinguish between inadvertent errors and intentional 
billing irregularities. The investigation looked at whether 
there are opportunities to simplify the current coding and 
billing process.
    b. Benefits.--To determine the source of the complexity and 
explore what opportunities exist to simplify the program, 
improve provider program knowledge and enhance overall 
management by HCFA.
    c. Hearings.--``Medicare: Cures for Billing Code 
Complexity,'' April 9, 1998.

22. Department of Health and Human Services, ``Public Health 2000: 
        Immune Globulin Shortages--Causes and Cures.''

    a. Summary.--Tens of thousands of Americans, many of them 
children, suffer from immune system deficiencies and must use 
Intravenous Immune Globulin [IVIG], a blood-based medicine. 
Critical and unexpected shortages of IVIG products are putting 
their lives at serious risk. Manufacturers seem unable, or 
unwilling to meet the growing demand. The FDA does not know why 
there are shortages. Suspected causes of shortages include: 
growth in product demand, product hoarding, recalls of products 
at risk of transmitting disease, and FDA enforcement actions.
    b. Benefits.--to identify solutions to the public health 
crisis of IVIG shortages and ascertain specific actions and 
implementation time lines for regulatory agencies and 
manufacturers.
    c. Hearings.--``Public Health 2000: Immune Globulin 
Shortages--Causes and Cures,'' May 7, 1998.

23. Vulnerabilities in the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
        [HUD]'s Procurement and Contracting Practices.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee investigation examined 
reports by the Office of Inspector General [OIG] and the U.S. 
General Accounting Office [GAO] which concluded HUD's 
procurement and contracting practices leave HUD vulnerable to 
waste, fraud, and abuse. Implementation of the HUD 2020 
Management Reform Plan is expected to increase the need for 
contracted work, making this investigation particularly timely. 
The subcommittee also examined the Department's commitment to 
systemic procurement and contracting reforms, as well as the 
potential of planned reforms to correct Department 
deficiencies.
    b. Benefits.--HUD awarded 9,600 contracts worth over $3.2 
billion between 1992 and 1996. In a targeted audit of 63 
contracts worth $1.5 billion, the OIG found a variety of 
problems including: need determination, planning, and periodic 
assessments; cost consciousness; contract oversight and 
monitoring; contracting for prohibited services; contract 
close-out procedures; and interagency agreements. While HUD was 
initially resistant to the OIG's conclusions and 
recommendations for change, the Department has since recanted 
its denials and has endorsed nearly all of the OIG's 
recommended reforms.
    c. Hearings.--``HUD Contracting: Vulnerabilities and 
Proposed Solutions,'' June 5, 1998.

24. National Institutes of Health, ``Institutional Review Boards: A 
        System in Jeopardy.''

    a. Summary.--There are 3,000-5,000 Institutional Review 
Boards [IRBs] in the United States overseeing both public and 
private research activities. IRBs, the cornerstone of the 
entire bioethics review structure to protect the interests of 
patients, review too much, too quickly and with too little 
expertise.
    The HHS Inspector General's report, ``Institutional Review 
Boards: A System in Jeopardy,'' concluded that Institutional 
Review Boards [IRBs] limited oversight of research on human 
subjects compromises the protection of study participants.
    b. Benefits.--To ensure adequate oversight of human 
subjects in research studies.
    c. Hearings.--``Institutional Review Boards: A System in 
Jeopardy,'' June 11, 1998.

25. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, ``Job 
        Corps: An Examination of the Program and Operational 
        Components.''

    a. Summary.--The Job Corps is one of the few remaining 
fully Federal training programs serving 69,000 disadvantaged 
youths annually at a cost of about $1.3 billion. The 
subcommittee investigated the Job Corps' vocational training 
component to determine if the vocational training provided is 
appropriate to meet the demands of local labor markets. In 
addition, the subcommittee investigated whether Job Corps 
participants are completing their vocational training and 
obtaining jobs related to the training received.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation documents the need for 
better criteria to determine vocational training completers, 
accurate reporting of job training and placement information, 
and the need for Labor to justify the use of sole source 
contracts for vocational training services.
    c. Hearings.--``Job Corps Oversight: Recruitment and 
Placement Standards'' and ``Job Corps Oversight Part II: 
Vocational Training Standards,'' October 23, 1997 and July 29, 
1998.

26. Food and Drug Administration ``Blood Safety: Minimizing Plasma 
        Product Risks.''

    a. Summary.--An estimated 500,000 people in the United 
States receive products manufactured from human plasma each 
year. Plasma products have infected recipients with diseases 
such as Hepatitis C virus and Human Immunodeficiency Virus 
[HIV]. In the 1980's, before HIV transmission was understood, 
63 percent of the Nation's hemophiliacs became infected with 
HIV. Some safety concerns remain due to the fact that more than 
50 percent of U.S. based manufacturers are under court order to 
abide by Good Manufacturing Practices [GMPs]. GAO conducted a 
study at the request of the subcommittee chairman to evaluate 
the safety of plasma based products. GAO concluded that known 
risks of plasma products are low if good manufacturing 
practices are followed.
    b. Benefits.--To ensure that the FDA is enforcing current 
Good Manufacturing Practices to assure the safety and 
availability of blood and plasma products.
    c. Hearings.--``Blood Safety: Minimizing Plasma Product 
Risks,'' September 9, 1998.

27. Restructuring the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] Medical 
        Services

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee continued to explore the 
impact of VA health services restructuring and resource 
allocation on the quality of care at VA facilities, with 
particular attention to the Togus [Maine] VA Medical Center and 
the VA Connecticut Healthcare System. The subcommittee 
considered how the VA measures the quality of health care 
provided to veterans, the impact of budget cuts imposed under 
the Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation [VERA] system, as 
well as how the VA plans to assure the consistent quality of 
medical care in the new ``integrated'' structure.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation examined progress in 
meeting VA goals, including the achievement of Veterans 
Integrated Service Network [VISN] cost savings, especially 
VISN-1 which includes the New England states. It also gave the 
subcommittee and general public the opportunity to review the 
extent to which VA reform measures were examined by all 
stakeholders prior to their implementation, the degree to which 
they have helped or hurt veterans, and the way in which they 
are viewed by the men and women they are supposed to aid.
    c. Hearings.--``Restructuring VA Medical Services: 
Measuring and Maintaining Quality of Care,'' September 25, 
1998.

28. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 
        ``Employment and Training in the Welfare-to-Work Environment.''

    a. Summary.--The purpose of the investigation is to 
determine the way in which some States' employment and training 
programs are meeting the needs of their Temporary Assistance to 
Needy Families [TANF] clients within the new welfare-to-work 
environment. In addition, the investigation seeks to determine 
how State and local welfare agencies are preparing clients for 
employment.
    b. Benefits.--To determine what successful models or 
approaches State and localities are using to help their welfare 
clients get and keep jobs.

29. Department of Education, ``An Examination of Federal Regulations 
        and School Districts.''

    a. Summary.--The purpose of the investigation is to 
determine the major Federal regulations that apply to school 
districts and how the public might benefit from these 
regulations. In addition, the subcommittee is examining the 
flexibility provisions available for those regulations 
perceived by school district officials as being especially 
burdensome.
    b. Benefits.--To determine what flexibility provisions are 
successful to provide relief from Federal regulations to local 
school districts.

    Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and 
                           Regulatory Affairs

1. Investigation of the White House Database.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee has been investigating and 
continues to investigate the misuse of the White House Database 
[WhoDB] for unauthorized purposes. This investigation has been 
a part of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight's 
investigation of campaign fundraising abuses. This 
investigation was first referred to the subcommittee by 
Chairman William F. Clinger, Jr., in the 104th Congress.
    This referral was reaffirmed at the beginning of the 105th 
Congress by Chairman Dan Burton and ratified in writing on July 
17, 1997.
    b. Benefits.--The misuse of the WhoDB implicates the Anti-
Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1301(a), which prohibits the use of 
funds authorized by Congress for unauthorized purposes and 18 
U.S.C. 641 which imposes criminal sanctions for the use of 
Government property for nongovernmental purposes.
    According to documents produced to the subcommittee by the 
White House, creation of the WhoDB involved approximately $1.7 
million of taxpayer funds. The subcommittee is investigating 
whether the White House converted this government asset to 
assist the private political purposes of the President and the 
Democratic National Committee. The subcommittee has received 
more than 35,000 pages of documents and spoken to more than 20 
witnesses. The subcommittee expects to continue its 
investigation during the second session of the 105th Congress. 
The documents produced to the subcommittee and the testimony of 
the witnesses continue to suggest that the WhoDB was misused 
for unauthorized purposes.

2. Investigation of the Misuse of Statistics by the Department of 
        Energy.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee has initiated an inquiry into 
the use of statistics by the Department of Energy to 
misrepresent its activity in making grants to disadvantaged 
business enterprises.
    b. Benefits.--Such misrepresentations undermine the 
credibility of the Department and reflect a political agenda 
that may be inconsistent with the program requirements. The 
subcommittee expects to investigate the matter further during 
the second session of the 105th Congress.

3. Investigation of OIRA'S Review of NAAQS Rules.

    a. Summary.--EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
[NAAQS] for particulate matter and ozone were considered a 
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 
and were reviewed by the Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs [OIRA] of the Office of Management and Budget [OMB]. 
OIRA approved the rules as complying with the requirements of 
the order. The NAAQS rulemaking was one of the most significant 
regulatory actions of this year, expected to impose costs of 
over $9 billion per year on the regulated public for partial 
attainment. Because of the major impact of these rules, the 
subcommittee has carefully investigated OIRA's involvement in 
the rulemaking to determine the extent to which OIRA performed 
its regulatory review obligations under President Clinton's 
Executive Order 12866 and ensured that the proposed rules 
complied with all applicable statutes and Executive orders.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation has thus far exposed 
serious deficiencies in OIRA's conduct of regulatory review 
pursuant to Executive orders and procedural statutes. As a 
result, the subcommittee better understands specific areas in 
which the regulatory review process needs further oversight and 
reform. OIRA has repeatedly failed to cooperate fully with 
congressional oversight efforts.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on ``EPA's 
Particulate Matter and Ozone Rulemaking: Is EPA Above the 
Law?'' on April 16 and 23, 1997.

4. Securities and Exchange Commission.

    a. Summary.--From March 1996 through April 1997, the 
Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, 
and Regulatory Affairs reviewed the official travel policies 
and procedures of the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]. 
Based upon its investigation, the subcommittee recommended that 
the SEC begin following the internal guidelines set out by the 
SEC Comptroller, particularly those in a July 9, 1993, memo on 
first-class travel, which states that employees should not fly 
first class even at their own expense.
    The subcommittee recommended and the SEC implemented the 
following reforms:
         Strictly construe the FTR's requirements for 
        approvals of upgrades for travel or lodging 
        accommodations, and require explicit justifications for 
        such upgrades consistent with FTR requirements.
         Do not construe the FTR to permit travel 
        upgrades to business class for the reason that official 
        business needs to be conducted in flight, even if the 
        official work is confidential in nature.
         Continue to caution SEC travelers to be 
        circumspect about doing work on confidential or 
        sensitive matters while traveling to protect against 
        inadvertent or premature disclosure of confidential or 
        sensitive information. (The subcommittee has concluded 
        that neither business- nor first-class travel 
        significantly enhances the opportunity to maintain 
        confidentiality of agency documents or records.\13\ )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ The subcommittee does not believe that the exceptional 
security circumstances cited in the FTR include maintaining 
confidentiality of agency records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Include the specific FTR justification for any 
        travel upgrade in a written approval memorandum, which 
        must be submitted to the SEC's Comptroller's Office 
        with the travel voucher before any reimbursement for 
        upgrade expenses is approved. Consistent with current 
        practice, that memorandum should be retained with the 
        agency's official records relating to the trip.
         If a traveler receives an upgrade for lodging, 
        and he or she stays at a hotel with a rate in excess of 
        the maximum approved rate for subsistence expenses 
        (currently up to 150 percent of the standard per diem 
        allowance) (the maximum per diem allowance), determine, 
        on a case-by-case basis, whether the appropriate 
        reimbursement is the standard per diem allowance or the 
        maximum per diem allowance.
    Factors to be considered include, but are not limited to, 
the following:
          1) net savings to the Government due to the proximity 
        of the chosen hotel to the location of work which would 
        lessen related transportation costs to be paid by the 
        Government;
          2) reasonable personal safety concerns, particularly 
        relative to persons traveling alone; and
          3) attendance at conferences or meetings which take 
        place at hotels with rates above the maximum per diem 
        allowance.
    Increasing the lodging allowance up to the maximum per diem 
allowance for a particular locality should be considered 
exceptional--travelers are expected to attempt to find 
reasonable accommodations within the per diem allowance set by 
GSA. The traveler bears the burden of persuasion to satisfy the 
SEC's Office of the Comptroller that the traveler should 
receive more than the standard per diem allowance. The 
subcommittee is of the view that justifying a rate above the 
standard per diem allowance on the basis of attending 
conferences or meetings at hotels with rates above the maximum 
per diem allowance is appropriate only if the traveler stays on 
site, at a less expensive hotel in close proximity to the 
conference or meeting site, or if no other hotel is reasonably 
available.
         Consult with the Inspector General to 
        implement a periodic audit by the Inspector General's 
        office of agency travel vouchers, including those in 
        which upgrades have been approved, to determine 
        compliance with the FTR and agency policies.
         Require all SEC travelers to attach used 
        airline ticket stubs, demonstrating the class of 
        accommodations used by the traveler, to their travel 
        vouchers.
         Review and approve requests for travel 
        upgrades on a uniform basis.
    b. Benefits.--The SEC has agreed to implement all of the 
subcommittee's recommended reforms. Many of these 
recommendations are not reforms; rather, they require 
enforcement of internal agency travel policies and Federal 
travel regulations already on the books. In adopting these 
recommendations, the SEC has come into compliance with the 
regulations which govern all Federal employees' travel.
    The SEC's Inspector General is making quarterly reports to 
the subcommittee on compliance with the travel reforms. Reports 
were submitted in October 1997 and January 1998, showing full 
compliance. The subcommittee hopes that the SEC will begin to 
serve as an example of an agency that fully complies with its 
internal travel policies and the Federal travel regulations, 
with the benefit being, the protection of taxpayer dollars.
    c. Hearings.--None.

5. Oversight of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Programs.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee conducted oversight into the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's (the Corps) wetlands program. The 
subcommittee held an oversight hearing on this issue in 
Marietta, GA, on June 16, 1997. The hearing, ``Wetlands: 
Community and Individual Rights vs. Unchecked Government 
Power,'' examined particular difficulties that local citizens 
and the county government had in obtaining permits from the 
Corps to develop their property.
    First, the hearing covered the issue of the Corps' denial 
of a permit for Cobb County to build the West Cobb Loop, a 
much-needed roadway to ease traffic congestion in the area. The 
Corps denied the permit because it favored an alternate route 
which would not impact any wetlands, but would affect more than 
700 homes, 2 churches and a school in the West Sandtown 
community, and force residents in 39 homes to completely 
relocate.
    Second, the hearing examined the problems Robert Dabbs, a 
small, local developer of subdivisions, experienced in 
obtaining a permit from the Corps. The Corps put a Cease and 
Desist Order on his entire development project, although he 
only affected 0.63 of an acre of wetlands in the 111-acre 
residential development. Mr. Dabbs cooperated with the Corps' 
every request, spending thousands of dollars to comply, but the 
Corps did not have time to look at his paperwork. At the time 
of the hearing, Mr. Dabbs was on the brink of financial ruin 
due to the Corps' delay. One of his partners had already folded 
and 165 construction workers' jobs had been eliminated.
    Third, the hearing examined the situation of Grady Brown, 
an elderly cattle rancher and businessman. The Corps stopped 
him from using part of his own land because the Georgia 
Department of Transportation [DOT] inadvertently flooded it 10 
years previously, creating a wetland. The DOT recognized their 
error and drained the property, but when the Corps found out, 
they ordered the DOT to undo their work and reflood the land. 
The Corps left Mr. Brown with a lot of useless swamp land and 
no recourse but to go through a long and likely futile 
permitting process or to engage in a costly, protracted legal 
battle.

Background: Federal Wetlands Regulations

    The key program under which wetlands are regulated by the 
Federal Government is found in Section 404 of the Clean Water 
Act [CWA], which was established in 1972. Under Section 404, 
landowners and developers must get permits from the Corps 
before conducting any work which results in the disposal of 
dredged or fill materials into the waters of the United States, 
including wetlands. The Section 404 program is jointly 
administered by the Corps and the Environmental Protection 
Agency [EPA]. Section 404 authorizes States to take over the 
administration of permits, but the process to do so is very 
complex and only two States have assumed this responsibility--
Michigan and New Jersey.
    The Corps issues general permits for activities that will 
only have a minor impact on wetlands and individual permits for 
more extensive activities. General permits, which are issued 
for 5-year periods, allow activities in their scope to go 
forward without individual review, reducing paperwork and 
delay. Over 80 percent of the approximately 50,000 activities 
permitted by the Corps each year are covered by general 
permits.
    In December 1996, the Corps reissued its 37 nationwide 
permits [NWPs], as its general permits are known, and added 2 
new ones. The Corps made a few significant revisions to the 
NWPs. Most importantly, it is phasing out the Nationwide 26 
permit which authorizes discharges into isolated waters (not 
connected or adjacent to surface waters) and headwaters 
(minimal flow waters) affecting up to 10 acres. The Corps has 
reauthorized NWP 26 for 2 years. After 2 years, NWP 26 will be 
eliminated entirely and replaced by new, activity-specific 
permits. While NWP 26 remains in existence, it has been reduced 
to cover only those activities affecting up to 3 acres. A 
preconstruction notification is now required for any activity 
affecting more than one third of an acre, reduced from 1 acre. 
Landowners and developers have voiced great concern that the 
Corps will not be able to replace NWP 26 sufficiently and that 
the increased workload of granting individual permits for all 
the activities that were formerly covered by NWP 26 will result 
in long, costly delays. Over 20,000 activities occur under NWP 
26 every year.
    The subcommittee examined a study recently released by the 
Competitive Enterprise Institute [CEI], which concluded that 
wetlands restoration has exploded in the last decade resulting 
in ``no net loss'' of wetlands. In fact, the study reported, 
there has been a net gain in wetlands. The U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's Natural Resource and Conservation Service has 
conducted a survey of wetlands across the Nation as part of its 
most recent National Resources Inventory [NRI]. The NRI showed 
a trend of wetland losses that indicates about 141,000 acres of 
wetlands were lost in 1995. In the same year, three non-
regulatory wetland restoration programs of the USDA restored at 
least 187,000 acres of wetlands. These programs are the 
Partners For Wildlife Program, the North American Waterfowl 
Management Plan, and the Wetland Reserve Program. Wetland 
restoration is defined as ``the re-establishment of wetland 
hydrology and wetland vegetation to lands which had previously 
been drained, typically for agricultural purposes.'' 
Restoration is distinct from creation of a new wetland where 
none existed previously or enhancement of an existing wetland 
to improve its functioning.
    b. Benefits.--As a result of the subcommittee's oversight 
hearing, the Corps agreed to readdress the West Cobb Loop and 
Robert Dabbs' permit issues, as well as drainage of the wetland 
on Grady Brown's property.
    At the hearing, Cobb County Department of Transportation 
Director Jim Croy testified on behalf of Cobb County on the 
West Cobb Loop issue. The Commission's application for a permit 
to build the road was rejected by the Corps because the chosen 
route would impact 11 acres of wetlands--not the ``least 
environmentally damaging alternative.'' The Commission and 
local citizens chose the route that would impact some wetlands 
because it would have the smallest impact on the residents of 
the area. They also offered to mitigate the impact by creating 
eight times as many wetlands and building bridges where 
possible to span the wetlands, making the project more 
expensive. The route the Corps preferred would widen an 
existing road through a residential neighborhood, affecting 
700+ homes, 1 school and 2 churches, and forcing the complete 
relocation of 39 homes. This route would not touch any 
wetlands. The route the county chose would only force the 
relocation of three homes. The citizens of Cobb County feel 
strongly that there is a need for this road to ease the traffic 
on smaller roads. They are paying for the road directly from 
their own tax dollars--no Federal funds--through a 1 percent 
tax they voted to impose on themselves for road improvement 
projects.
    Two citizens testified about the impact the road would have 
on their community if the Corps' preferred route was chosen. 
Chris McLean and David Parr addressed issues of community 
safety and well-being. There is a school on the road the Corps 
wanted to widen. Children walk to school along that road every 
day. The road connects several housing subdivisions. The rate 
of accidents in this residential area would greatly increase if 
the road was widened from two to five lanes and the speed 
increased.
    Col. Grant M. Smith, District Commander of the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers Savannah District, testified on behalf the 
Corps. He made the decision to reject the county's application 
for a permit to build the West Cobb Loop. At the hearing, Col. 
Smith agreed to work with the county on its re-proposal of a 
route for the West Cobb Loop. To date, Cobb County has 
submitted a new application for a permit to build on a route 
similar to the one in its first proposal. Currently, the 
application is in a joint comment period. According to Cobb 
County officials, it is likely that the application will be 
approved and a permit will be granted to begin construction in 
March or April 1998.
    In the case of a permit for Robert Dabbs' housing 
subdivision, Col. Smith testified that he was not aware of the 
costly delays caused by the Corps, and he apologized for them. 
He announced that the Corps had scheduled a meeting to inspect 
Mr. Dabbs' property again on June 18 (2 days after the 
hearing). At the inspection, the Corps agreed with the 
delineation Mr. Dabbs' engineer had determined--they settled on 
0.9 of an acre of wetlands. Mr. Dabbs applied for an after-the-
fact permit from the Corps for his development, and he will 
mitigate for the wetlands he disturbed. The Corps gave him a 
letter releasing the part of the development that isn't wetland 
for construction to continue.
    Col. Smith was not able to be as accommodating in Mr. 
Brown's case. Because the regulations do not distinguish 
between man-made and natural wetlands, both must be protected. 
But he agreed to reconsider the issue to determine if a 
mutually agreeable solution could be reached. The case has not 
yet been resolved satisfactorily.
    c. Hearings.--A field hearing was held on this matter on 
June 16, 1997, in Marietta, GA, ``Wetlands: Community and 
Individual Rights v. Unchecked Government Power.''

6. Oversight of the Security and Exchange Commission's ``Disclosure of 
        Accounting Policies for Derivative Financial Instruments and 
        Derivative Commodity Instruments'' (derivative rule).

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee conducted a substantial 
review of the SEC's derivative rule, which was promulgated on 
February 10, 1997, to determine whether the rule was sound and 
efficient and whether the SEC had complied with the statutory 
requirements of the underlying securities law (National 
Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996) and the 
Congressional Review Act under the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act (Public Law 104-121). The subcommittee 
sent the SEC oversight letters on March 17, 20, and 28, 1997, 
requesting a complete copy of the initial and final regulatory 
flexibility analysis for the rule, among other materials.
    The subcommittee reviewed all the documents submitted by 
the SEC and conducted extensive interviews of the SEC Chief 
Economist, the SEC Chief Accountant, the SEC Deputy Chief 
Accountant, and an SEC Assistant General Counsel, all of whom 
were involved in the derivative rulemaking process. The 
subcommittee also interviewed a number of outside economic 
experts, market analysts, and securities experts and met with a 
variety of interested parties in the regulated community. In 
addition, the subcommittee has carefully reviewed the findings, 
conclusions, and recommendations of the Senate Subcommittee on 
Securities in their report dated April 21, 1997 (Report of the 
Subcommittee on Securities on Proposals by the Securities and 
Exchange Commission and the Financial Accounting Standards 
Board for the Accounting Treatment of Financial Derivatives). 
Based on this substantial review of the derivative rule, we 
find additional support for and endorse the findings and 
conclusions of the Senate report.
    Most significantly, the subcommittee reviewed a memorandum 
from the SEC Office of Economic Analysis dated January 7, 1997, 
which presents a thorough and persuasive critique of the 
quantitative disclosure requirements of the derivative rule. 
The memorandum suggests that the market has already responded 
positively to the concerns that arose a few years ago in well-
publicized cases and will continue to do so without any action 
by the SEC. In contrast to the direction the market is taking, 
the SEC's Chief Economist states that the derivative rule, 
particularly its quantitative disclosure requirements, ``has 
the potential to create misleading representations of market 
risks in the registrants'' disclosures.'' In fact, the SEC's 
Chief Economist wrote that under the rule ``some risk 
disclosures will be misleading.'' (Emphasis added.) To cite but 
one example, the Chief Economist wrote that ``a registrant may 
be at considerable risk due [to its] derivatives positions and 
yet report a quantitative risk of zero under the [derivative 
rule].'' Finally, the Chief Economist wrote that the 
quantitative disclosure requirements of the derivative rule 
will likely cause market participants to shift to over-the-
counter contracts that entail even greater risk. As the 
memorandum relates, the rule ``creates incentives for financial 
engineering and a movement of trading to over-the-counter 
markets from financial exchanges.'' In short, it appears that 
the SEC's Chief Economist believed that no quantitative 
disclosure requirement was necessary and that the requirements 
in the rule the SEC has issued will be misleading and 
counterproductive.
    Apart from the persuasive criticism of the derivative rule 
in the memorandum, the subcommittee is most troubled that the 
Chief Economist's conclusions, and many other comments that the 
SEC received from the regulated community on the quantitative 
disclosure requirements, appear to have been completely ignored 
by the SEC's Office of the Chief Accountant and others at the 
SEC. Sadly, the subcommittee has concluded that the SEC 
regulated for the sake of regulating, rather than for the 
protection of investors.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee concluded, in accordance 
with the Senate Subcommittee on Securities' Report, that the 
derivative rule is problematic for the following reasons.
    1. There is no justification for requiring quantification 
of derivative risks, as the derivative rule requires, but not 
requiring quantification of the following intangible risks, 
each of which the SEC Chief Economist said usually has a larger 
impact on a public company's stock value:
         changes in company management;
         the possibility of a labor strike;
         changes in a competitor's line of products or 
        services;
         development of valuable patent rights;
         good or bad marketing decisions;
         increases or decreases in the cost of 
        manufacturing inputs; and,
         all other good or bad business decisions.
    2. Although the market developed the valuation methods that 
the SEC now requires under the derivative rule, the market 
players who developed the tools oppose mandatory disclosure. By 
mandating disclosure, the derivative rule, creates an incentive 
for the market not to develop or improve such risk management 
tools in the future, for derivatives or for any of the other 
risks listed above.
    3. The SEC Chief Economist admitted in an internal memo and 
in a subcommittee interview that none of the derivative 
debacles of the past would have been prevented by the new 
derivative rule.
    4. The SEC's initial economic analysis and cost estimate on 
the derivative rule was simply guesswork on the part of the 
Deputy Chief Accountant with no input from the SEC Office of 
Economic Analysis. The SEC's final economic analysis was based 
on anecdotal interviews by the Deputy Chief Accountant, who has 
since left, with only minimal review by the SEC Office of 
Economic Analysis. The Senate Subcommittee on Securities found 
that the SEC had violated Section 106 of the National 
Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996 by not conducting a 
real cost benefit analysis. The Subcommittee on National 
Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and Regulatory Affair 
concurs with this conclusion.
    5. The actual direct cost of compliance with the derivative 
rule will far exceed the SEC's estimates. Interviews with the 
CFOs of several major corporations convinced the subcommittee 
that the SEC's final cost estimate was based on faulty 
assumptions about the amount of time it would take to comply 
with the rule.
    6. Those companies to which the derivative rule applies are 
at serious risk of competitive harm because they are forced to 
disclose sensitive information that their foreign competitors 
and those domestic companies which are not covered by the rule 
do not have to disclose.
    7. The SEC Chief Economist concluded that the analyses 
required by the derivative rule will be too complex for most 
investors to follow. Therefore, the rule will provide 
misleading information to investors.
    8. The SEC Chief Economist concluded that the analyses 
required by the derivative rule will also be misleading because 
the various options the rule allows for reporting derivative 
risk are not compatible. Companies are given three options for 
quantitative reporting: tabular presentation (describing the 
fair value and contract terms), ``sensitivity analysis'' 
(describing potential earnings and losses under various market 
fluctuations), and ``value at risk'' (describing potential 
losses within a historical context). It would be difficult, if 
not impossible, for most investors to compare what one company 
puts in one format and another company puts in another format.
    9. The SEC Chief Economist concluded that the derivative 
rule will create an incentive for firms to move from financial 
exchanges to over-the-counter or other non-cash settled 
commodity markets, thus increasing the risk to investors.
    10. The SEC Chief Economist concluded that the derivative 
rule will create an incentive for firms to engage in less 
hedging activity, thus increasing the risk to investors. This 
is the case because derivatives are used by companies primarily 
to reduce risk. The companies that use derivatives oppose the 
rule because it requires them to disclose financial trade 
secrets. If these companies have to disclose information about 
how they use derivatives to their competitors, it is not as 
worthwhile for them to use derivatives. Thus, the rule creates 
an incentive for companies to use fewer derivatives. Using 
fewer derivatives creates more risk for the companies' 
investors.
    11. Although the ``safe-harbor'' provision of the SEC rule 
is an attempt to limit the litigation arising from the rule, 
the subcommittee believes that substantial litigation remains 
likely to occur.
    c. Hearings.--None.

7. EPA's Particulate and Ozone Rulemaking.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee conducted significant 
oversight of the process that the Environmental Protection 
Agency [EPA] followed in developing new air quality standards 
for particulate matter [PM] and ozone. This review focused on 
EPA's compliance with Federal laws and procedures intended to 
assure that regulations will not do more harm than good. In 
particular, the subcommittee examined the Agency's compliance 
with the requirements of the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act [SBREFA], Regulatory Flexibility Act 
[RFA], the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act [UMRA] and Executive 
Order 12866, and with the administrative procedures set forth 
in the Clean Air Act.
    On November 27, 1996, EPA proposed revisions to tighten 
dramatically the National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAAQS] 
for particulate matter and ozone. The new NAAQS, which were 
finalized in July 1997, will regulate fine particles and impose 
a lower acceptable level of smog measured over a longer time 
period. Under the Clean Air Act, NAAQS are required to be set 
at a level that is ``requisite to protect the public health,'' 
while ``allowing an adequate margin of safety.'' Throughout the 
rulemaking proceeding, EPA Administrator Carol Browner 
persistently maintained that the Clean Air Act allows the 
Agency to consider only health factors in its decisionmaking. 
Therefore, she insisted that UMRA's regulatory requirements did 
not apply and that EPA could not consider the results of its 
regulatory impact analyses in determining whether to revise the 
current standards. She also argued that RFA and SBREFA did not 
apply, because these health-based standards do not, in 
themselves, have any direct regulatory effect. Moreover, she 
stated that it is not feasible to conduct regulatory impact 
analyses at the NAAQS-setting stage, because the Agency does 
not know what specific regulatory requirements a State will 
choose for implementing the standards.
    However, EPA's analyses assume that the available science 
indicates a threshold for unacceptable risk from which EPA 
could set a standard allowing an adequate margin of safety. In 
fact, this assumption ignores the findings of EPA's own 
scientific advisory committee. Based on the best available 
science, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee [CASAC] 
determined that there are no such bright scientific lines. 
Indeed, CASAC indicated that there is no scientific proof that 
EPA's standards will measurably improve public health. In the 
case of ozone, the panel concluded that the proposed standard 
was not significantly more protective of public health than the 
current one. In the case of PM, they found significant 
uncertainty surrounding the health effects of fine particles. 
In their view, there is no compelling evidence on which to set 
more restrictive standards at this time. As a result, CASAC 
concluded that science could not make the judgment call on 
EPA's new standards.
    In the face of inconclusive science and the prospect of 
questionable public health benefits, compliance with ``good 
government'' procedures takes on added significance. Under 
these circumstances, sound policy judgments can be made only 
after (1) a careful balancing of the weight of the available 
scientific evidence against anticipated costs, risks, and 
likely benefits; and (2) an adequate opportunity for review and 
comment. For this reason, the subcommittee closely reviewed 
EPA's compliance with the Federal laws, Executive orders, and 
administrative procedures that require the Agency (1) to 
analyze and take into account a range of factors in exercising 
its discretion on proper risk management; and (2) to allow 
ample time for the filing and review of comments. The 
investigation focused on the following problems:
    Regulatory Flexibility Act.--EPA certified that its rules 
will not have a significant impact on small business. This 
finding is very problematic because EPA indicated that these 
rules will have a significant economic effect on a substantial 
number of small entities in its regulatory impact analyses. 
Moreover, the Agency has previously prepared analyses of small 
business effects in other NAAQS-setting rulemakings. Finally, 
the Small Business Administration, the controlling legal 
authority, determined that EPA was required to do so in this 
rulemaking proceeding.
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.--EPA has insisted that the 
Clean Air Act (Act) prohibits it from complying with the 
requirements of UMRA. Therefore, EPA did not prepare a written 
statement that evaluated the effects of its changes on State, 
local, and tribal governments and the private sector or provide 
an explanation why the Agency could not select the least 
costly, most cost-effective, and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the Act. Nor did EPA involve 
State and local officials in developing its rules. Yet, the 
Agency had the discretion not to change the existing air 
quality standards and this NAAQS review involved policy 
judgments.
    Executive Order 12866.--Although EPA considered it 
appropriate to evaluate alternative regulatory options, the 
Agency maintained that it would be inconsistent with the Clean 
Air Act for the Agency to take into account the results of its 
economic analyses in determining which option to select. This 
is problematic in light of CASAC's conclusion that science 
could not make the judgment call in this rulemaking proceeding.
    Regulatory Impact Analyses.--At the proposing stage, EPA 
failed to perform full cost analyses of its changes to the PM 
and ozone standards and available alternatives, even though 
doing so would have enabled a more informed evaluation of the 
achievability of these standards and their net benefits.
    Risk Management.--In developing its new PM2.5 annual 
standard, the Agency did not give appropriate weight to the 
inconclusive nature of the scientific evidence on the health 
effects of fine particles, especially the significant 
uncertainties raised by CASAC. Moreover, in spite of the 
marginal public health benefits that its ozone proposal would 
provide and its own determination that the costs of 
implementing the standard would outweigh the benefits, EPA 
preferred this option to issuing an 8-hour equivalent of the 
current standard.
    PM Research.--Despite the many unanswered questions and 
uncertainties surrounding the mortality effects of fine 
particles, EPA refused to validate the two key government-
funded prospective studies upon which the Agency relied, by 
obtaining and making available to the public for independent 
review the data underlying those studies.
    Opportunity for Review.--EPA did not find it necessary to 
provide an adequate opportunity for public comment and 
regulatory review before adopting any revisions to the PM and 
ozone NAAQS. This is very problematic given the complexity of 
this NAAQS review, which addressed both the PM and ozone 
standards, and the amount of time allocated in the past to 
reviewing just one standard. In the case of the ozone standard, 
this is particularly egregious because EPA was not under a 
court-ordered deadline to review that standard. Moreover, in 
its filing with the District Court in Arizona seeking an 
extension of the deadlines for the particulate matter 
rulemaking, EPA recognized that the court provided ``an 
extraordinarily short time period'' for reviewing and 
responding to public comments in a rulemaking of this nature. 
Under such severe time constraints, it is highly dubious that 
EPA was able to perform a meaningful review of all of the 
comments filed on both the PM and ozone proposals.
    In pursuing its oversight work, the subcommittee sent 
letters of inquiry to EPA, OIRA, SBA, and the Council on 
Economic Advisers. The subcommittee also interviewed EPA, SBA, 
and OIRA officials involved in this rulemaking proceeding, 
CASAC scientists, State and local authorities, and economic and 
policy analysts. In addition to the documents provided in 
response to its inquiries, the subcommittee reviewed legal, 
economic and scientific analyses developed by the private 
sector and the public comments submitted on EPA's proposals.
    Finally, on April 16 and 23, 1997, the subcommittee held a 
hearing on EPA's rulemaking. On the first day of the hearing, 
the subcommittee heard testimony from representatives of the 
public, small business, the scientific community, and State and 
local government. Testifying at the second day of the hearing 
were EPA Administrator Browner, OIRA Administrator Sally Katzen 
and SBA Chief Counsel for Advocacy Jere Glover.
    On the first day of the hearing, witnesses provided 
persuasive testimony that EPA's proposed new stringent 
standards were misguided. Dr. Christopher Grande, an 
anesthesiologist and intensive care specialist in trauma 
injury, said that the proposed rules are ``the latest example 
in what [he] see[s] as a disturbing trend of the last two 
decades where scarce public health resources are diverted from 
more clearly demonstrated beneficial uses.'' ``For example,'' 
he added, ``if a community is forced to spend its resources 
implementing the ozone and particulate matter air quality 
standards, what other public health needs will the community 
sacrifice?'' This concern was echoed by Faith Kline, a fourth-
grade school teacher and severe asthma sufferer, and Fred 
Congress, a minority business owner. Both admonished the Agency 
not to take a great public policy leap without more scientific 
justification. To do otherwise, they agreed, will just result 
in onerous new control measures being imposed on the backs of 
citizens for minimal health benefits.
    A bipartisan group of State and local elected officials 
also expressed concern that EPA's air quality standards will be 
counterproductive to cleaner air and improvements in public 
health. According to Ohio Governor George Voinovich, ``the 
proposed standards threaten to undo all the hard work and 
sacrifice made by our [citizens] to bring their communities 
into attainment.'' San Diego Mayor Susan Golding and Illinois 
State Representative Jeffrey Schoenberg believed that the rules 
will have an enormous impact on small business and will become 
``one of the largest unfunded mandates'' ever faced by State 
and local government.
    During the course of its oversight, the subcommittee also 
found the following information particularly noteworthy in view 
of its concerns about the conduct of the rulemaking process:
    Interagency Review.--EPA did not adequately address the 
economic and scientific criticism that its air quality 
standards provoked throughout the Clinton administration. The 
President's own Office of Science and Technology Policy 
objected that these standards are not based on adequate 
scientific information. The Council of Economic Advisers [CEA] 
observed that, ``the incremental health-risk reduction from 
more stringent standards is small, while costs are high.'' In 
fact, the CEA estimated that the costs of fully complying with 
just EPA's new ozone standards could reach $60 billion a year. 
According to the SBA, these are ``the most expensive 
regulations faced by small business in 10 or more years.'' The 
Department of Transportation [DOT] commented that it was 
``incomprehensible that the administration would commit to a 
new set of standards without much greater understanding of the 
problem and its solutions.'' A DOT analysis of the impact of 
EPA's standards on States and localities showed that areas in 
noncompliance will face ``economically strangling restrictions 
to daily operations.'' The Department noted that the standards 
will ``bring a significantly larger proportion of the 
population and more jurisdictions under Federal oversight and 
procedural burdens.''
    State and local elected officials.--EPA did not adequately 
address the concerns voiced by numerous governors and thousands 
of mayors about these standards. They maintained that the 
standards will have a disproportionate impact on small business 
and will impose one of the largest unfunded mandates ever on 
State and localities. These standards will force onerous new 
control measures and unnecessary lifestyle changes on hundreds 
of counties that will not be able to comply. The costs of doing 
business will rise considerably, causing massive layoffs. Areas 
in nonattainment will have to adhere to stringent requirements 
regarding building permits and uses, transportations plans, 
industrial uses, and the like. In short, the elected officials 
protested that States and localities will face oppressive 
constraints on their freedom to run their own communities and 
meet the needs of their citizens.
    EPA's Final Regulatory Impact Analysis.--While EPA has 
interpreted the Clean Air Act as requiring the setting of NAAQS 
to be health-based and not based on cost or other economic 
considerations, the Agency nonetheless performed a regulatory 
impact analysis [RIA] to determine the costs and benefits of 
its new standards. Moreover, EPA's final RIA clearly shows that 
its preliminary analysis did not conform to the 
administration's own guidelines for issuing regulations (OMB's 
guidelines for implementing Executive Order 12866). In contrast 
to that preliminary analysis which showed that the standards 
were cost-effective, EPA now has found that its new standards 
may actually result in harm to the public, potentially 
producing net negative benefits of $26 billion. Based on its 
estimates, EPA has concluded that the net benefits for ozone 
are negative and that it is quite plausible that the net 
benefits of the PM2.5 standard also will be negative. Total 
costs could be $47 billion ($37 billion from the PM2.5 rule 
plus $9.6 billion from the ozone rule). By the time EPA 
finalized its rules, its cost estimate rose about five-fold, 
while its measure of public health fell by over 80 percent 
(number of lives saved fell by 97 percent). Finally, the level 
that EPA has adopted for its annual PM2.5 standard is very cost 
sensitive. A change in the level by just 1 microgram per cubic 
meter, from 15 to 16, would result in a 37 percent reduction in 
the number of residual nonattainment areas--from 30 to 19.
    Job Impacts.--In its study, ``Costs, Economic Impacts, and 
Benefits of EPA's Ozone and Particulate Standards, the Reason 
Public Policy Institute found that the standards could cost 
from $90 to $150 billion annually. These costs would have an 
adverse effect on economic growth and employment, taking about 
$1,600 from each family of four after taxes and putting 200,000 
to 400,000 jobs at risk. The costs of these standards could 
reduce the purchasing power of lower income families by more 
than 5 percent. Finally, the study projected that 
disproportionate share of the job losses would come from lower 
paying occupations in the small business sector.
    Better Investments.--EPA did not evaluate the health 
benefits from investing scarce resources in the implementation 
of its stringent PM and ozone standards as compared to benefits 
from investing in other public health and safety programs. In 
terms of cost per life-year saved, EPA's rules are very cost 
ineffective when compared with other investment choices, such 
as mammograms and immunizations. For example, the cost per 
life-year saved of breast cancer screening for women ages 40-64 
is about $17,000, while the cost per life-year saved of 
pneumonia vaccinations for those over 65 is about $2,300. By 
contrast, EPA's PM analysis indicates a cost per life-year 
saved of $2.4 million.
    Research.--Although EPA's 1996 ``Air Quality and Emissions 
Trends Report'' shows that nationwide air quality has improved 
substantially over the last 10 years, the incidence of asthma 
is increasing appreciably. Most experts believe that the 
primary cause of increased asthma prevalence is related to 
indoor not outdoor air pollution. Further research is needed to 
examine the effects of poverty and indoor air quality on the 
incidence of asthma, relative to the effects of outdoor air. 
Moreover, with respect to the health effects of fine particles, 
CASAC urged EPA to ``immediately implement a targeted research 
program to address [the] unanswered questions and 
uncertainties.'' President Clinton's budget request for fiscal 
year 1998 underscored the necessity for research. In requesting 
$26.4 million for PM research, a 37 percent increase over 1997, 
the President indicated, among other things, the need to 
investigate the ``biological mechanisms by which PM 
concentrations in outdoor air may induce health effects and, in 
doing so, evaluat[e] potential links between PM exposures and 
health effects.'' Clearly, absent a better understanding of the 
science, effective control strategies cannot be designed.
    Underlying Data.--The subcommittee sent letters to Harvard 
and the American Cancer Society [ACS] urging that they 
cooperate with efforts to structure a public process for the 
independent review of the data underlying their long-term 
studies, which are critical to EPA's annual PM2.5 standard. 
Prompted by such appeals, Harvard and ASC are working with the 
Health Effects Institute to set up procedures for independent 
scientific review.
    Unintended Adverse Consequences.--EPA did not evaluate any 
of the following potential adverse consequences: (1) Reducing 
ground-level ozone may cause an increase in malignant and 
nonmelanoma skin cancers and cataracts, as well as other health 
risks from ultraviolet B rays; (2) Setting a generic fine 
particle standard may result in controlling particles that 
don't significantly harm the public health, and not controlling 
ones that do; and (3) The regulatory costs that will be 
transmitted throughout the economy will increase poverty 
levels. As a result, workers and consumers will have less 
disposable income to spend on safety devices, on medical 
checkups and procedures, and on clean and safe housing.
    b. Benefits.--The record developed through the 
subcommittee's oversight clearly shows that EPA defied good 
government laws and procedures in developing its new air 
quality standards, that these standards are scientifically 
indefensible, and that they will impose enormous burdens on 
State and local government and the private sector, with little 
or no assurance of public health benefits. Nothing in the Clean 
Air Act removes the Agency's discretion and responsibility to 
take a reasonable approach when the scientific evidence is 
inconclusive. Contrary to good government procedures and 
requirements, EPA rushed to judgment without weighing a range 
of relevant factors and without providing an adequate 
opportunity for public comment and review.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``EPA's Particulate Matter and Ozone Rulemaking: Is EPA Above 
the Law?'' on April 16 and 23, 1997.

8. GAO Findings on Superfund Cleanup.

    a. Summary.--On February 13, 1997, the subcommittee held a 
hearing on the preliminary findings of the General Accounting 
Office [GAO] on the duration of the Superfund cleanup process. 
Despite the Environmental Protection Agency's [EPA] claims to 
the contrary, GAO testified that the pace of the Superfund 
program is actually slowing down. GAO stated that it now takes 
much longer for non-Federal sites to move through the Superfund 
system than it did 10 years ago. Moreover, GAO staff warned 
that longer completion times are significant because many 
listing and cleanup activities remain in the Superfund program.
    The Superfund program was created in 1980 when Congress 
enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation 
and Liability Act [CERCLA] to identify and cleanup the Nation's 
worst hazardous wastesites. After nearly 17 years, the public 
and private sectors combined have spent over $30 billion on the 
program, with only 30 percent of the sites on the National 
Priorities List [NPL] cleaned up.
    At the request of former Government Reform and Oversight 
Chairman William F. Clinger, GAO investigated the time it takes 
to assess and cleanup contaminated sites on the NPL and why 
cleanups have been delayed. In March 1997, GAO issued its final 
report, ``Times to Complete the Assessment and Cleanup of 
Hazardous Waste Sites,'' which confirmed its earlier findings. 
Based on EPA's own data, GAO concluded that:
          (1) It now takes substantially longer to list sites 
        on the NPL than it did 10 years ago. In 1996, it took 
        9.4 years to evaluate and place sites on the NPL, while 
        sites listed between 1986 and 1990 took about 5.8 
        years. GAO predicted that long delays will continue 
        because a large number of sites are potentially 
        eligible for Superfund listing and only a limited 
        number of sites are being added to the program each 
        year. GAO estimated that between 1,400 and 2,300 sites 
        could be added to the program in the future;
          (2) The average number of site additions to the NPL 
        has fallen dramatically over this same 10 year period. 
        Only 16 sites per year have been added in recent years;
          (3) The time it takes to clean up a site, once it has 
        been placed on the NPL, is more than twice as long as 
        it was 10 years ago. In 1986, the average time to 
        cleanup a Superfund site listed on the NPL was less 
        than 4 years. In 1993, EPA established a goal of 5 
        years to cleanup a site. However, by 1996, cleanups 
        were averaging 10.6 years; and
          (4) The actual time it takes to do ``construction 
        work''--the real shovels-in-the-dirt part--is being 
        completed in the same length of time. In 1996, remedial 
        actions took about 2 years, as long as it took in 1991.
    EPA told GAO that the increased cleanup times are the 
result of three factors: ``(1) the growing complexity of sites, 
(2) efforts to find parties and reach settlements with them, 
and (3) resource constraints.''
    Certainly, sites are now ``more complex'' in one respect. 
GAO reported in 1993 that a full 40 percent of all the sites 
that EPA had reported as ``construction complete'' required no 
remedial action whatsoever. Basically, EPA finished leaning up 
the sites that were easier to deal with early in the program. 
However, GAO also noted in their report that actual cleanup is 
just as fast today as it was previously. Therefore, the 
``complexity'' that EPA cites as a reason for delay is 
attributable to the pre-cleanup phase--studies, remedy design, 
et cetera. In the case of multi-party sites, this phase is 
dominated by legal battles with potentially responsible parties 
[PRPs] over who should pay and how much, and what should be 
done--that is, issues of liability and remedy selection.
    Moreover, by stating that efforts to reach settlements with 
parties delays the process, EPA acknowledged that the liability 
system hinders site cleanup. Notably, EPA reported to GAO that 
the reason remedial designs are completed twice as quickly at 
Federal sites as they are at non-Federal sites is because 
``Federal cleanups do not usually involve negotiations or 
litigation with private responsible parties.'' EPA's own data 
suggest that the number of parties involved in legal disputes 
is correlated to the speed of cleanup:
         A full 50 percent of all ``orphan'' sites 
        (sites where EPA is unable to identify any viable 
        liable party and simply pays for the cleanup itself) 
        have been completed, and 41 percent of the sites with 
        10 or fewer parties have been cleaned up. However, at 
        sites with 500 or more PRPs, just 17 percent have been 
        finished.
         The average multi-party Superfund site takes a 
        total of 12 years to be completed after it is listed on 
        the NPL. As John F. Lynch, Jr., an experienced 
        Superfund lawyer, testified at the hearing, the 
        problems at multi-party sites are much greater than at 
        single party sites, ``by orders of magnitude.'' The 
        lengthy testing, decision and ``down'' periods are 
        directly attributable to complicated negotiations and 
        litigation with PRPs over remedies and their costs, and 
        which parties should pay.
    Finally, President Clinton sought unsuccessfully to 
increase funding for the current Superfund program during 
fiscal year 1998 by $650 million. Clearly, based on GAO's 
findings, appropriating such amounts without first reforming 
the underlying program would do little to expedite cleanups but 
would simply perpetuate this flawed and inefficient program.
    In presenting data on completion times, GAO used a ``date 
of event'' analysis (e.g., date of a site's placement on the 
NPL, date of completing a cleanup) and looked back to compute 
the length of time. The GAO staff testified that this 
methodology is the most appropriate measure of the productivity 
and management of Super-fund resources over time. GAO's 
analysis considered the actual number of listings, cleanups 
completed, or intermediate steps completed in a given year 
regardless of when the sites were discovered or placed on the 
NPL. The staff pointed out that this approach is consistent 
with the method that EPA uses in its management reports to 
measure the Superfund program's performance and to justify 
budget requests.
    At the hearing, Elliot Laws, Former Assistant Administrator 
for Solid Waste and Emergency Response, testified that recent 
EPA reforms have fundamentally changed the program. Among other 
things, he claimed that the Agency's reforms have brought 
relevant stakeholders into the process earlier, increased the 
number of small parties who are protected from liability, 
adopted liability allocations worked out by the relevant 
parties, allowed States to assume more responsibility for 
cleanups, increased the speed of cleanups by using presumptive 
remedies, and reduced cleanup costs by establishing a Remedy 
Review Board to review proposed high-cost remedies at sites.
    In March 1997, EPA submitted its own analysis comparing 
cleanup durations during the Clinton administration to those 
under prior years. The Agency claimed that its data show that 
it has taken only 8 years to clean up a site in recent years 
(1993-1996), as opposed to the more than 10 years it had taken 
for sites in the pipeline between 1987-1992. EPA's study used a 
``date of submission'' analysis, which tracks processing times 
by the year sites were discovered or listed. For each time 
period, EPA's analysis only counted activities started and 
finished during that time period. As a result, EPA's findings 
are skewed. The Agency's study shows improvement in processing 
times only because the data for later years excludes a higher 
proportion of ongoing work than the data for earlier years.
    On September 24, 1997, GAO issued a report entitled, 
``Super-fund: Duration of the Cleanup Process at Hazardous 
Waste Sites on the National Priorities List.'' In that report, 
GAO compared EPA's projection that sites listed in 1993 through 
1996 would be cleaned up in an average of 8 years against the 
program's historical performance. In doing this, GAO used the 
same methodology as EPA, a ``date of submission'' analysis, to 
isolate any effects of recent policy or procedural changes on 
processing times. GAO calculated the duration of the cleanup 
process from a site's listing on the NPL through remedial 
action for all sites that began this process in fiscal years 
1986 through 1994. GAO examined both how long it took to clean 
up completed sites and how long the uncompleted sites have been 
``in process.'' Based on EPA's own data, GAO determined that 
the only way cleanups could average 8 years would be if all 
cleanups ``in process'' had been completed by July 1, 1997. 
However, because such a large proportion of the sites listed in 
the 9-year period are still in process, the average cleanup 
time for these sites will exceed 8 years by a substantial 
margin. Therefore, even after using the same methodology as EPA 
to analyze Superfund processing data, GAO verified that 
cleanups are taking substantially longer.
    Finally, on May 30, 1997, at the request of the 
subcommittee and full committee, GAO completed its report, 
``Superfund: Information on EPA's Administrative Reforms,'' in 
which it examined whether, in fact, EPA's 45 administrative 
reforms have resulted in significant, fundamental changes in 
the program and are achieving demonstrable results. GAO found 
that the Agency could report quantifiable results for just six 
of them. Furthermore, of those six, EPA could document the 
benefits fully for merely four reforms. These results do not 
show any significant progress, let alone a fundamentally 
different program.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's oversight and the GAO 
report on cleanup times provide further evidence that the 
current Superfund program is not working and requires 
comprehensive reform. GAO's findings show that the program will 
probably get worse before it gets better. Even assuming that 
the administration can do a better job, the sheer number of 
potential Superfund sites is staggering. GAO estimated that 
1,400 to 2,300 additional sites may be added in the future. If 
EPA can only clean up 65 sites per year, and it is only taking 
on 16 new sites per year, the job may never be done. Moreover, 
GAO's findings show that the delays are attributable to the 
pre-cleanup phase, which is plagued by legal battles over who 
should pay and what should be done. Actual cleanup time has 
remained steady. Therefore, cleanups will continue to be 
delayed, unless the Superfund's liability system is 
fundamentally reformed. Only those who are truly responsible 
for the pollution, those parties which owned and controlled 
sites and parties which violated disposal laws, should be held 
accountable. Otherwise, the real mission of this program--
cleaning up sites that pose a risk to our citizens--will never 
be achieved. The subcommittee is amazed that EPA is not equally 
concerned by GAO's findings and acknowledging the urgency for 
comprehensive legislative reform.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``GAO Findings on Superfund Cleanup,'' on February 13, 1997.

9. OMB's ``Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal 
        Regulations.

    a. Summary.--On October 27, 1997, the subcommittee sent a 
letter to the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] expressing 
its concerns about the adequacy of the agency's ``Report to 
Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations.'' 
These concerns also were shared by the Commerce and 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committees. Based on a 
thorough review, all three committees found that OMB's report 
failed to provide a sound information base for public policy 
decisionmaking.
    This report was submitted pursuant to Section 645 of the 
Treasury, Postal Services, and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 1997 (Public Law 104-208), which required 
the Director of OMB to provide to Congress, by September 30, 
1997, a report containing the following information:
          (1) Estimates of the total annual costs and benefits 
        of Federal regulatory programs;
          (2) Estimates of the costs and benefits of each rule 
        that is likely to result in annual costs of $100 
        million or more;
          (3) An assessment of the direct and indirect impacts 
        of Federal rules on the private sector, State and local 
        government, and the Federal Government; and
          (4) Recommendations from the Director and a 
        description of significant public comments to reform or 
        eliminate any Federal regulatory program or program 
        element that is inefficient, ineffective, or is not a 
        sound use of the Nation's resources.
    In adopting these regulatory accounting requirements, 
Congress sought to obtain a credible and reliable assessment of 
the benefits and burdens of regulation in order to develop a 
more effective and accountable regulatory system that will 
achieve better results. However, OMB's report made painfully 
clear that the Federal Government has not yet established an 
information system that will yield meaningful estimates of the 
effects of regulation on our society.
    In particular, the letter to OMB noted that its report did 
not fully comply with specific statutory requirements. It was 
wholly deficient in assessing the direct and indirect impacts 
of Federal rules and it made no recommendations for reform. In 
addition, OMB interpreted Congress mandate too narrowly to 
achieve the legislative goal. For example, the report did not 
break down information by Federal program, it provided 
information on only a limited number of major rules, and it 
excluded information on rules issued by independent agencies. 
Most significantly, the report exposed the lack of any 
systematic approach to collecting, analyzing, and reporting 
data on regulatory impacts. Moreover, in developing this 
report, OMB did not take the leadership role that Congress 
intended in assuring the quality and reliability of the 
information reported. Without a systematic approach and OMB 
auditing, Congress will not be assured of the accurate, 
complete, and consistently measured information that it needs 
to properly manage the regulatory process.
    The letter recommended that OMB take the lead in 
implementing the following improvements:
          (1) Standardize procedures governmentwide for 
        collecting, analyzing, and documenting the best 
        available information on a regular and systematic 
        basis, including formalizing the agency's ``Best 
        Practices'' guidelines;
          (2) Establish an information database on the benefits 
        and costs of regulation, obtaining information from a 
        variety of sources as it becomes available;
          (3) Establish a system for tracking net benefits of 
        different regulatory programs and their program 
        elements;
          (4) Ensure that the report to Congress includes 
        information on all Federal mandates, provides estimates 
        on paperwork burdens and full social costs, and 
        disaggregates the total overall estimates by regulatory 
        program and economic sector;
          (5) Use traditional economic measures, such as 
        impacts on productivity, employment, and income 
        distribution, to present aggregate information in a 
        more meaningful way; and
          (6) Synthesize and evaluate the information provided 
        by Federal agencies, especially their compliance with 
        OMB's guidelines, and supply both an independent 
        assessment of regulatory impacts and concrete reform 
        recommendations.
    b. Benefits.--Based on the letter's recommendations, the 
subcommittee, along with the Committees on Commerce and 
Transportation and Infrastructure, will work with OMB to 
implement more effectively Section 625 of the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105-
61), which carries forward these regulatory accounting 
requirements for another year. As the OMB report indicated, 
Federal regulation constitutes ``a major component of our 
economy'' and regulations have ``enormous potential for both 
good and harm.'' The committees hope that, working together 
with OMB, we can begin to build a sound information base for 
decisionmaking and can make regulatory accounting the effective 
management tool that Congress intended.
    c. Hearings.--None.

10. EPA's Strategic Plan.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee participated with the House 
Departmental Staff Team which reviewed and commented on the 
strategic plan developed by the Environmental Protection Agency 
[EPA] under the Government Performance and Results Act (Public 
Law 103-62) (Results Act). The overall aim of the Results Act 
is to foster accountability by requiring Federal Government 
agencies to establish goals and measure their performance. It 
is designed to obtain systematic and reliable information about 
where Federal programs and activities are going, how they will 
achieve their goals, and how performance will be measured.
    Specifically, the Results Act requires Federal agencies to 
prepare multi year strategic plans, annual performance plans, 
and annual performance reports. Under the act, Agencies had to 
submit their first 5-year strategic plans to Congress and the 
Office of Management and Budget [OMB] by September 30, 1997. 
The act requires agencies to include the following six critical 
components in their plans: (1) a comprehensive mission 
statement; (2) agency wide long-term goals and objectives for 
all major functions and operations; (3) strategies and the 
various resources needed to achieve the goals and objectives; 
(4) the relationship between the long-term goals and objectives 
and the annual performance goals; (5) an identification of key 
factors, external to the agency and beyond its control, that 
could significantly affect the achievement of the strategic 
goals; and (6) a description of program evaluations used to 
establish or revise strategic goals and a schedule for future 
program evaluation. In developing their strategic plans, 
agencies were required to consult with Congress regarding the 
contents of their plans.
    On July 28, 1997, the committees participating on the House 
EPA Staff Team sent a letter to the Agency providing comments 
on its draft strategic plan. In general, the committees felt 
that the draft plan was a good starting point, but that many 
changes were necessary before it complied with the act. The 
following are some of the changes that the committees 
recommended to improve the draft plan:
          (1) The Agency's mission statement should more 
        accurately reflect its founding statutes and authority. 
        Moreover, the plan should place priority on those 
        strategic goals for which the Agency has statutory 
        authority;
          (2) EPA's goals and objectives need to be more 
        results-oriented and measurable;
          (3) The Agency's goals and objectives should be 
        expressed as environmental outcomes, while 
        organization/program outputs should be classified as 
        implementation tools; that is, strategies for achieving 
        those goals;
          (4) The strategic plan should prioritize among goals 
        and objectives. In particular, EPA should commit to 
        using risk assessment to prioritize environmental risk 
        management decisions;
          (5) The plan should emphasize the need to have 
        reliable information in order to measure results. Also 
        needed are performance measures that link EPA's 
        activities to changes in health and environmental 
        conditions;
          (6) Given the kinds of goals and objectives that it 
        sets, the strategic plan should contain measurements of 
        the costs that EPA's regulatory actions impose on the 
        private sector and State and local government;
          (7) The Agency's numerical objectives must be 
        justified by reference to some statutory or policy 
        requirement;
          (8) EPA should include performance measures relating 
        to its efforts to work with States to achieve 
        environmental goals;
          (9) The draft plan lacked a sufficient assessment of 
        external factors that would limit the Agency's ability 
        to achieve its objectives;
          (10) The draft plan did not include program 
        evaluations used to develop the plan and a schedule for 
        future evaluations;
          (11) The draft plan did not address the relationship 
        between its long-term goals and objectives and the 
        annual performance goals; and
          (12) The draft plan did not discuss coordination with 
        other agencies for crosscutting programs, activities, 
        or functions that are similar to those of other Federal 
        agencies;
    b. Benefits.--Based on these comments, EPA made certain 
changes in the final strategic plan that it submitted to 
Congress and OMB in September 1997. It added sections on 
program evaluations used in preparing the plan and on the 
relationship of the plan's general goals to annual performance 
goals. The plan also described the steps that EPA took to 
coordinate its plan with other agencies, and addressed the role 
of the States in implementing EPA's programs. The section 
identifying key external factors was expanded to include 
additional factors, such as changes in producer and consumer 
behavior, that could directly affect the achievement of the 
plan's goals and objectives. The mission statement also was 
revised to coincide more closely with the language of the 
Agency's statutes. Finally, EPA included an addendum that 
identified its authorities by goal and objective.
    The Team will continue to work with EPA to make further 
improvements, such as: (1) stating goals and objectives in 
quantifiable and measurable terms; (2) relating specific 
strategies to specific objectives; (3) communicating more 
effectively the Agency's priorities; (4) ensuring the 
availability of sufficient scientific and environmental data; 
(5) coordinating plans and activities with other agencies that 
have similar or crosscutting functions; and (6) specifically 
linking the Agency's goals and objectives to each of its 
budgetary program activities.
    c. Hearings.--None.

11. Oversight of EPA and the Regulatory Process.

    a. Summary.--As part of its oversight responsibilities 
concerning Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and the 
regulatory process, the subcommittee continued to inquire about 
specific Agency's rulemaking actions. These inquiries have 
focused on the Agency's compliance with ``good government'' 
laws and procedures intended to assure that regulations do not 
do more harm than good. Specifically, the subcommittee has 
investigated the Agency's compliance with the requirements of 
the Administrative Procedures Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, the Congressional Review 
Act, and Executive Order 12866. The subcommittee has been 
particularly interested in whether the following types of 
issues were adequately addressed in the rulemaking proceedings: 
the need for regulation; the incremental costs and benefits of 
available regulatory alternatives; whether the benefits of the 
intended regulation would justify its costs; what would be the 
most cost-effective, least costly, and least burdensome 
regulatory option and any reasons why the Agency could not 
select that alternative; paperwork burdens; impacts on small 
business, State and local government, and the private sector; 
efforts to involve small business and State and local 
government representatives early in the development of the 
rule; impacts on the economy; any disproportionate impacts of 
the rule on certain populations or geographical areas; 
opportunity for comment and review.
    In the recent past, the subcommittee conducted inquiries 
into the following specific rulemakings:
    Urban Area Source Program.--On November 18, 1997, the 
subcommittee sent a letter of inquiry to EPA regarding its 
implementation of the Urban Area Source Program under Section 
112(k) of the Clean Air Act. The subcommittee raised concerns 
about whether EPA, in developing a regulatory strategy on area 
sources, is complying with the requirements of the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act [SBREFA]. In 
particular, the subcommittee requested information about 
whether EPA is analyzing potential impacts on small business 
entities in developing its strategy; is providing a meaningful 
opportunity for small entities to participate early in the 
process; and is planning to convene a Small Business Advocacy 
Review Panel. Also, the subcommittee inquired whether EPA has 
been focusing on chemicals that are, in fact, emitted from area 
sources, in compiling its draft list of candidate air toxics 
for this program.
    Toxic Release Inventory [TRI] Program.--On March 17, 1997, 
the subcommittee sent a letter to OMB concerning its review of 
EPA's draft final rule, ``Addition of Facilities in Certain 
Industry Sectors: Toxic Chemical Release Reporting Community 
Right to Know.'' This ruled extended the requirements under 
Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act for the reporting of toxic chemical releases to seven 
new industry sectors. In the letter to OMB, the subcommittee 
raised concerns about the unnecessary paperwork burdens that 
this regulation would create, especially for small businesses. 
The letter requested information on the extent to which such 
burdens on small business had been analyzed and whether all 
practicable steps had been taken to exempt from reporting or, 
alternatively, to minimize the burdens on, small businesses and 
other small entities. The subcommittee also questioned whether 
the benefits from imposing these informational requirements 
justified their costs.
    NOX Rule for Utilities.--On November 21, 1997, the 
subcommittee sent a letter to EPA inquiring about its proposed 
Phase II Nox rules under the Clean Air Act. This letter raised 
concerns about the process that the Agency had followed in 
developing these rules. In this rulemaking, EPA proposed 
lowering Nox emissions for about 750 wall-fired and 
tangentially-fired utility boilers (Group 1 boilers) and 
establishing specific emission limits by category for about 190 
other boilers. The subcommittee questioned whether the Agency 
was providing an adequate opportunity for public input and 
whether EPA and its consultants used realistic methodologies to 
support lowering emissions limits on the Group 1 boilers. The 
subcommittee also questioned the need for changing the Nox 
emissions standard for Group 1 boilers and the need for 
regulating cyclone boilers at all. Finally, the subcommittee 
requested information on why the EPA did not prepare an Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis and on the Agency's efforts 
to involve State and local officials in developing its rules.

12. Brookhaven National Laboratory.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee has been investigating 
environmental, health, and safety problems at the Brookhaven 
National Laboratory [BNL], one of the Department of Energy's 
[DOE] major multi-program laboratories, and evaluating actions 
that are being taken at this Federal facility to remedy and 
prevent the recurrence of these problems.
    Initially, the focus of the subcommittee's oversight was on 
DOE and BNL efforts to clean up existing onsite groundwater 
contamination, stemming from the facility's past activities. 
However, when tritium from active operations was detected in 
groundwater on the Lab site, it became clear that the problems 
at BNL were not isolated events, but were, instead, systemic in 
nature. The subcommittee then began investigating institutional 
deficiencies in the management of environmental, health, and 
safety activities [E, H & S] at BNL.
    Because of its former use as a military facility and the 
later operations of the Laboratory, this site became 
contaminated with chemical wastes and hazardous substances. 
After a history of chemical and radiological releases to 
surface water and groundwater on site, the Brookhaven facility 
was listed on the National Priorities List under the Superfund 
law in 1989. While there have been ongoing remedial 
investigations to define future clean-up priorities, activities 
over the past few years have concentrated on capping inactive 
landfills, removing underground storage tanks, excavating 
cesspools, removing above-ground radiological waste tanks, 
installing a groundwater pump and treat system to minimize off-
site contamination, and hooking-up homes south of the site to 
the public water supply. Although BNL officials recognized the 
need for extensive groundwater monitoring back in 1992, this 
was given a low priority.
    In December 1996 elevated concentrations of tritium, a low-
level radioactive form of hydrogen, were discovered in 
monitoring wells adjacent to BNL's High Flux Beam Reactor 
[HFBRA], a research reactor at the site. Results of a DOE 
investigation pointed to the reactor's spent fuel pool as the 
source of the tritium. The tritium groundwater plume was found 
to extend about 2,200 feet and has peak concentrations, close 
to the reactor, over 30 times the Federal drinking water 
standard. Based on the size of the plume, the leak may have 
started as much as 12 years ago. At the time that the leak was 
detected, the HFBR had been shutdown for routine maintenance 
and remains shutdown today.
    Back in 1994, the Suffolk County Department of Health 
Services had informed BNL that the HFBR spent fuel pool did not 
comply with county code requirements for hazardous waste 
storage. While BNL agreed to install monitoring wells near the 
spent fuel pool at that time, the wells were not installed 
until 1996. Also, although the tritium leak was detected in 
December 1996, it was not until January 16, 1997, that the lab 
began notifying regulatory agencies and local officials. This 
delay severely damaged BNL's credibility with the local 
community. Finally, while the tritium plume posed no health 
threat to the surrounding communities and lab employees, this 
incident, which arose after various other problems, showed the 
need for improvement in laboratory E, S & H management and 
oversight.
    As a result of the discovery of the tritium leak and the 
management review and investigation that followed, Secretary of 
Energy Federico Pena terminated Associated Universities, Inc. 
[AUI] as the managing contractor for BNL. AUI had been 
operating contractor for the laboratory since its founding in 
1947.
    As part of its oversight, subcommittee staff visited BNL 
twice and interviewed managers and scientists at BNL; DOE's 
onsite staff, the Brookhaven Group; and local citizens. The 
subcommittee also interviewed officials at DOE headquarters 
within the offices of Oversight and Energy Research, and staff 
at the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]. The subcommittee 
has reviewed investigatory reports and management reviews that 
have been done regarding BNL, including the ``Integrated Safety 
Management Evaluation of the Brookhaven National Laboratory'' 
by DOE's Office of Oversight, the ``Interim Report of the BNL 
Facility Review,'' the findings of EPA's Multi-Media Compliance 
Evaluation Inspection, and ``Brookhaven National Laboratory: At 
the Crossroads,'' the report resulting from the New York 
Attorney General's investigation.
    Based on such reports and evaluations, DOE has developed an 
Action Plan ``to improve the way DOE and BNL protect the 
environment, provide for the safety and health of employees, 
and address local community concerns and interests while 
conducting world-class science.'' Through its oversight, the 
subcommittee intends to track the implementation of this plan 
to determine whether DOE and BNL are meeting their objectives 
and milestones for change. In particular, the subcommittee will 
be monitoring their progress in the following areas: (1) 
Clarifying the roles, responsibilities, and authorities related 
to BNL; (2) Strengthening management systems and procedures 
used by BNL and the Brookhaven Group to determine necessary 
corrective actions and to prioritize, track, and implement 
those actions; (3) Establishing a structured, standards-based 
approach to the planning and control of work and related 
hazards across organizations, facilities, and activities, with 
a view to fully integrating effective E, S & H management 
processes and allocating appropriate funding support throughout 
BNL; (4) Strengthening DOE's monitoring and assessments of BNL 
E, S & H performance and safety management (especially, BNL's 
compliance with safety management policies, prioritization of 
issues and resources, and control of workforce hazards), and 
including the Department's performance expectations into its 
strategic plan and annual performance plans; and (5) Expanding 
BNL community involvement and outreach efforts.
    b. Benefits.--All of the investigatory reports and 
management reviews that the subcommittee reviewed identified 
opportunities for improvement at BNL. The laboratory must put 
into place E, S & H management systems and controls that will 
serve to prevent environmental problems from occurring and that 
will detect and quickly remedy those that do arise. This 
subcommittee intends to make sure that environmental management 
practices are securely in place, the causes of the tritium leak 
and other problems that have occurred are fully understood, and 
corrective actions are taken expeditiously.

13. Investigation of President Clinton's Executive Order 13083, 
        ``Federalism.''

    a. Summary.--On May 14, 1998, President Clinton issued 
Executive Order 13083, ``Federalism.'' On June 3rd, the 
subcommittee prepared a side-by-side analysis comparing 
President Reagan's 1987 Federalism Executive Order 12612 with 
President Clinton's first and second Federalism Executive 
Orders (12875 and 13083). On June 8th, the subcommittee 
chairman wrote President Clinton to inquire why he issued 
Executive Order 13083 since it abandoned protections for State 
and local governments (e.g., preparation of a Federalism 
Assessment for statutory and regulatory proposals and a 
presumption against Federal preemption of State and local laws 
and rules) which were in place since President Reagan's 1987 
order. On June 10th, the subcommittee alerted the National 
Governors' Association about the new order. Apparently, none of 
the seven major State and local interest groups were aware of 
the new order prior to the subcommittee's call. On July 27th, 
the subcommittee chairman wrote the Office of Management and 
Budget, initiating an investigation to discover documents which 
revealed the individuals involved and the philosophy behind the 
new order.
    On July 28th, the subcommittee held a hearing which 
included bi-partisan agreement and opposition to the new order 
(see Hearings section below). At the hearing, the 
administration witness committed to use President Reagan's 
Federalism order as the starting point for negotiations with 
State and local governments for a revision of President 
Clinton's new order. On July 30th, based on arguments presented 
at the hearing, the subcommittee chairman sent a second letter 
to President Clinton demanding that the President withdraw or 
indefinitely suspend his Federalism order.
    Executive Order 13083 provided an opportunity for the 
public to understand the basic difference in philosophy between 
Republicans and Democrats. Republicans believe that the powers 
of the Federal Government, specified in the Constitution, are 
defined and limited and that all other powers should be 
exercised by State and local governments. In contrast, 
Democrats support a centralized Federal Government, which 
usurps the powers of State and local governments even in 
traditional State and local functional areas.
    After the subcommittee provided the Senate Governmental 
Affairs Committee its side-by-side analysis and the 
subcommittee chairman's June 8th letter to President Clinton, 
on July 22nd, the Senate unanimously passed a Sense of the 
Senate resolution asking the President to repeal his new 
Federalism order. On July 29th, in the Departments of Veterans 
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
Agencies Appropriations bill for 1999 (the VA-HUD 
Appropriations bill), the House passed a statutory prohibition 
on funds to implement Executive Order 13083. On August 5th, the 
House passed, by a 417-2 vote, an amendment to the Departments 
of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related 
Agencies Appropriations bill for 1999, which was similar to the 
provision in the House VA-HUD Appropriations bill. 
Additionally, the subcommittee chairman co-sponsored various 
bills and resolutions opposing the new Clinton order and a bi-
partisan bill which would codify President Reagan's Federalism 
order.
    On August 5th, President Clinton indefinitely suspended his 
new Federalism order.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee chairman's letters to the 
President before and after the subcommittee's hearing and the 
subcommittee's July 28, 1998 hearing itself put pressure on the 
administration to rethink Executive Order 13083. As a 
consequence, on August 5, 1998, the President issued Executive 
Order 13095 which suspended Executive Order 13083. On October 
1, 1998, Majority Leader Dick Armey gave an ``Excellence in 
Programmatic Oversight Award'' to the subcommittee for its 
oversight of Executive Order 13083.
    c. Hearings.--On July 28, 1998, the subcommittee held a 
hearing on President Clinton's Executive Order 13083, 
``Clinton-Gore v. State and Local Governments.'' The hearing 
included bi-partisan agreement and opposition to this order. 
Witnesses testifying for the five major State and local 
organizations--Governor Michael O. Leavitt (R-UT) for the 
National Governors' Association, State Representative Daniel T. 
Blue, Jr. (D-NC) for the National Conference of State 
Legislatures, Mayor Edward Rendell (D-Philadelphia, PA) for the 
U.S. Conference of Mayors, Councilman Brian J. O'Neill (R-
Philadelphia, PA) for the National League of Cities, and 
Commissioner Betty Lou Ward (D-Wake County, NC) for the 
National Association of Counties--voiced their concerns both 
about the process employed by the Clinton administration and 
the substance of the new Federalism order. In addition, former 
and current administration officials discussed the philosophic 
basis for their Federalism orders.

14. Investigation of Paperwork and Regulatory Accomplishments by the 
        Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and 
        Regulatory Affairs.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee serves both as the 
authorizing and oversight committee for the Office of 
Management and Budget's [OMB] Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs [OIRA]. In 1998, the subcommittee devoted 
substantial oversight to OIRA's activities under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 [PRA], the Congressional Review Act 
[CRA], and the regulatory accounting provisions (section 625) 
of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Acts for 
1997 and 1998. The subcommittee's oversight revealed that OIRA 
failed to satisfactorily perform its statutory responsibilities 
for paperwork reduction, the CRA, and regulatory accounting and 
failed to satisfactorily perform as well in the area of 
regulatory reviews. OIRA's performance relating to the CRA is 
discussed in the following section of this report.
            (1) Paperwork Reduction
    The PRA requires OIRA to work with the agencies to achieve 
government-wide paperwork reductions of 10 percent per year in 
fiscal years 1996 and 1997. OIRA is required to review all new 
and revised paperwork requirements proposed by the agencies on 
the public before they can take effect. OIRA's reviews resulted 
in the government's paperwork burden on the public not meeting 
the statutory reduction goals. Instead, there was only a 2.6 
percent reduction government-wide in fiscal year 1996 and an 
estimated 1.8 percent reduction government-wide in fiscal year 
1997. The amount of paperwork imposed on the public by several 
departments and agencies actually increased. For example, in 
fiscal year 1996, the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, the Department of the Interior, and the 
Environmental Protection Agency increased their paperwork 
burden on the public by more than 10 percent, 4.6 percent, and 
4.5 percent, respectively.
            (2) Regulatory Reviews
    OIRA also performed very poorly in its review of new and 
revised regulatory requirements proposed by the agencies on the 
public. Executive Order 12866 requires OIRA to review all major 
or significant rules to ensure that the benefits of the rules 
outweigh their costs and that the agencies comply with all 
applicable laws and procedures. The subcommittee's oversight 
revealed that OIRA's regulatory review process has largely 
become a rubber-stamp function for agency proposals.
    OIRA, under the Clinton administration, reviews less than a 
fourth of the number of rules reviewed by OIRA under the Reagan 
and Bush administrations. Of the 4,476 rules reviewed by OIRA 
during the Clinton administration, OIRA rejected only 13 rules, 
compared to 87 rejected during the Bush administration, and 296 
rejected during the two Reagan administration terms. Last year, 
OIRA sent back only four rules, three of which were from the 
Railroad Retirement Board, which is not a major regulatory 
agency.
            (3) Regulatory Accounting
    Although some economists estimate that Federal regulations 
cost the American people as much as $1 trillion annually, it is 
not clear what the relative costs and benefits are in the 
aggregate and for each major regulation and Federal program. To 
make difficult choices about whether the social, environmental, 
and/or economic benefits of a particular government program or 
regulation are worth the overall costs of the program or 
regulation, Congress and the American people need accurate and 
comprehensive information about the impacts of Federal programs 
and rules.
    To begin to obtain such information, the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Acts for 1997 and 1998 
required OIRA to submit a report to Congress providing 
estimates of the total costs and benefits of Federal 
regulations and the costs and benefits for each major rule, and 
recommendations for the elimination or modification of specific 
Federal programs. Instead of providing actual estimates, in the 
first report, OMB simply rehashed several obsolete studies on 
the aggregate effects of regulations. For major rules, OMB 
provided estimates for only 15 of 59 major rules issued during 
the period covered by the report. Finally, OMB did not offer a 
single recommendation for terminating or even modifying any 
Federal regulatory program.
    On August 28, 1998, the subcommittee commented on OMB's 
draft second report to Congress on the costs and benefits of 
Federal regulations. The subcommittee applauded the 
improvements made by OMB since its first report to Congress, 
such as inclusion of rules issued by independent agencies, as 
the subcommittee recommended in its October 27, 1997 letter to 
OMB in response to the first report. Nevertheless, the 
subcommittee stated its belief that the report fell short by 
not estimating monetized costs for all major rules issued by 
these agencies during the period covered by the report. OMB's 
draft report includes monetized cost estimates for only 4 of 
the 41 major rules issued by these agencies between April 1, 
1996 and March 31, 1998.
    The subcommittee also repeated some of its concerns stated 
in its October 1997 letter. Those concerns include (a) the 
incomplete compliance with specific statutory requirements and 
(b) the absence of any mandatory systematic and standardized 
procedure for agencies to collect and report data to OMB on 
regulatory impacts of all existing, revised, and new 
regulations. The subcommittee stated its belief that the most 
significant failure was to comply fully with the statutory 
requirement to recommend a regulatory program (other than 
electricity restructuring) for regulatory reform or 
elimination. The statute requires OMB to recommend regulatory 
programs or program elements that are inefficient, ineffective, 
or not a sound use of the Nation's resources. The subcommittee 
believes that full compliance with this statutory provision is 
essential to protect the public from unwarranted regulatory 
intrusion.
    With respect to the absence of standard procedures for 
collecting and reporting data by the agencies, the subcommittee 
believes that implementing such procedures is critical to the 
credibility of future government-wide analyses. Accordingly, 
the subcommittee told OMB that it expects OMB to require all 
executive branch agencies to follow uniform systematic 
standardized procedures for collecting and reporting data to 
OMB and to request that the independent regulatory agencies do 
the same. At a minimum, the subcommittee asserted there must be 
a standardized procedure for collecting and reporting data on 
the costs and benefits for all existing rules.
    The subcommittee agreed with OMB about some of the 
limitations in the report: (a) there are still enormous data 
gaps; (b) the report's estimates of compliance costs are 
substantially understated; (c) the cost-benefit analyses for 
the 33 final rules issued last year incompletely monetized 
costs and benefits; and (d) there needs to be better 
information in proposed rules to assure selection of 
alternatives with the greatest net benefits.
    The subcommittee shared OMB's concern about aggregating the 
cost and benefit estimates from individual rules and various 
studies. The subcommittee is especially concerned about total 
Federal regulatory cost estimates that are understated because 
of insufficient data on the direct and indirect impacts of 
Federal rules. The statute requires that the report include 
both OMB's estimates of total costs and benefits and OMB's 
``assessment of the direct and indirect impacts of Federal 
rules on the private sector, State and local government, and 
the Federal Government.'' The subcommittee recommended that OMB 
seek out research or reports of any estimates from those 
sectors on the direct and indirect impacts of Federal rules for 
consideration in subsequent reports.
    b. Benefits.--As a result of the subcommittee's 
investigation and analysis, the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act for 1999 includes a statutory requirement 
for OMB to submit a report to Congress by March 31, 1999 that 
identifies specific paperwork reduction accomplishments 
expected, constituting annual 5 percent reductions in paperwork 
expected in fiscal year 1999 and fiscal year 2000. 
Additionally, section 638 of the Treasury and General 
Government Appropriations Act for 1999 is a modification of 
section 625 of the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Acts for 1997 and 1998. The new language 
requires OMB to prepare an accounting statement and associated 
report on the cumulative costs and benefits of Federal 
regulatory programs and provides for peer review.
    c. Hearings.--None. See the next section of this report for 
information about two 1998 hearings relating to the CRA.

15. The Congressional Review Act.

    The subcommittee conducted an ongoing review and study of 
agency compliance with the requirements of the Congressional 
Review Act [CRA], 5 U.S.C. ch. 8. A series of hearings, 
oversight letters, review of new regulations, and extensive 
legal research revealed that the agencies have not fully 
implemented the CRA.
    a. Oversight of Agency Compliance With CRA.--The 
subcommittee conducted extensive legal research regarding the 
requirements of the CRA and reviewed agency compliance with the 
CRA, finding that many agencies failed to report many 
interpretive rules, guidances, and policy statements that fall 
within the CRA's definition of a covered ``rule.''
    Under section 801(a)(1)(A) of the CRA, the Federal agency 
issuing a rule must send a report to Congress. This report must 
include the text of the rule, a summary description of the 
rule, and the proposed effective date. The agency must file 
such report with Congress, including copies to the General 
Accounting Office [GAO], ``[b]efore a rule can take effect . . 
.'' Sec. 801(a)(1)(A). In other words, unless and until an 
agency properly reports a rule, the rule has no legal force or 
effect. Any action the agency takes to promulgate, implement, 
or enforce an unreported rule is an ultra vires act and, 
therefore, legally null and void.
    The CRA broadly defines a rule as any ``agency statement of 
general . . . applicability and future effect designed to 
implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy . . .'' 
Sec. Sec. 804(3) and 551(4). This definition is not limited to 
``legislative'' rules subject to the notice and comment 
provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act's [APA] section 
553. On the contrary, the definition includes any interpretive 
rule or other agency statement used to apply existing law or 
implement policy. The legislative history confirms the plain 
text of the definition: ``Interpretive rules, general 
statements of policy, and analogous agency policy guidelines 
are covered without qualification because they meet the 
definition of a `rule' borrowed from section 551 of title 5, 
and are not excluded from the definition of a rule.'' Statement 
of Representative McIntosh, March 28, 1996, Congressional 
Record at H3005.
    In 1998, the subcommittee gave special attention to three 
rules that are covered by the CRA but were not reported.
            (1) Oversight of HHS/HCFA Compliance With CRA With Regard 
                    to Viagra-Medicaid Rule
    The subcommittee's review of the Department of Health and 
Human Services' [HHS] compliance with the CRA revealed that, on 
July 2, 1998, HHS's Health Care Financing Administration [HCFA] 
issued a rule requiring State Medicaid programs to cover 
Viagra, a prescription drug used to treat male impotence. Under 
HCFA's new interpretation of the prescription drug 
reimbursement provisions of the Social Security Act, States are 
required to reimburse Viagra users under any State Medicaid 
program that covers prescription drugs. HCFA imposed this 
interpretive rule on the States without adequate prior 
consultation with State Medicaid authorities.
    The Viagra rule was issued not only in violation of 
traditional federalism principles but also in violation of the 
CRA and is, therefore, legally invalid and should not be 
regarded as binding on the States. The subcommittee reviewed 
the Viagra ruling to determine whether HCFA complied with the 
requirements of the APA in issuing this new regulation. In 
particular, the subcommittee examined HCFA's compliance with 
the CRA to determine whether HCFA reported the rule to Congress 
pursuant to the CRA's rule reporting requirements. The 
subcommittee found that HCFA's Viagra directive is a rule 
subject to the CRA's requirements and that, in violation of the 
CRA, HCFA failed to report the rule to Congress.
    HCFA's interpretive directive on Viagra falls squarely 
within the CRA's definition of a rule and is, therefore, 
subject to the CRA's reporting requirements. HCFA issued this 
directive on July 2, 1998 in the form of a press release to all 
State Medicaid Directors. The directive is a statement of 
general applicability and future effect, applicable to all 
State Medicaid programs as of July 2nd. The directive is 
clearly designed to interpret existing law, deeming Viagra a 
``medically necessary'' drug within the meaning of section 1927 
of the Social Security Act.
    In view of the significant cost of this rule to State 
governments, which are obliged to administer Federal Medicaid 
programs, the subcommittee swiftly notified the Governor of 
each of the 50 States that, because HCFA's directive is a rule 
subject to the CRA and because HCFA has failed to report this 
rule to Congress as the statute requires, the rule has not 
legally taken effect. In other words, the subcommittee informed 
the Governors, HCFA's expansive interpretation of section 1927 
has no legal force or effect and should not be regarded as 
binding on the States, until such time as HCFA submits all 
required reports to Congress. Furthermore, because this 
interpretive rule was issued without observance of procedures 
required by law, any attempt by HCFA to enforce this illegal 
rule is subject to judicial review under section 706(2)(D) of 
the APA.
    The subcommittee also sent a letter informing the Secretary 
of HHS of the delinquent status of the HCFA rule. To date, HHS/
HCFA has not reported the rule and has provided the 
subcommittee with no legal justification for its delinquency.
            (2) Oversight of DOT Compliance With CRA in Regard to the 
                    ``Peanut-Free-Zone'' Rule
    The subcommittee's review of the Department of 
Transportation's [DOT] compliance with CRA revealed that DOT's 
Office of Aviation Enforcement Proceedings had issued a rule 
requiring the creation of ``peanut-free `buffer zone[s]' '' on 
airline flights. The rule, released on August 12, 1998 by DOT's 
Office of Aviation Enforcement Proceedings in the form of a 
letter sent to the 10 largest U.S. air carriers, interprets 
provisions of the Air Carrier Access Act of 1986 [ACAA], 49 
U.S.C. Sec. 1374(c), and its implementing regulations, 14 
C.F.R. Part 382; prescribes requirements that are binding on 
the air carriers; and establishes a new policy for enforcing 
such requirements. Although the preamble to the Federal 
Register entry for Part 382, 63 F.R. 10528 at 10529, refers to 
peanut allergies, the text of ACAA Sec. 1374(c) and Part 382 
make no mention of peanuts or allergies of any kind.
    The letter generally applies to the 10 largest airlines, 
effective August 12, 1998. Because the letter implements and 
interprets law, and prescribes a new DOT policy, and because 
the letter is a statement of general applicability and future 
effect, it is a rule within the meaning of the CRA (5 U.S.C. 
ch. 8). The subcommittee discovered that, in response to the 
rule, 4 of the 10 major air carriers canceled their peanut 
orders outright for fear of enforcement action by DOT, dealing 
a devastating blow to small peanut farmers.
    On September 17, 1998, the subcommittee sent a letter to 
Secretary Slater advising him of DOT's failure to comply with 
the CRA in this matter. At the time that this report was 
printed, the Secretary had failed to respond. Section 372 of 
the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act for 1999 provides that no funds may be used 
to implement, carry out, or enforce any regulation that 
requires or encourages an air carrier to, on intrastate or 
interstate air transportation, provide a peanut-free buffer 
zone or any other related peanut-restricted area, or restrict 
the distribution of peanuts until the DOT Secretary submits a 
peer-reviewed scientific study to Congress. The study would 
need to determine that there are severe reactions by passengers 
to peanuts as a result of contact with very small airborne 
peanut particles of the kind that passengers might encounter in 
an aircraft.
            (3) Oversight of EPA Compliance With CRA in Regard to 
                    ``Environmental Justice'' Guidance
    The subcommittee's review of the Environmental Protection 
Agency's [EPA] compliance with the CRA revealed that EPA had 
issued ``Interim Guidance for Investigating Title VI 
Administrative Complaints Challenging Permits'' (Guidance). The 
Guidance, released on February 4, 1998 by EPA's Office of 
Environmental Justice, establishes a ``framework'' for handling 
complaints filed with EPA's Office of Civil Rights under Title 
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (Title VI), 
alleging disparate environmental impacts on minority 
populations resulting from the issuance of industrial site 
permits by State and local governments that receive EPA 
funding.
    If EPA determines that a permit has discriminatory effects, 
it is required by its own Title VI regulations to terminate 
funding to the State or local agency issuing the permit (40 
C.F.R. pt. 7). These regulations do not specify what 
constitutes a discriminatory ``effect'' in the environmental 
permitting context. The Guidance, which applies prospectively 
to all Title VI complaints challenging such permits, 
effectively amends and interprets EPA's Title VI regulations by 
setting forth specific procedures and criteria that EPA ``will 
follow'' in processing complaints. As a result, State and local 
governments issuing permits, as well as private parties 
applying for permits, are likely to regard the requirements of 
the Guidance as binding in matters related to siting industrial 
facilities. In light of the legal and policy effects of the 
Guidance, the subcommittee determined that it is a rule within 
the meaning of the CRA. The determination as to whether the 
Environmental Justice Guidance is a rule under the CRA is being 
researched by the GAO and an opinion is expected in the near 
future.
    Benefits.--These instances of agency persistence in 
refusing to report rules covered by the CRA, despite the broad 
financial and policy implications of the rule for the States, 
the private sector, and small businesses, have given the 
subcommittee a telling illustration of the reasons for, and the 
extent of, the agencys' failure to comply with the rule 
reporting provisions of the CRA. The subcommittee's review 
demonstrated the glaring need for OMB to issue guidance to the 
agencies on the requirements of the CRA, including 
clarification of the definition of a ``rule.'' To assist OMB in 
the development of such guidance, the subcommittee conducted 
extensive legal research on the definition of a rule and 
prepared draft guidance for OMB's use.
    b. CRA Seminars.--In cooperation with the House Judiciary 
Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law and the Small 
Business Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform and Paperwork 
Reduction, the subcommittee held three seminars on the use of 
the CRA as an oversight tool. The first two seminars were for 
personal staff, and a third seminar was conducted for committee 
staff. More than 60 House and Senate staff members and members 
of the public attended the seminars. The seminars addressed the 
overall structure and basic provisions of the CRA, focusing on 
the scope of agency actions covered by the statute and the use 
of the Resolution of Disapproval as an oversight tool in the 
struggle to control burdensome new regulations. The seminars 
also addressed more advanced topics regarding the statute's 
complex timing provision, floor procedures, and legal questions 
pertaining to the definition of a rule and the availability of 
judicial review of unreported agency rules.
    Benefits.--The seminars heightened congressional awareness 
of the value of the CRA for oversight of regulatory agencies 
and provided a forum for answering questions and exchanging 
recommendations pertaining to implementation of the CRA by both 
Congress and the agencies.
    c. CRA Implementation and Guidance.--OIRA failed to perform 
its responsibilities with respect to the CRA. Despite OIRA's 
obligation under President Clinton's Executive order to provide 
the agencies with guidance on compliance with regulatory laws, 
OIRA has done virtually nothing to insure that the agencies are 
complying with the CRA.
    To encourage OIRA to carry out its responsibilities under 
the CRA, the subcommittee proposed to increase OIRA's fiscal 
year 1998 budget by $200,000 specifically to help with CRA 
implementation and other responsibilities. Congress accepted 
this proposal. Regrettably, $200,000 and 12 months later, OIRA 
has shown no signs of improvement and even openly stated that 
it has no intention of doing anything new to implement CRA. As 
a result of the subcommittee's analysis, the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Act for 1999 includes a 
statutory requirement for OMB, by March 31, 1999, to issue 
guidance on the requirements of the CRA, including a standard 
new rule reporting form.
    d. Hearings.--Dismayed by OIRA's recalcitrance regarding 
CRA, the subcommittee held two hearings (March 10, 1998 and 
June 17, 1998) on OIRA implementation of CRA. In the 
subcommittee's hearing on OIRA's implementation of CRA on March 
10th, GAO General Counsel Robert Murphy testified that 279 new 
regulations were not reported as required by the CRA--and this 
does not include the undisclosed number of policy statements, 
guidance, and other rules that were not even published in the 
Federal Register. At both hearings, Mr. Murphy testified that 
OIRA has refused to cooperate with GAO in developing a standard 
format for agency reports on new rules. Furthermore, GAO 
testified that, under the Clinton OIRA's watch, at least eight 
major rules took effect illegally. At the hearings, OIRA 
indicated a willingness to improve its performance under CRA, 
but subsequently did little or nothing to improve its record on 
CRA implementation.

16. Investigation of the White House Initiative on Global Climate 
        Change and the Kyoto Protocol.

    a. Summary.--From March 2-18, 1998, the subcommittee sent 
letters of inquiry to 22 Federal agencies about the White House 
Initiative on Global Climate Change. Questions sought for the 
administration to justify the President's budget request for a 
huge increase in funding (+ $6.3 billion) and to disclose the 
administration's domestic strategies for climate change. The 
Clinton-Gore administration only very reluctantly and very 
slowly responded to the subcommittee's requests. Due to the 
incomplete responses to the subcommittee's questions and the 
incomplete document production, from June 26th to August 12th, 
the chairman of the full committee issued seven subpoenas for 
document production by four Executive Office of the President 
components (the Council of Economic Advisers, the Council on 
Environmental Quality [CEQ], the Office of Management and 
Budget, and the Office of Science and Technology Policy); and 
three other executive departments and agencies (the Department 
of Energy [DOE], the Department of State, and the Environmental 
Protection Agency [EPA]).
    On September 30, 1998, the subcommittee received from the 
White House Counsel's office 161 descriptions of over 300 
documents being withheld from review even by Members of 
Congress. Subsequently, the White House Counsel's office added 
more withheld documents, including some documents originally 
offered for review by Members. On October 1, 1998, the chairman 
of the subcommittee wrote White House Counsel Charles Ruff for 
six specific documents from those being withheld from Congress. 
On October 7th, Mr. Ruff stated ``we are prepared to assert 
Executive Privilege'' for four of these six documents. Such an 
assertion of Executive Privilege would be only the fourth time 
that President Clinton has made such an assertion in his 6 
years in office in response to a congressional request for 
documents.
    At the subcommittee's October 9, 1998 hearing, the 
subcommittee issued a report card for 10 agencies on their 
responsiveness to the subcommittee's March 1998 inquiries in 
terms of answers to questions and production of documents. The 
Department of the Interior received ``Incomplete'' in both 
areas. The Department of Agriculture received an ``Incomplete'' 
for its answers and an ``F'' for its document production. The 
Department of State received a ``D-'' for its answers and an 
``Incomplete'' for its document production. Other poor grades 
included a ``D'' for CEQ's answers and a ``D'' for DOE's 
document production. In contrast, the Department of the 
Treasury and EPA received an ``A'' and a ``B+,'' respectively, 
for their document production.
    The answers and documents which were provided revealed very 
few program performance measures (despite the requirements of 
the Government Performance and Results Act which mandates such 
measures for every program) on which Congress and the American 
public could assess what benefits would be received for the 
requested funding, and a possible backdoor approach to 
implementing the Kyoto Protocol prior to ratification of the 
treaty by the U.S. Senate. Documents, which were finally made 
available to the subcommittee, indicated that the 
administration has or is evaluating such measures as: (a) 
annual increases in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy [CAFE] 
standards for motor vehicles, which already impose unnecessary 
burdens on the public; (b) fees or taxes on less fuel-efficient 
vehicles, which will make driving much more expensive for 
families that need larger cars; (c) performance standards for 
electric utilities and other regulated sources, which will 
drive up utility bills; (d) greater use of energy efficiency 
standards and mandates; (e) a broad-based energy tax (possibly 
based on carbon content), which would result in higher energy 
prices to consumers; (f) fuel-specific excise taxes (such as an 
oil tax or import fee); (g) a sector-specific excise tax (such 
as a transportation tax); and (h) pollution/consumption taxes 
which could be costly to all Americans.
    As a result of the subcommittee's investigation, analysis, 
and hearings and other congressional investigations, the 
Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act for 
1999 includes a statutory prohibition on funding for EPA to 
propose or issue rules for the purpose of implementation or in 
preparation of implementation of the Kyoto Protocol prior to 
Senate ratification and report language directing the 
administration to do a better job of justifying any requested 
funding increases in the fiscal year 2000 budget submission for 
all affected agencies. In addition, the Foreign Operations, 
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act for 
1999 includes a statutory requirement for the President to 
provide a detailed account of all agency obligations and 
expenditures for climate change programs and activities for 
fiscal years 1998, 1999, and thereafter, including an 
accounting of climate change expenditures by agency for each 
line item in the President's Budget Appendix, and any plan 
related to the implementation or the furtherance of the Kyoto 
Protocol.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's letters of inquiry, 
analysis, and hearings revealed very few program performance 
measures on which Congress and the American public could assess 
what benefits would be received for the funding requested in 
the President's Fiscal Year 1999 Budget, and a possible 
backdoor approach to implementing the Kyoto Protocol prior to 
ratification of the treaty by the U.S. Senate. As a 
consequence, Congress included several statutory provisions and 
report language in the fiscal year 1999 appropriations bills to 
ensure additional budget justification and program performance 
measures in the President's Fiscal Year 2000 Budget and to 
prevent implementation of the Kyoto Protocol prior to 
ratification by the U.S. Senate.
    c. Hearings.--On June 17, 1998, the subcommittee held a 
hearing, ``The White House Global Climate Change Initiative and 
Congressional Review Act Implementation: Is OMB Hiding The 
Truth About New Regulations and Programs?'' On October 9, 1998, 
the subcommittee held its eighth and final 1998 hearing on 
global climate change, ``Will the Administration Implement the 
Kyoto Protocol Through the Back Door?''

17. Hearings on the Kyoto Protocol.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee conducted six hearings to 
examine the potential impact of implementing the Kyoto Protocol 
on the U.S. economy and energy system and to assure that the 
administration does not unilaterally implement this treaty 
before it is submitted to the Senate for advice and consent. 
The subcommittee heard testimony from citizens, State and local 
government elected officials, business and labor leaders, and 
economic experts who are concerned that this treaty could 
significantly harm our economy and standard of living.
    On December 11, 1997, the Parties to the United Nations 
Framework Convention on Climate Change agreed to a Protocol 
that imposes legally binding targets and timetables on 
industrialized nations for reducing emissions of six greenhouse 
gases. This Protocol places the greatest burden on the United 
States. At Kyoto, the Clinton/Gore administration committed the 
United States to reducing its emissions by 7 percent below 1990 
levels within the timeframe 2008 to 2012. In real terms, this 
requires an unprecedented 40 percent reduction of fossil energy 
use from business-as-usual. On the other hand, this treaty 
exempts developing countries from any restrictions, regardless 
of their level of economic development or the quantity of 
greenhouse gases they emit. There are no constraints on such 
huge emissions producers like China, India, South Korea, Brazil 
and Mexico.
    In Senate Resolution 98, which passed by a 95-0 vote, the 
Senate indicated to the administration that it would not ratify 
any climate treaty that excludes developing countries and that 
could harm the United States economically. Recognizing the 
Protocol's deficiencies, the Clinton/Gore administration has 
promised that it will not submit this treaty for ratification 
until there is ``meaningful participation'' by developing 
countries. In addition, in hearings before Congress, Under 
Secretary of State Stuart E. Eizenstat has repeatedly disavowed 
any intention of the administration to implement the Protocol 
before it is submitted to the Senate.
    At the subcommittee's hearing on May 19, 1998, Dr. Janet 
Yellen, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, testified 
that the costs to Americans of complying with the Kyoto 
Protocol would be ``modest.'' According to the administration's 
calculations, it would only cost one-tenth of 1 percent of 
projected GDP in 2010, about $7 to $12 billion per year, with 
an emissions price in the range of $14 to $23 per ton of 
carbon. Based on the modest energy price effects associated 
with these estimates, the administration also predicted that 
the treaty would likely have little impact on U.S. trade 
competitiveness or on U.S. jobs. The administration's estimates 
assume that there will be unrestricted global trading and that 
the United States will be able to satisfy 85 percent of its 
Kyoto obligation by purchasing credits from other nations that 
can reduce emissions less expensively.
    However, the administration's very low estimates stand in 
sharp contrast to the findings of most economic experts who 
have analyzed the economic costs of implementing the Kyoto 
Protocol. At the subcommittee's hearings, experts discussed a 
wide range of models which predict that meeting the U.S. 
emissions reduction target would severely diminish U.S. trade 
competitiveness, eliminate millions of American jobs, and slow 
U.S. GDP growth. In addition, experts addressed the lack of 
sound science to support the Protocol.
    U.S. Competitiveness. Without the participation of the 
developing countries, economic studies by Standard and Poor's 
DRI [DRI] and WEFA, Inc. concluded that the Kyoto Protocol's 
mandatory requirements for reducing emissions would shift 
existing competitive advantages away from the United States and 
other industrialized nations. This would lead to significant 
declines in American output and employment, with offsetting 
increases in those countries with low energy costs, such as 
China, India, and Mexico. They agreed that this treaty also 
would accelerate the relocation of energy-intensive industries 
to non-participating countries (non-Annex I countries) to take 
advantage of cheap labor, lower capital expenses and production 
costs, and lower environmental, health, and safety standards.
    DRI and WEFA noted that the impact on industries that 
depend on export sales or face strong import competition could 
be severe if developing countries were allowed to use low-cost, 
high-polluting technologies and to sell their products at a 
lower cost in the United States. For example, Ande Abbott of 
the Boilermakers Union projects that low-priced cement from 
China could flood the U.S. market, costing the United States 
its competitive position and hundreds of jobs without any 
offsetting environmental benefits. According to the Department 
of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory study, U.S. energy 
intensive industries such as cement, chemicals, paper, 
aluminum, and iron and steel would face sharp price increases 
that would depress domestic demand and encourage imports. That 
study asserts that, by excluding developing countries from 
mandated restraints, the Kyoto Protocol would effectively 
``redistribute output, employment, and greenhouse gas emissions 
to non-participating countries.''
    Loss of American Jobs. Without international trading, WEFA 
projected 2.4 million jobs lost from implementing the Kyoto 
Protocol. The AFL-CIO estimated that the treaty will cost as 
many as 1.5 million Americans their jobs. Even assuming the use 
of the treaty's flexibility mechanisms to achieve emissions 
reductions, DRI still predicted between 1.1 and 1.6 million job 
losses during 2008-2012. Cecil Roberts, president of the United 
Mine Workers of America, testified that every region of the 
country will be hit, nearly every sector of our economy 
affected, and many high-paying mining and manufacturing jobs 
lost. States that rely on energy production, manufacturing, and 
trade export will be the hardest hit. Governor Underwood of 
West Virginia testified that his State could lose over 6,000 
jobs, including 3,000 high-paying manufacturing jobs. Mr. 
Roberts queried ``whether the benefit of [implementing the 
Kyoto Protocol]--a decline in carbon concentrations of about 
one part per million--is worth a million lost American jobs and 
over $100 billion per year in lost economic output.''
    Impact on GDP Growth. At the subcommittee's hearing on 
April 23, 1998, WEFA, Inc. economist, Dr. Mary Novak, testified 
that the U.S. target could not be met without significant 
increases in energy prices. It would ``require substantial 
investments by both consumers and businesses to improve energy 
efficiency and to substitute low-carbon energy sources for 
higher carbon energy sources.'' Dr. Margo Thorning, Chief 
Economist for the American Council for Capital Formation, 
agreed, stating that, ``in the absence of an international 
trading system, the U.S. would be forced to curb its emissions 
by more than 30 percent within little more than a decade. As 
carbon emissions were reduced, economic growth would slow due 
to lost output, as prices rise for goods that must be produced 
using less carbon and/or more expensive processes.'' Dr. Novak 
estimated that total annual output in the United States would 
fall 3.2 percent below 2010 baseline projections, or $300 
billion. Limited trading schemes (involving only developed 
countries and Eastern Europe/Former Soviet Union) would cut the 
U.S.'s GDP by between 0.9 percent annually, according to Dr. 
David Montgomery of Charles River Associates [CRA], and 1.6 
percent, estimated by Dr. Joyce Brinner of DRI.
    Unsubstantiated Science. The science surrounding global 
warming is far from settled. William O'Keefe, executive vice 
president of the American Petroleum Institute, noted at one of 
the subcommittee's hearings that the 1995 Second Assessment 
Report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change [IPCC] indicates considerable uncertainty about the 
magnitude, pace, and impact of global warming. There is no 
consensus among climate scientists about whether nature will 
amplify the small direct impacts on temperature from human 
greenhouse gas emissions into serious warming at some point in 
the future. According to the IPCC report, ``Our ability to 
quantify the human influence on the global climate is currently 
limited because the expected signal is still emerging from the 
noise of natural variability, and because there are 
uncertainties in key factors.'' As Paul Wilhelm, president of 
the U.S. Steel Group noted, ``There are major unresolved 
questions concerning the accuracy of current and historical 
temperature and atmospheric observations, the reliability of 
climate modeling and prediction techniques, and even whether 
climatic warming might be a good thing.''
    While the scientific evidence of global warming is very 
inconclusive, it is clear that measurable net reductions of 
greenhouse gas emissions cannot be achieved without the 
participation of developing countries. Paul Agathen, senior 
vice president of Ameren Corp., pointed out that, according to 
the former chairman of the IPCC, Bert Bolin, emissions 
reductions only by developed nations ``would not be detectable 
on projected temperature increases.'' By 2015, developing 
countries' emissions are projected to increase by more than 141 
percent over 1990 levels, as compared to only 30 percent for 
developed countries. Melvin Dixon of the United Paperworkers 
International Union asserted that ``It just seems unreasonable 
to expect that greenhouse-gas output can be reduced worldwide 
without regulating the fastest-growing segment of the world's 
economy.'' Melvin Brekhus, executive vice president of Texas 
Industries and Mr. Wilhelm both stated that an unintended 
consequence of the Kyoto Protocol would be the encouragement of 
energy inefficiency and increased greenhouse gas emissions by 
steel and cement manufacturing companies in developing 
countries.
    Cost of Tradeable Permits. Another measure of the burden 
that the Kyoto target would impose on the U.S. economy is the 
cost of a tradeable permit to emit a metric ton of carbon. 
Under a permit system, permits would trade at the marginal cost 
of abatement. Dr. Novak testified that ``requiring consumers 
and businesses to pay for a permit to consume energy 
effectively causes energy prices to increase.'' In her view, 
these price increases would ``act as a prolonged series of 
mini-shocks to the U.S. economy,'' as with the oil price shocks 
in the 1970's and early 1980's. Without international trading, 
WEFA estimated that a carbon fee of $265 per metric ton would 
be required to reduce emissions 7 percent below 1990 levels. If 
the United States can purchase credits overseas to offset 42 
percent of its obligation, DRI predicted a permit price of 
$110. Finally, CRA estimated a permit price of about $120 if 
the United States could achieve its goal of unrestricted 
trading among Annex I countries.
    The foregoing estimates about the impact of the Kyoto 
Protocol on American output, employment, and competitiveness 
are at great variance to the administration's estimates because 
they rely on quite different assumptions about the scope of 
international emissions trading, the conversion of powerplants 
from coal to natural gas, and the development rate of energy 
efficient and low-carbon technologies. These different 
assumptions affect the amount of fossil fuel combustion that 
the United States would have to cut domestically, the price at 
which those reductions could be achieved within the period 
2008-2012, and the impact of the price increases on U.S. 
growth, employment, and competitiveness. As Dr. Montgomery 
stated, under different and more reasonable assumptions, the 
costs of implementing the Kyoto Protocol would be 10 times 
higher than the estimates stated by Dr. Yellen.
    International Emissions Trading. The administration's 
estimate that carbon permit prices will be only between $14 and 
$23 per ton of carbon assumes that there will be unrestricted 
global trading, in which key developing countries, such as 
China, India and Brazil are active participants, and that the 
United States will be able to purchase sufficient emissions 
credits overseas to offset 85 percent of its commitment. 
However, as Dr. Brinner of DRI and other witnesses stated, this 
assumption is unrealistic for two reasons: (1) the Kyoto 
Protocol limits emissions trading only to participating 
countries (Annex I countries); and (2) other countries' and 
groups' philosophies on trading may well lead to limits on the 
amount of reductions that any one country can achieve outside 
its borders and on the amount of international trading that a 
nation can use to meet its emissions target.
    At the U.N. climate change negotiating sessions in Bonn, 
Germany earlier this year, the European Union and several 
Eastern nations insisted that a ``concrete ceiling'' be imposed 
on the use of trading. Moreover, developing countries refused 
to consider voluntary commitments. Robert Murray, president and 
CEO of Coal Resources, Inc., noted that, in a closing statement 
in Bonn, the Ambassador of Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the 
developing world, said ``The Group reiterates that there must 
be no new commitments, voluntary or otherwise, introduced for 
all developing countries, under any guise. . . .'' John 
Passacantando, president of Ozone Action, and Daniel Lashoff, 
senior scientist of the Natural Resources Defense Council, both 
testified that environmental groups expect the United States to 
provide leadership to the rest of the world, by achieving its 
target domestically through increasing energy efficiency and 
reducing energy consumption. Finally, in May 1998, President 
Clinton signed a G-8 nation communique committing the United 
States to ``undertake domestically the steps necessary to 
reduce significantly greenhouse gas emissions'' and to use 
trading, as the Kyoto Protocol says, to ``supplement domestic 
actions.''
    In addition, the administration's cost estimates assume 
that an international emissions trading system can be developed 
and operating by 2008-2012. Mr. O'Keefe quoted a statement by 
the distinguished economist Dr. Thomas Schelling that ``an 
international emissions trading agreement, while esthetically 
elegant, is economically unworkable. There is no likelihood 
that nations of the world can sit down and allocate once and 
for all among themselves several trillion dollars worth . . . 
of very long-term unchangeable emissions quotas.''
    Dr. Montgomery noted that ``When all of the 
Administration's assumptions about unrestricted emissions 
trading are removed, permit prices increase from $14 per ton to 
$193 per ton with no international trading.''
    Conversion of Coal-Fired Utilities to Natural Gas. Dr. 
Montgomery of CRA pointed out that the model on which the 
administration's analysis relies, the Second Generation Model, 
projects that all U.S. coal-fired utilities can be converted to 
natural gas by 2010. Both Dr. Montgomery and Mr. Agathen 
asserted that this is not feasible due to factors such as the 
huge costs of prematurely scrapping coal-fired plants and 
difficulties in obtaining and transporting huge additional 
quantities of natural gas in a short time period. Moreover, the 
administration's analysis is inherently contradictory. If 
international emissions trading holds the cost of carbon 
permits under $25 per ton, utility executives would have no 
incentive to replace coal with natural gas. And if the permit 
prices rise above that mark, the replacement of current coal-
fired plants would be a massive and costly undertaking.
    Development and Deployment of Energy Efficient and Low-
Carbon Technologies. The administration anticipates that 
improvements in energy efficiency over the next 10 years will 
have a major impact on the cost of reducing carbon emissions. 
The basis for the administration's optimism is a Department of 
Energy [DOE] study prepared by five national laboratories. As 
Dan Reicher, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy at DOE, testified, this report concluded that, 
without increasing the Nation's energy bill, significant 
progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions can be achieved 
by developing clean energy technologies. However, the report's 
conclusions are based on judgments about the effects of price 
and the assumed effect of a ``great commitment'' by the 
government and the ``very active'' private sector that might 
accompany the establishment of a permit scheme. The study does 
not analyze the policies that might be needed to accomplish 
higher penetration of energy efficient and low-carbon 
technologies or the costs of such policies.
    Dr. John McTague, vice president, Ford Motor Co., 
maintained that there is no short-term technical fix that would 
significantly lower U.S. carbon emissions. He testified that, 
contrary to the administration's rosy predictions, deployment 
of new technology through the joint government/industry 
Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles will not meet the 
U.S. Kyoto targets and timetable. He added that the treaty's 
``rigid timetables threaten significant disruption to sound 
technological development.'' Furthermore, as George Harad, 
chairman and CEO of Boise Cascade Corp., noted, capital 
turnover has its own dynamic, particularly in such capital 
intensive industries as the forest products industry. Mr. 
O'Keefe referred to a recent analysis by Stanford University 
and the Electric Power Research Institute which indicates that 
an orderly, longer-term strategy would reduce emissions 
reduction costs by 80 percent and provide greater environmental 
benefits.
    Second Generation Model. The administration's analysis is 
based on the Second Generation Model [SGM] developed by Pacific 
Northwest National Laboratory. This model only takes into 
account costs in energy markets (direct costs) and is not 
appropriate for analyzing the Protocol's near-term economic 
impacts. The models used by CRA, WEFA, and DRI include the 
indirect costs of higher energy prices throughout the economy, 
not just in energy markets. Unlike the administration, CRA and 
DRI present results for a full range of trading scenarios, not 
just for the least-cost unrestricted trading scenarios. David 
Smith, director of Public Policy for the AFL-CIO, notes that 
the SGM ``does not allow us to determine employment impacts 
incurred during the transition to a lower emissions producing 
economy, especially as they are distributed across industries 
and geographic regions.''
    Domestic policies to curb emissions to meet the Kyoto 
target could have a significant impact on U.S. households' 
economic well-being, as well as negatively affecting the 
distribution of income. Judy Kent, a consumer and housewife, 
testified that the Protocol would mean higher costs for 
American families for housing, heating and air conditioning, 
lighting, transportation, food, and consumer products. 
According to Dr. Novak of WEFA, electricity costs could 
increase by 56 percent, home heating oil could jump 70 percent, 
and gasoline prices could rise by 48 percent. While all 
consumers would be affected, the hardest hit would be senior 
citizens, like witness Robert Johnson, and the poor, who pay a 
larger share of their income for utilities, gasoline, and food.
    Finally, the subcommittee's hearings were intended to 
assure that the administration does not unilaterally implement 
the Kyoto Protocol before the President submits it to the 
Senate. David Gardiner, Assistant Administrator of Policy, 
Planning, and Evaluation at the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency [EPA], testified that the agency has the authority to 
regulate the carbon dioxide that we exhale every day as an air 
pollutant under the Clean Air Act (Act), as if it were the same 
as other air pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide, or mercury, 
that already are regulated. Mr. Agathen indicated that, without 
establishing any basis for reclassifying CO2 as a 
pollutant, EPA modified a consent decree with the Natural 
Resources Defense Council to study ways to control carbon 
dioxide emissions from electric utilities under the Act's air 
toxics provisions. Notably, an internal EPA memorandum, dated 
May 1994, observed that ``such aggressive use of Clean Air Act 
authority'' would not be well-received in Congress. Mr. Murray 
testified that on February 18, 1998 at a widely attended 
meeting of the Agency's Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, the 
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation indicated 
that the ``next set of major decisions and rules'' would 
include ``greenhouse gas implementation.'' Mr. Murray also 
described a closed-door meeting in the Assistant 
Administrator's office, when air program staff showed a slide 
about the Agency's ``Clean Air Power Initiative'' which 
included a statement that EPA's ongoing efforts would 
significantly impact coal use in favor of natural gas. Based on 
this testimony and the subcommittee's oversight, Congressman 
McIntosh urged Congress to support the limitation in the fiscal 
year 1999 VA-HUD Appropriations Act that would prevent EPA from 
funding regulatory actions aimed at implementing the Kyoto 
Protocol before it is submitted to the Senate for advice and 
consent.
    b. Benefits.--The record developed through the 
subcommittee's hearings shows that the Kyoto Protocol goes too 
far, too fast, and involves too few countries, given the state 
of the science and the potential economic consequences of 
implementing this treaty. These hearings demonstrate how 
important it is for decisionmakers and the public to be 
informed about the full range of risks that the United States 
might face under the Kyoto Protocol, including estimates of 
cost under less favorable assumptions than the administration's 
about what other countries will agree to. Given the need to 
increase U.S. economic growth to address such challenges as a 
growing population, the retirement of the baby boom generation, 
and a persistent trade deficit, policymakers need to weigh 
carefully the treaty's potential negative economic impacts and 
its failure to engage developing countries in meaningful 
participation. These hearings argue for a measured approach to 
climate change--an orderly, long-term strategy based on facts, 
rigorous analysis, and an objective assessment of the risks.
    The record developed through these hearings also strongly 
suggests that the EPA is taking actions to implement the Kyoto 
Protocol prior to its submission to the Senate. This record 
demonstrates that the funding limitation in the fiscal year 
1999 VA-HUD Appropriations Act is needed to prevent such back-
door regulatory actions.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a series of six 
hearings entitled, ``The Kyoto Protocol: Is the Clinton-Gore 
Administration Selling Out Americans?'' on April 23, May 19, 
May 20, June 24, July 15, and September 16, 1998.

18. Investigation of OIRA's Review of NAAQS Rules.

    a. Summary.--The Environmental Protection Agency's [EPA] 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAAQS] for particulate 
matter [PM] and ozone, proposed on November 27, 1996, were 
considered a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866 and were reviewed by the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs [OIRA] of the Office of Management and 
Budget [OMB]. OIRA approved the rules as complying with the 
requirements of Executive Order 12866. The NAAQS rulemaking was 
one of the most significant regulatory actions of this year, 
expected to impose costs of over $9 billion per year on the 
regulated public for partial attainment. Because of the major 
impact of these rules, the subcommittee carefully investigated 
OIRA's involvement in the rulemaking to determine the extent to 
which OIRA performed its regulatory review obligations under 
President Clinton's Executive Order 12866 and ensured that the 
proposed rules complied with all applicable statutes and 
Executive orders.
    The subcommittee found that OIRA failed to perform its duty 
to function as an independent reviewer of agency regulatory 
impact data and an honest broker of disputes between agencies. 
Instead, politically-appointed OIRA decisionmakers passively 
followed the whims of the President, the Vice President, and 
the Administrator of EPA by perfunctorily reviewing and, for 
reasons of political expediency, approving the PM-Ozone rules 
despite serious, substantive objections raised by OIRA career 
staff pertaining to evidence in the record and the desirability 
of alternative courses of regulatory action. Also, OIRA 
political officials repeatedly failed to cooperate fully with 
congressional oversight inquiries and, in particular, with the 
subcommittee's investigation.
    b. Benefits.--The investigation has thus far exposed 
serious deficiencies in OIRA's conduct of regulatory review 
pursuant to Executive orders and procedural statutes. As a 
result, the subcommittee better understands specific areas in 
which the regulatory review process needs further oversight and 
reform.
    c. Hearings.--None.

19. Oversight of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's 
        proposed rule, ``State-Issued Driver's Licenses and Comparable 
        Identification Documents.''

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee examined the privacy concerns 
surrounding creation of a national identification [ID] card, 
and more specifically, the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration's [NHTSA] proposed rule, ``State-Issued Driver's 
Licenses and Comparable Identification Documents.'' This 
proposal, which provides that a Federal agency may only accept 
as proof of identity a State-issued driver's license which 
conforms to certain standards, including that it shall contain 
a Social Security Number [SSN] (or that a SSN is verified for 
each applicant), was criticized as establishing a de facto 
national ID card.
    NHTSA's rule (23 CFR Part 1331) was proposed on June 17, 
1998. The rule implements section 656(b) of the Illegal 
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1998 
(included in the Fiscal Year 1997 Omnibus Consolidated 
Appropriations Act).
    The rule provides that a Federal agency may only accept as 
proof of identity a State-issued driver's license or 
identification document that meets certain criteria, including 
that it contains the holder's SSN, readable visually or 
electronically, by October 1, 2000. States which do not require 
SSNs on driver's licenses and identification documents are 
exempt from this requirement, but must require all applicants 
to submit their SSNs and must verify each SSN with the Social 
Security Administration [SSA]. This requirement still raises 
privacy concerns because the SSNs are likely to be held in the 
Department of Motor Vehicles records.
    The subcommittee also examined the privacy concerns 
surrounding two other measures developed over the past few 
years which indicate a move toward a national ID card--a law 
requiring the development of a unique health identifier or 
medical ID number for individuals and a law establishing a 
national database of all newly hired employees.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee held an oversight hearing on 
the national ID card issue, focusing on the NHTSA rule on 
State-issued driver's licenses. Witnesses representing a wide 
variety of organizations, including the American Civil 
Liberties Union, the National Conference of State Legislatures, 
and the National Taxpayers' Union, testified against the 
development of a national ID card in general and the NHTSA rule 
in particular.
    NHTSA submitted a written statement for the record, stating 
that it only issued the rule because it was required to do so 
by law: ``We . . . have no programmatic interest in whether a 
final rule is developed. We issued the proposal because we were 
directed by the act to do so. The use of the social security 
number, which has proven highly controversial, has little 
bearing on the safety mission of the agency.'' NHTSA asked 
Congress to reconsider the statutory requirement for the rule: 
``To the extent that the controversy over the proposal is 
requiring us to address thousands of comments from angry 
members of the public, we would welcome the Congress's 
reassessment of subsection 656 (b) [the statute].''
    Also, in a letter to Speaker Newt Gingrich, NHTSA 
Administrator Ricardo Martinez wrote, ``in view of these 
concerns, and the misgivings of several Members of Congress, we 
have concluded that the issuance of a final rule pursuant to 
the Act should await the opportunity for further review by 
Congress. Accordingly, the agency will await Congress's advice 
on the issuance of a final rule.''
    As a result of the hearing and increased opposition to the 
rule, a 1-year moratorium was included in the Omnibus 
Appropriations bill that prohibits NHTSA from promulgating 
regulations related to national ID cards.
    c. Hearings.--``A National ID Card: Big Government at its 
Worst or Technological Efficiency?,'' September 17, 1998.

20. Oversight of the Patent and Trademark Office's Proposed 
        Consolidation/Relocation.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee conducted an oversight 
inquiry into the Patent and Trademark Office's [PTO] proposed 
consolidation and relocation in a new headquarters complex. 
Specifically, the subcommittee examined concerns raised about 
the cost of the move. PTO is currently located in leased space 
in Crystal City. The Federal Government is conducting a bidding 
process for a new building, which would involve a $1.3 billion, 
20-year lease.
    The subcommittee's concerns regarding PTO's acquisition of 
new space focused on the above-standard amenities which PTO 
included in its plans. PTO's Solicitation for Offers [SFO] 
requests that bidders incorporate such luxury features as 
marble or terrazzo floors/walls in the lobby, a fitness center, 
jogging trails, amphitheaters, statues, and fountains. PTO also 
plans to purchase all new furniture for the new building. 
Estimates of the furniture costs are extremely high--$5,000 
desks, $1,500 chairs, $1,000 coat racks, $83 wastebaskets, $250 
shower curtains, $309 ash urns, $13,298 modular tables, $1,000 
beds, $500 bedding, and $1,000 lecterns. General Services 
Administration [GSA] schedules reveal that the furniture could 
be purchased for far less. The shower curtains are $6.12, 
wastebaskets are $5.38, coat racks are $104, desks are $1,300-
$2,000, and chairs are $150 (ergonomic office chair)-$600 (top-
of-the-line leather, executive chair).
    PTO budgeted $29 million for above GSA-standard features, 
such as locks on private office doors, bumper guards in the 
hallways, and an uninterruptable power source for the computer 
system. Although PTO is completely funded by patent and 
trademark fees (as the new building would be), the subcommittee 
is still troubled by any misuse of PTO funds. The funds PTO 
raises are essentially taxpayer dollars because they go 
directly into the U.S. Treasury and Congress appropriates a 
portion of them to PTO. The remaining funds are used to pay off 
the debt and for other government purposes.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee sent oversight letters on 
the PTO's proposed consolidation/relocation to Commerce 
Secretary William Daley, PTO Commissioner Bruce Lehman, and GSA 
Administrator David Barram. The subcommittee raised concerns 
about the cost of the consolidation/relocation project, 
particularly for the above-standard upgrades and furniture. The 
subcommittee worked in conjunction with Senator Sam Brownback's 
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, 
Restructuring, and the District of Columbia. Senator Brownback 
included an amendment in the Commerce, Justice, State 
Appropriations bill to put a cap on the funds for the PTO's 
consolidation/relocation.
    c. Hearings.--None.

21. The Noxious Nine: The Worst Clinton Regulations of 1997.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee examined and evaluated many 
of the regulations issued by the Clinton administration in 
1997. The subcommittee discovered that the Clinton bureaucracy 
is making regulatory law at lightening speed. The Federal 
Register is now over 67,000 pages long--that's 37 percent more 
pages than 10 years ago. Last year alone, Federal agencies 
churned out over 4,000 new rules, including at least 59 major 
rules. Also, over 4,000 rules, including 125 major rules, are 
now in the planning stage. Each major rule will have an 
economic impact of at least $100,000. The costs for some of 
these regulations could run into the hundreds of billions.
    In 1997, Federal regulations cost the American people an 
estimated $688 billion--a 25 percent increase from 10 years 
before. Broken down, that is approximately $6,900 for a typical 
family of four. Regulations cost families more than medical 
expenses, food, transportation, recreation, clothing, or 
savings.
    In many cases these regulations fail to meet the goals of a 
cleaner, healthier and safer America. Worse, they often defy 
common sense--hurting the very people they are designed to help 
or actually polluting the environment instead of helping to 
clean it. Many are based on dubious, unproven scientific 
theories. The costs of such regulations often far outweigh the 
estimated benefits and, in many cases, the agencies do not even 
bother to estimate the costs.
    As a result of the subcommittee's oversight, the 
subcommittee assembled a cross-section of Clinton regulations 
that combine the worst of arbitrary government action, bad 
science and extraordinary costs without significant benefits, 
and, in short, indifference to the health, safety, and economic 
survival of America's families. These are the ``Noxious 
Nine''--the Clinton administration's nine worst regulations of 
1997:
            (1) PM-Ozone Standards (EPA).
    Last year the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] gave 
itself sweeping new powers over the American economy by 
mandating rigid, new limits on emissions of particulate matter 
[PM] and ozone. Independent estimates show total costs 
exceeding $300-$400 billion per year, far outstripping the 
supposed health benefits and dealing a crushing blow to 
America's farms and small businesses. Data shows that the 
standards will actually harm public health, increasing risks 
for skin cancer and cataracts, reducing living standards for 
the poor, and shrinking revenues available for life-saving 
public health measures.
            (2) Airbag Deactivation Rule (DOT/NHTSA).
    Some regulations cost people their lives. Airbags have 
killed at least 40 small children and at least 35 elderly women 
and men. Responding to the public outcry, President Clinton 
promised action. The simple solution would be to allow people 
to remove their own airbags, or, to keep the airbags, but 
install an on-off switch to protect their children and other 
passengers at risk. The Clinton Solution was more government 
interference and more paperwork. Under new regulations from the 
Department of Transportation [DOT], people who want to turn off 
their airbags first have to apply to Dr. Ricardo Martinez, the 
head of the National Highway Transportation Safety 
Administration [NHTSA] at DOT, and go through an application 
and approval process that is so complicated and so expensive 
that most working men and women cannot afford it.
            (3) Derivatives Disclosure Rule (SEC).
    Designed to protect investors by forcing banks and 
corporations to disclose additional information about 
derivatives, this rule actually hurts investors. According to 
the Securities and Exchange Commission's [SEC] own chief 
economist, the new rule lulls investors into a false sense of 
security, leading them to take unnecessary risks. The 
disclosure requirements also impose unnecessary costs on 
consumers and investors, force corporations to reveal sensitive 
information to foreign competitors, and create perverse 
incentives likely to result in wasteful litigation. In short, 
the derivatives rule is unnecessary and its requirements are 
misleading and counterproductive.
            (4) Enforcement Guidance on Accommodating Mental Illness in 
                    the Workplace (EEOC).
    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's [EEOC] new 
mental illness ``guidance'' instructs employers to take certain 
``reasonable steps'' to accommodate the mental impairments of 
employees. Under the new guidelines, if an employee is 
incompetent, uncooperative, hostile, violent, chronically late, 
or depressed, the employer must first assume the role of 
professional psychiatrist and determine whether the employee is 
mentally impaired. The result: Any business with 15 or more 
employees must give mentally impaired employees extra time off, 
put up room dividers or build sound-proof offices for employees 
who have trouble concentrating or cannot get along with their 
coworkers because of mental illness, allow impaired employees 
to wear headphones, and provide a ``job coach'' to help them 
function in the workplace.
            (5) Anti-Recycling Policy for Asthma Inhalers Containing 
                    CFCs (EPA).
    EPA quietly reversed a long-standing, pro-recycling policy 
by issuing a ``verbal guidance'' urging manufacturers of asthma 
inhalers to incinerate factory-second inhalers instead of 
recycling them to capture the leftover chlorofluorocarbons 
[CFCs]. The result will be to undo 10 years of EPA-sponsored 
technology advances and harm the environment. EPA's stated goal 
is to protect the ozone layer by reducing the emission of CFCs. 
Ironically, this new, anti-recycling policy will have exactly 
the opposite effect.
            (6) Elimination of Asthma Inhalers Containing CFCs (FDA-
                    HHS) (proposed rule).
    Some regulations harm the very people they are intended to 
help. Not only has EPA banned the recycling of asthma inhalers, 
but last year the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] announced 
plans to outlaw the production of asthma inhalers and take them 
off the market, taking away an essential medical device from 
the people who need it most. The Clinton administration claims 
that its PM-Ozone standards will improve public health, 
supposedly benefiting 15,000 asthma sufferers. But the Clinton-
FDA ban on asthma inhalers does just the opposite: it harms 
exactly the people the clean air laws were designed to help by 
taking away a potentially life-saving medical device from 30 
million sufferers of asthma and other diseases.
            (7) Stealth Tax on Small Business Partnerships (Treasury/
                    IRS).
    The Internal Revenue Service [IRS] tried to slip through a 
tax increase and more paperwork for America's partnerships--
including engineering, consulting, and accounting 
partnerships--in the form of a regulation. This stealth income 
tax would require limited partners to pay Medicare health-
insurance taxes not only on their own incomes but also on 
partnership earnings. Congress enacted a 1-year moratorium on 
publication of a final rule. If the Clinton administration is 
serious about reforming the IRS, it must stop the IRS from re-
enacting the partnership tax or issuing any other illegal tax 
hike.
            (8) Special Education Regulations (Education) (proposed).
    The Clinton Education Department's proposed regulations on 
special education add 71 percent more words of rules on special 
education, impose new, unfunded mandates on every school 
district in the Nation, and undermine classroom discipline by 
mandating a double standard for violent and disruptive children 
that goes beyond the statute. The regulations strip parents and 
teachers of their authority, load them down with new paperwork, 
harm the very students the special education laws were intended 
to help, and create a bonanza for trial lawyers eager to sue 
local schools and communities.
            (9) A Category Unto Itself: The Kyoto Climate Change 
                    Treaty.
    The Kyoto Climate Change Treaty deserves a place on the 
Noxious Nine list, perhaps more than the other eight combined. 
Nevertheless it belongs in a category all its own, as the 
Clinton-Gore blueprint for what promises to be the most costly 
and far-reaching scheme of regulatory control this country has 
ever known. Although the Treaty has not yet been ratified by 
the Senate, as required by the Constitution, the administration 
has already jumped the gun on Congress through a regulatory 
backdoor approach--using regulation to implement a treaty that 
has not been ratified, for the sake of a theory that has not 
been proven.
    b. Benefits.--The Noxious Nine are the worst Clinton 
regulations of 1997. These regulations expose the Clinton 
administration's record of regulatory overkill and abuse. Many 
of them are still only proposals, so they may be improved or 
repealed. Others merit careful congressional review and, 
possibly, resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional 
Review Act.
    c. Hearings.--None.

22. Oversight of the Department of Transportation's ``Proposed 
        Statement of Enforcement Policy on Unfair Exclusionary Conduct 
        by Airlines.''

    a. Summary.--The Department of Transportation [DOT] 
published a ``Proposed Statement of Enforcement Policy on 
Unfair Exclusionary Conduct by Airlines'' on April 10, 1998. 
DOT issued this proposal to address what the administration 
believes to be a problem--larger airlines engaging in practices 
designed to eliminate competition by smaller airlines at hub 
airports. This proposal identifies the behavior that DOT will 
consider to be an unfair exclusionary practice and, therefore, 
will find unlawful. DOT General Counsel Nancy McFadden 
summarized DOT's policy as follows: ``If, in response to a new 
entry into one of its hub markets, a major carrier pursues a 
strategy of price cuts and capacity increases that either (1) 
sacrifices more revenue than all of the new entrant's capacity 
could have diverted from it or (2) results in substantially 
worse short-term operating results than would a reasonable 
alternative strategy for competing with the new entrant, we 
propose to find this unlawful'' (emphasis added). DOT has 
received wide-ranging opposition to its proposal from consumer 
advocates, small business groups, smaller communities, labor 
unions, economists, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, major 
airlines, and numerous U.S. Senators and Members of Congress. 
Although the subcommittee shares many of the concerns raised by 
these parties about DOT's proposal, it has focused its 
oversight on the manner in which DOT appears to have conducted 
itself, in the face of this opposition, during the public 
comment period of this open regulatory docket. The subcommittee 
sent two letters to DOT Secretary Rodney Slater, inquiring 
about DOT's compliance with normal regulatory procedures, in 
accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act, in issuing 
this proposal for public comment. The subcommittee also 
questioned DOT about its use of appropriated funds to hire a 
public relations consultant to lobby Congress on the proposal; 
whether DOT considers the proposal to be binding on the 
airlines; and whether DOT plans to submit the proposal to 
Congress as a rule under the Congressional Review Act.
    b. Benefits.--In response to the subcommittee's August 13, 
1998 letter, DOT changed its policy on posting comments from 
Members of Congress in the public docket for this rulemaking. 
Many letters were not posted because DOT's practice was to wait 
until a reply was sent from the Secretary to the Member of 
Congress and then post the original letter and the reply. 
Therefore, the inclusion of important comments in the 
rulemaking's public docket was significantly delayed. After the 
subcommittee's inquiry, DOT agreed to begin posting comments 
from Members of Congress in the docket upon receipt.
    The subcommittee plans to continue its oversight of this 
rulemaking process.
    c. Hearings.--None.

23. Securities and Exchange Commission's Travel Oversight.

    a. Summary.--From March 1996 through April 1997, the 
subcommittee reviewed the official travel policies and 
procedures of the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]. 
Based upon its investigation, the subcommittee recommended that 
the SEC make the following reforms in its official travel 
policies and procedures:
          The SEC should strictly enforce the Federal 
        Travel Regulation's [FTR] restrictions on first-class 
        travel at government expense to permit first-class 
        travel only in situations expressly enumerated in the 
        FTR.\14\ The SEC voluntarily should adopt a formal 
        policy prohibiting personally-funded or host-paid 
        first-class travel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Criteria for use of first-class airline accommodations in the 
FTR: 1) No other reasonably available accommodations--neither coach 
class nor business class (scheduled to leave within 24 hours of the 
employee's proposed departure time or scheduled to arrive within 24 
hours of the employee's proposed arrival time). 2) Travel by an 
employee with a disability. 3) Security Reasons--exceptional security 
circumstances include but are not limited to: (a) travel in any other 
accommodations would endanger the employee's life or Government 
property; (b) travel by agents in who are in charge of protective 
details and who are accompanying individuals authorized to use first-
class; (c) travel by couriers and control officers who are accompanying 
controlled pouches or packages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          The SEC should strictly construe the FTR's 
        requirements for approvals of upgrades for travel or 
        lodging accommodations, and require explicit 
        justifications for such upgrades consistent with FTR 
        requirements. The FTR should not be construed to permit 
        travel upgrades to business class for the reason that 
        official business needs to be conducted in flight, even 
        if the official work is confidential in nature. The SEC 
        should continue to caution SEC travelers to be 
        circumspect about doing work on confidential or 
        sensitive matters while traveling to protect against 
        inadvertent or premature disclosure of confidential or 
        sensitive information. The subcommittee does not 
        believe that business- or first-class travel 
        significantly enhances the opportunity to maintain 
        confidentiality of agency documents or records.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ The subcommittee does not believe that the exceptional 
security circumstances cited in the FTR include maintaining 
confidentiality of agency records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          The SEC should include the specific FTR 
        justification for any travel upgrade in a written 
        approval memorandum, which must be submitted to the 
        SEC's Comptroller's Office with the travel voucher 
        before any reimbursement for upgrade expenses is 
        approved. Consistent with current practice, that 
        memorandum should be retained with the agency's 
        official records relating to the trip.
          If a traveler receives an upgrade for 
        lodging, and he or she stays at a hotel with a rate in 
        excess of the maximum approved rate for subsistence 
        expenses (currently up to 150 percent of the standard 
        per diem allowance) (the maximum per diem allowance), 
        the SEC should determine, on a case-by-case basis, 
        whether the appropriate reimbursement is the standard 
        per diem allowance or the maximum per diem allowance. 
        Factors to be considered include, but are not limited 
        to, the following: (a) net savings to the government 
        due to the proximity of the chosen hotel to the 
        location of work which would lessen related 
        transportation costs to be paid by the government; (b) 
        reasonable personal safety concerns, particularly 
        relative to persons traveling alone; and (c) attendance 
        at conferences or meetings which take place at hotels 
        with rates above the maximum per diem allowance.
          Increasing the lodging allowance up to the 
        maximum per diem allowance for a particular locality 
        should be considered exceptional--travelers are 
        expected to attempt to find reasonable accommodations 
        within the per diem allowance set by GSA. The traveler 
        bears the burden of persuasion to satisfy the SEC's 
        Office of the Comptroller that the traveler should 
        receive more than the standard per diem allowance. The 
        subcommittee is of the view that justifying a rate 
        above the standard per diem allowance on the basis of 
        attending conferences or meetings at hotels with rates 
        above the maximum per diem allowance is appropriate 
        only if the traveler stays on site, at a less expensive 
        hotel in close proximity to the conference or meeting 
        site, or if no other hotel is reasonably available.
          The SEC should consult with its Inspector 
        General [IG] to implement a periodic audit by the IG of 
        agency travel vouchers, including those in which 
        upgrades have been approved, to determine compliance 
        with the FTR and agency policies.
          All SEC travelers must attach used airline 
        ticket stubs, demonstrating the class of accommodations 
        used by the traveler, to their travel vouchers.
          The SEC should review and approve requests 
        for travel upgrades on a uniform basis.
    b. Benefits.--The SEC has adopted and implemented the 
subcommittee's recommended travel reforms. The SEC Comptroller 
issued a new travel policy on February 2, 1998 to all its 
employees, restricting travel upgrades to exceptional 
circumstances as defined by the FTR. This new travel policy 
tightened reporting requirements and prohibited government-
funded upgrades used to defray the personal costs of employees 
traveling first-class (although employees are still free to 
upgrade from coach class to first class at their own expense). 
On June 5, 1998, the SEC IG conducted an audit of the 
Commission's travel practices, including travel upgrades. The 
audit found that the SEC's internal controls were generally 
functioning as intended and that the new travel upgrade 
policies complied with the FTR and the subcommittee's 
recommendations. The SEC's IG is making quarterly reports to 
the subcommittee on compliance with the travel reforms. Each 
report to date has shown full compliance with the travel 
reforms.
    c. Hearings.--None.

Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal 
                                Justice

1. National Drug Control Policy.

    a. Summary.--The National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 
(21 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) established the Office of National 
Drug Control Policy [ONDCP]. The act also provided for 
appointment of a Director of ONDCP, and required that the 
Director develop an overall strategy and budget for Federal 
anti-narcotics efforts, including both supply and demand 
reduction. Specifically, the statute provided that ONDCP: ``(A) 
include comprehensive, research based, long-range goals for 
reducing drug abuse in the United States; (B) include short-
term measurable objectives which the Director determines may be 
realistically achieved in the 2-year period beginning on the 
date of the submission of the strategy; (C) describe the 
balance between resources devoted to supply reduction and 
demand reduction; and (D) review State and local drug control 
activities to ensure that the United States pursues well-
coordinated and effective drug control at all levels of the 
government.'' Pursuant to the Government Reform and Oversight 
Committee's jurisdiction over ONDCP, as well as all other 
departments and agencies engaged in counternarcotics efforts, 
the Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, 
and Criminal Justice convened numerous in-depth oversight 
hearings during 1997 to assess the status and effectiveness of 
the Nation's Federal drug control strategy and the strategy's 
implementation.
    In addition to administration officials, expert advice and 
recommendations were sought from preeminent outside experts, 
including local officials and civic leaders. The subcommittee 
aimed to identify strategic and policy weaknesses, and in the 
course of its investigation, the subcommittee engaged in 
official contact with the various agencies and departments over 
which it has jurisdiction, namely those that engage in 
counternarcotics activities. These include, but are not limited 
to, the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Departments 
of Defense, State, Justice, the Central Intelligence Agency, 
the U.S. Customs Service, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement 
Network.
    Throughout 1997, the subcommittee met extensively with the 
agencies involved in counternarcotics efforts, collecting and 
analyzing both statistical and anecdotal evidence on the 
effectiveness of the Nation's drug strategy and supporting 
programs. This includes the areas of source zone interdiction, 
transit zone interdiction, arrival zone interdiction, law 
enforcement, prevention, and treatment. The subcommittee sought 
further insight from GAO investigators, field agents, and 
departmental Inspectors General.
    Illegal drugs cost our society approximately $67 billion 
each year. Drug-related deaths have increased 42 percent since 
1990 and numbered 14,218 in 1995. Accidents, crime, domestic 
violence, illness, lost opportunity, and reduced productivity 
are the direct consequences of substance abuse. Drug abuse and 
trafficking hurt families, businesses, and neighborhoods; 
impede education; and choke criminal-justice, health, and 
social-service systems. According to the 1996 NHSDA, an 
estimated 6.1 million current illegal drug users were employed 
full-time (6.2 percent of the full-time labor force aged 18 and 
older) in 1996, while 1.9 million worked part-time. More than 
1.5 million Americans were arrested for drug-law violations in 
1996. Drug-trafficking organizations seek to launder $57 
billion a year spent in the illegal U.S. drug market.
    According to the 1996 National Household Survey on Drug 
Abuse [NHSDA] 13 million Americans (6.1 percent of the U.S. 
household population aged 12 and over) were current drug users. 
According to the 1997 Monitoring the Future Study (MTF) since 
1992 there has been a substantial increase in the use of most 
drugs--particularly marijuana; and 1 of 4 12th graders is a 
current illegal drug user while for 8th graders, the figure is 
approximately 1 in 8. A survey conducted by the Columbia 
University Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse [CASA] 
reported that 41 percent of teens had attended parties where 
marijuana was available, and 30 percent had seen drugs sold at 
school. In 1996, an estimated 1.7 million Americans were 
current cocaine users. The current-use rate has not changed 
significantly in the last 7 years. The 1997 MTF survey found 
that the proportion of students reporting use of powder cocaine 
in the past year was 2.2 percent, 4.1 percent, and 5 percent in 
grades 8, 10, and 12, respectively. This rate represents a 
leveling off in 8th-grade use and no change in 10th and 12th 
grade. Between 287 and 376 metric tons of cocaine are estimated 
to have been smuggled into the United States in 1995. 
Consumption-based calculations suggest the U.S. demand for 
cocaine was about 330 metric tons. There are approximately 
320,000 occasional heroin users and 810,000 chronic users in 
the United States. Rates of heroin use among teenagers rose 
significantly in 8th, 10th, and 12th grades during the 1990s. 
The 1996 NHSDA found that the mean age of initiation declined 
from 27.3 years in 1988 to 19.3 in 1995. Plan, TX, one of the 
Nation's 10 safest cities, had 11 heroin-overdose deaths in 
1997. Orlando, FL saw 48 heroin deaths in 1995 and 1996; 10 
victims were 21 years of age or younger. The 1996 NHSDA 
estimated that 4.7 percent (10.1 million) of the population 
aged 12 and older were current marijuana or hashish users, 
which is the same rate as 1995. Approximately three-quarters 
(77 percent) of current illegal drug users used marijuana or 
hashish in 1996. The 1997 MTF shows that marijuana continues to 
be the illegal drug most frequently used by young people. Among 
high school seniors, 49.6 percent reported using marijuana at 
least once in their lives. By comparison, the figure was 44.9 
percent for seniors in 1996 and 41.7 percent in 1995. After 6 
years of steady increase, current marijuana use fell in 1997 
among eighth graders, from 11.3 percent in 1996 to 10.2 
percent. While marijuana is the most readily available illegal 
drug in our Nation, there is currently no methodology to 
determine the extent of cannabis cultivation within the United 
States. Cannabis is frequently cultivated in remote locations 
and on public land to prevent observation and identification of 
owners. The 1996 NHSDA estimated that 4.9 million Americans 
tried methamphetamine in their lifetime, up significantly for 
the 1995 estimate of 4.7 million. Studies show that 
methamphetamine use continues to be more common in the western 
United States than in the rest of the country. Methamphetamine 
is by far the most prevalent synthetic controlled substance 
clandestinely manufactured in the United States. It is also 
imported from Mexico. The 1996 NHSDA reported no significant 
change in the prevalence of inhalants, hallucinogens (like LSD 
and PCP), or psychotherapeutics (tranquilizers, sedatives, 
analgesics, or stimulants) used for non-medical purposes 
between 1995 and 1996. Current usage rates among those 12 and 
older for both hallucinogens and inhalants remained well below 
1 percent in 1996.
    Congressional Delegation.--From May 23 through June 1, 
1997, Subcommittee Chairman J. Dennis Hastert was joined by 
Congressmen Souder, Sanford, Barr, and Blagojevich on a 
congressional delegation (CODEL) which visited Panama, 
Colombia, Peru and Bolivia. Accompanying the CODEL were 
subcommittee staff director and chief counsel, Robert Charles; 
professional staffers Sean Littlefield and Kevin Long; USCG CDR 
Rob Mobley and House International Relations Committee staffer, 
John Mackey. The purpose of the visit was to conduct an in-
country review of current U.S. counternarcotics efforts and 
determine the level of cooperation by source and transit zone 
countries. The CODEL held extensive meetings with United States 
and host nation civilian, military, and law enforcement 
officials to discuss current policies, programs and activities 
intended to stop the flow of illegal drugs coming into the 
United States. The CODEL also explored how financial support 
for these programs could be better directed, and more 
effectively used.
    On May 23, 1997, the CODEL visited with the Panama country 
team at the Embassy. Those attending included the U.S. 
Ambassador, DEA, country attache, the U.S. Customs attache, the 
military attache, and civilian personnel assigned to the 
Embassy. The country team emphasis seemed to be on unity. They 
were adamant about how well they worked together in their 
mission. The Embassy brought in the Panamanian Attorney General 
and several of his associates to explain Panama's new money 
laundering laws and creative efforts to stop the flow of 
laundered money to and through Panama. DEA explained that the 
Panamanian police were ill-equipped to handle certain routine 
tasks, and requested that money be provided to the Panamanian 
police for vehicles and communications equipment. United States 
Customs personnel expressed a desire to see more x-ray and 
other detection devices at Panama's airports; the need for 
Customs aircraft throughout the source country region became 
obvious.
    On May 24, 1997, the CODEL met with General Wesley Clark, 
Commander in Chief of U.S. Southern Command [SOUTHCOM] at his 
headquarters; SOUTHCOM'S support staff was present for the 
briefing. The General offered his view of how to effectively 
enhance counternarcotics efforts in the source countries and 
described the mission of SOUTHCOM as it related to an array of 
present and future counternarcotics issues. SOUTHCOM plays a 
major role in the region's counternarcotics efforts. It is the 
southern-most U.S. base, and, as such, is strategically vital 
in the war on drugs. SOUTHCOM's use of Howard Air Force Base 
provides regional support for detection, monitoring, and 
interception of illegal drug traffic by air. The U.S. presence 
also facilitates regional inter-military cooperation, jungle 
training, regional police and military training, and 
intelligence coordination. That presence must be strong, 
committed, enduring and well-supported by the Pentagon; despite 
the move of SOUTHCOM to Miami and the importance of continued 
and uninterrupted development of SOUTHCOM activities on Puerto 
Rico, there was a consensus among Members of the CODEL that the 
United States must maintain a strong forward-based presence at 
Howard Air Force base.
    In Colombia, the CODEL visited San Jose del Guaviare, a 
remote forward-operating base for the Colombian National Police 
[CNP], and the Colombian Army's Second Mobile Brigade on May 
25. This area is located in the southeastern region of 
Colombia, also known for its geography as the ``wild zone.'' It 
is the largest coca growing and producing area in the world, 
and is universally acknowledged to be narco-guerrilla infested. 
The CODEL was accompanied by CNP General Rosso Jose Serrano, 
CNP Colonel Leonardo Gallego, director of the DANTI 
(antinarcotics police), Ambassador Frechette and selected 
Embassy staff.
    The CODEL then continued west from Bogota to Maraquita, 
where the CNP maintains its aviation school. There, the CODEL 
witnessed a CNP special operations drug lab assault 
demonstration using UH-1H helicopters, helicopters critical to 
effective counter-narcotics operations in the narco-guerrilla 
regions. This involved a live-fire coca lab ``take down.'' 
Subsequently, the CODEL inspected three of the UH-1Hs, released 
just prior to the CODEL's arrival in Maraquita. They were 
released only after pressing the questions to Ambassador 
Frechette in the country team briefing 2 days earlier. The 
helicopters were in poor condition; notably, the U.S.-provided 
helicopters were inexplicably missing essential mounts for the 
guns that would protect the helicopters during coca lab take 
downs. The helicopters were in need of substantial maintenance 
to place them in flying condition; this was a development 
widely seen as ironic, in view of the U.S. ability to deliver 
repaired and flyable excess aircraft. For each helicopter 
Colombia received from the United States, the CNP must now 
commit an additional $100,000 to make the asset flight worthy. 
Following the CODEL's return, the remaining helicopters were 
released to the CNP. Instructively, these helicopters were 
conducting counternarcotics missions within 3 days of delivery. 
These facts strongly support a pressing need for U.S. draw down 
aid, namely additional ``surplus helicopters.''
    On May 27 and 28, in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, the CODEL met 
with the Bolivia country team, including the Deputy Charge of 
Mission [DCM], DEA agent in charge, NAS, and civilian assets in 
place. The country team was mission-specific, and appeared to 
be running efficiently and smoothly. The DCM outlined a 
coherent counter-narcotics strategy, which seemed to be the 
United States Embassy's No. 1 priority in Bolivia. The DEA 
reported that it would have seven new DEA personnel shortly. 
The DEA briefed the CODEL about ongoing operations in the 
Chapare region, which is the country's leading coca producing 
region. NAS reported on several alternative development 
projects, and provided persuasive statistics regarding their 
success.
    On May 29 and 30, in Lima, Peru, the CODEL met with the 
Peruvian country team. Considerable attention was given to the 
successful ``shoot down policy'' adopted by President 
Fujimori's government. Additionally, the DEA and NAS touted 
eradication efforts and the decrease in coca production. 
Earlier in Iquitos, Peru, the CODEL witnessed part of Peru's 
riverine interdiction program. The CODEL also visited some 
remote coca field sites in Peru. The ``shoot down'' policy, 
supported by the United States in combination with intensive 
Peruvian law enforcement activities, yielded an 18 percent 
reduction in coca cultivation during 1996. The subcommittee 
subsequently learned that, in 1997, Peru achieved a further 27 
percent reduction in coca cultivation.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee recognizes that the 
availability of drugs on U.S. streets and the number of persons 
using illegal drugs continue to be serious problems in the 
United States, and constitute a major national and personal 
security threat. The subcommittee, through its oversight 
hearings, determined that there are significant policy and 
management obstacles that must be resolved in order to markedly 
improve the U.S. drug control efforts. In addition, the 
effectiveness of U.S. efforts to combat drug production, 
transshipment, and importation remain, on the whole, 
handicapped by low resource allocation. It is apparent that the 
U.S. Government has yet to meet the drug threat with the same 
intensity and dedication that the drug cartels and traffickers 
undertake in their efforts. Obstacles include numerous 
organizational and operational limitations, as well as a lack 
of sufficient and consistent funding. The subcommittee's 
hearings, meetings, and official correspondence assisted in 
elevating interagency cooperation and coordination, as well as 
providing much needed attention to counternarcotics issues. The 
oversight and investigation of drug policies and programs also 
enabled the subcommittee to determine whether current 
strategies or programs were meeting their statutory 
obligations.
    c. Hearings.--During the 105th Congress, the Subcommittee 
on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal 
Justice held 16 hearings on the topic of the status of this 
Nation's National Drug Control Policy. The hearings focused on 
all aspects of the war on drugs and demonstrated the importance 
of a several-tiered strategy, including source country and 
transit zone interdiction efforts to stop the illegal narcotics 
and precursor chemicals from entering the United States; a 
strong law enforcement and criminal justice system to apprehend 
and severely punish those convicted of drug trafficking; 
prevention efforts that not only educate our young people about 
the dangers of drug use but unite communities against drug use; 
and finally, an effective system of treating those already 
addicted. By encompassing all facets of the counternarcotics 
effort, we send a strong ``zero-tolerance'' message to anyone 
who considers cultivating, trafficking, or using illegal 
narcotics. A detailed description of the hearings held by the 
subcommittee follows:
    The subcommittee, in its role as authorizing subcommittee 
for the Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP], 
conducts an annual hearing reviewing the President's National 
Drug Control Strategy. On February 27, 1997, the subcommittee 
received testimony from General Barry McCaffrey, Director of 
the Office of National Drug Control Policy at a hearing 
entitled, ``Oversight of the 1997 National Drug Control 
Strategy.'' On March 26, 1998, the subcommittee received 
testimony from General McCaffrey at a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight of the 1998 National Drug Control Strategy.'' The 
purpose of these hearings was to examine the short- and long-
term plan described in President Clinton's 1997 and 1998 
National Drug Control Strategies, and to assess how effectively 
the Nation is fighting illegal drug abuse, both domestically 
and internationally.
    At the 1997 hearing alarming statistics were cited to 
portray the status of our war on drugs.
    Drug-induced deaths increased 47 percent between 1990 and 
1994, and now number approximately 14,000 per year. In 1995, a 
record high 531,800 drug-related hospital emergency room 
episodes occurred. Heroin-related emergency room episodes 
increased 124 percent between 1990 and 1995. General McCaffrey 
described cocaine use as plummeting and higher purity heroin 
use as increasing. He characterized the increase in 
methamphetamine use as, ``. . . a potentially worse threat to 
America than the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980's.''
    Even more threatening to the status of drug use, was the 
shocking decline in the average age of drug users, now dipping 
below the teen years. The perceived risk associated with drug 
use among teens has dropped and consequently the overall number 
of young people using drugs has skyrocketed. Use of illegal 
narcotics among 8th-graders, 11- and 12-year olds, is up 150 
percent over 1989. These numbers were widely viewed as 
startling and corroborate the need to educate all young 
Americans about the perils of drug use.
    General McCaffrey stressed the need to more strongly 
support different aspects of the drug war: stopping the 
cultivation of drugs at the source; interdicting the drugs in 
the transit zones and at the borders; enforcing severe 
punishment for those offenders who sell drugs; preventing young 
people from ever turning to illegal drug use; and providing 
treatment for those already addicted to narcotics. The 1997 
Strategy has established five strategic goals: (1) Educate and 
enable America's youth to reject illegal drugs as well as 
alcohol and tobacco; (2) Increase the safety of America's 
citizens by substantially reducing drug-related crime and 
violence; (3) Reduce health and social costs to the public of 
illegal drug use; (4) Shield America's air, land, and sea 
frontiers from the drug threat; and, (5) Break foreign and 
domestic drug sources of supply.
    With varying degrees of emphasis, all Members, and General 
McCaffrey, acknowledged that current Federal antidrug efforts 
are, while effective, under strain from reduced funding. 
According to McCaffrey, future strategies will continue to 
focus on drug-related crime and violence, as well as shielding 
our frontiers and reducing availability. The assumption is that 
it will also trigger an aggressive initiative to educate young 
people on the dangers of drug use.
    At the 1998 hearing the 1998 National Drug Control 
Strategy, as well as the accompanying budget and performance 
measure documents, were outlined. The 1998 National Drug 
Control Strategy states certain emphasis, goals, and budget 
priorities. In 1998, the administration released the first 5-
year budget for Federal drug control. The 5-year budget covers 
the fiscal years from 1999 to 2003. There are five goals of the 
1998 strategy. The strategy is designed to reduce drug use and 
availability by 50 percent over the next 10 years. Thirty-two 
supporting objectives are elaborated on in the strategy. Goal 
1: Educate and enable America's youth to reject illegal drugs 
as well as alcohol and tobacco. The strategy's mid-term 
objectives are to reduce the prevalence of past-month drug use 
among youth by 20 percent and increase the average age of first 
use by 12 months before the year 2002. The long-term objectives 
are a 50 percent reduction in current drug use and an increase 
of 36 months in the average age of first use by the year 2007. 
Goal 2: Increase the safety of America's citizens by 
substantially reducing drug-related crime and violence. The 
strategy's mid-term objective is to reduce drug-related crime 
and violence by 15 percent before the year 2002. The long-term 
objective is a 30 percent reduction by the year 2007. Goal 3: 
Reduce health and social costs to the public of illegal drug 
use. The strategy's mid-term objective is to reduce health and 
social consequences 10 percent by the year 2002. The long-term 
objective is a 25 percent reduction in consequences by the year 
2007. Goal 4: Shield America's air, land, and sea frontiers 
from the drug threat. The strategy's mid-term objective is to 
reduce the rate at which illegal drugs entering the transit 
zone and arrival zones successfully enter the United States 10 
percent by 2002. The long-term objective is a 20 percent 
reduction in this rate by the year 2007. Goal 5: Break foreign 
and domestic drug sources of supply. The strategy's mid-term 
objectives are a 15 percent reduction in the flow of illegal 
drugs from source countries and a 20 percent reduction in 
domestic marijuana cultivation and methamphetamine production 
by the year 2002. Long-term objectives include a 30 percent 
reduction in the flow of drugs from source countries and a 50 
percent reduction in domestic marijuana cultivation and 
methamphetamine production by 2007.
    The Performance Measures of Effectiveness [PME] are 
designed to 1) assess the effectiveness of the National Drug 
Control Strategy; 2) provide the entire drug control community, 
including State and local governments, the private sector, and 
foreign governments, with critical information on what needs to 
be done to refine policy and programmatic direction; and 3) 
assist with drug program budget management at all levels. The 
nucleus of the PME system consists of 12 impact performance 
targets that define desired outcomes of end states for the 
strategy. The remaining 82 performance targets calibrate 
progress toward the strategy's 32 objectives, which are 
supported by a system of drug control program efforts. In the 
area of overall drug use, the target is a 50 percent reduction 
by 2007 in the rate of illegal drug use in the United States 
compared with that in 1996. In the area of drug availability, 
the aim is a 50 percent reduction by 2007 of the available 
supply of illicit drugs in the United States compared with that 
in 1996. In the area of drug use consequences, the target is a 
30 percent reduction by 2007 in the rate of crime and violent 
acts associated with drug trafficking and drug abuse compared 
with that in 1996. In addition, this theme targets a 25 percent 
reduction by 2007 in damaging health and social costs 
attributable to drug use as measured by annual estimates of the 
social costs of drug use. The additional 82 performance targets 
establish benchmarks by which to gauge progress in achieving 
the National Drug Control Strategy's 32 objectives.
    Highlighting the work of successful prevention efforts 
around the country, the subcommittee held a hearing on February 
26, 1997 entitled, ``Civic Volunteers, Youth Service 
Organizations, and the War on Drugs.'' This hearing focused on 
successful efforts of civic groups and youth service 
organizations in the counterdrug effort.
    As the level of drug use among 8th and 10th graders has 
risen over the past few years, prevention efforts across the 
country are becoming increasingly important for young people. 
Representatives from a number of civic groups described 
successful, national programs that they have developed and 
sustained without any Federal money.
    In 1997, there were 5.6 million youth and adult members of 
the Boy Scouts of America, 260,000 members of the General 
Federation of Women's Clubs, and 132,000 members of the Junior 
Chamber of Commerce. Combined, these groups achieved hundreds-
of-thousands of volunteer hours and touched the lives of 
millions of young people. These organizations have the unique 
ability to reach out to all socioeconomic backgrounds and 
regions and successfully unite these that may normally not 
interact. Notably, each organization has approached the problem 
of youth drug abuse in a different and distinct manner. Several 
programs focused their exercises on character building, some 
follow the faith-based model, while others concentrate on 
building ties to the community through sports and community 
service projects. These organizations integrate the health 
dangers of drug use but the social and criminal perils as well.
    On the first panel, testimony was received from Mr. Frank 
Sarnecki, director, Loyal Order of Moose; Mr. John Creighton, 
Jr., president, Boy Scouts of America; Ms. Faye Dissinger, 
international president, General Foundation of Women's Club; 
and Mr. Mike Marshall, president, U.S. Junior Chamber of 
Commerce. Witnesses detailed the importance of building self-
esteem in our young people. By showing each and every teenager 
that they are important and can control the outcome of their 
lives, such programs taught responsible and well-reasoned 
decisionmaking skills.
    The second panel consisted of Mr. Dick Herndobler of the 
Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks; Mr. Gordon Thorson, 
national youth program director of the Veterans of Foreign 
Affairs; Mr. Howard Patterson, vice-president of Lions Club 
International; Mr. William Pease, assistant director for 
children and teens program of the American Legion Child Welfare 
Foundation; Mr. Don Baugher, president, Masonic National 
Foundation for Children; Mr. Larry Chisolm, also of the Masonic 
National Foundation for Children; and Mr. Dennis Windscheffel, 
a prominent drug prevention program consultant. Panel two 
brought a different perspective to the hearing. The essence of 
their message was that it is imperative that we demonstrate, as 
competent and dependable adults, that when you begin success in 
your teenage years, it paves the way for a successful 
adulthood. This panel emphasized that, too often, society is 
eager to point the finger at the young people and say, ``We 
need to change your behavior.'' While this may be true, we must 
demonstrate how to be an effective, reliable and productive 
adult.
    On June 18, 1998 the subcommittee held a hearing on 
athletes, celebrities, role models, and the message to young 
people about illegal drugs. The purpose of the hearing, 
``Athletes, Role Models and Their Influences on Young Americans 
to Stay Drug-Free'' was to highlight how professional athletes, 
and movie and television stars, serve as role models for young 
Americans, and that their conduct, particularly as it relates 
to the use of illegal substances, impacts young lives. 
Witnesses at this hearing included Sugar Ray Leonard, former 
professional boxing champion; Steve Fitzhugh, former Denver 
Broncos football player; Sergeant Sid Kelly, city of Chicago 
D.A.R.E. officer; Dr. Mark Gold, University of Florida Brain 
Institute; Bill Ellis, division vice president, K-Mart; and 
Bryton McClure, star of CBS sitcom, ``Family Matters.'' The 
subcommittee also heard from two Members of Congress with 
accomplished athletic careers, Congressman J.C. Watts of 
Oklahoma and Congressman Jim Ryun of Kansas.
    Sugar Ray Leonard testified that preventing children from 
ever experimenting with drugs is the most effective form of 
drug control for the Nation to adopt. As testament of his 
commitment to educating children about the dangers of drug 
abuse, one of the two principal objectives of the Sugar Ray 
Leonard Youth Foundation's objective is to educate children 
about the dangers of illegal drugs. Dr. Gold and Sgt. Kelly 
both testified to the effectiveness of the D.A.R.E. program 
(Drug Abuse Resistance Education), Sgt. Kelly from his 
experience with the Chicago Police Department, which began its 
D.A.R.E. program in 1988, and Dr. Gold as a prolific author on 
drugs and addiction, as well as his service with the Office of 
National Drug Control Policy on a variety of drug prevention 
matters. K-Mart's division vice president testified about the 
important role that corporate America can play in helping young 
people to make decisions about staying drug-free. K-Mart's 
annual Kids Race Against Drugs, conducted annually on Capitol 
Hill, is an example of an important corporate charitable 
initiative involving Members of Congress, celebrities and young 
people, which benefits anti-drug charities across the Nation.
    The hearing also inspired a letter from Congress to the 
National Basketball Association, because of the concern in 
Congress that teenagers are adversely impacted by professional 
athletes publicized as using illegal drugs. The day of the 
hearing, Chairman Hastert released a letter to the NBA 
Commissioner and to the Players' Association Executive 
Director, along with more than two dozen Members of Congress, 
including the Speaker, urging the NBA to adopt a consistent 
drug-testing policy for all players and tough sanctions against 
those testing positive for illicit drugs, and to adopt a 
``zero-tolerance'' policy for all NBA draft prospects, rookies 
and veteran players.
    On July 23, 1998 the subcommittee heard from experts on the 
problem of pregnant women and drug abuse from the States of 
South Carolina and Wisconsin. This hearing, ``Expectant Mothers 
and Substance Abuse: Intervention and Treatment Challenges for 
State Governments,'' highlighted two States which have been at 
the forefront of controversy and publicity for their approaches 
to the problem of mothers-to-be who use drugs. Witnesses at 
this hearing included Congressman Tom Latham of Iowa; Charles 
Condon, Attorney General, State of South Carolina; Joanne 
Huelsman; State senator, State of Wisconsin; Catherine 
Christophillis, director of drug prosecution, State of South 
Carolina; William Domina, Office of Corporation Counsel, 
Waukesha County, WI; Shirley Brown, outcome manager, Medical 
University of South Carolina; Paula Keller, director, Serenity 
Place; Betty Foley, associate director, Haymarket Center; 
Francine Feinberg, Meta House, Our Home Foundation; Mary Faith 
Marshall, program in bioethics, Medical University of South 
Carolina.
    South Carolina's program is a multi-level treatment plan 
which offers a reprieve-oriented judicial process for pregnant 
women using illegal substances. The State of South Carolina was 
sued for its program, but the Supreme Court upheld a lower 
court ruling, Whitner v. State, which held that viable fetuses 
(defined as 24 weeks gestation) are persons for purposes under 
the reporting requirements of South Carolina's code of law, 
protecting them against illegal drugs such as cocaine, heroin, 
LSD, amphetamines, and marijuana. Under the State's maternal 
drug screening protocol, patients are to be made aware that 
criminal prosecution is possible if they fail to adhere to the 
criteria of any treatment program required by them of the 
judicial system. In Wisconsin, the principal provision of 
legislation sponsored by witness, Senator Joanne Huelsman was 
to permit child protection officials to seek a court order for 
a substance-abusing pregnant woman to undergo alcohol or drug 
abuse treatment who has previously refused treatment. Inpatient 
treatment in a hospital can also be ordered. The bill has no 
mandatory reporting requirements, no criminal penalties, and 
relies on ``discretionary reporting'' by professionals who come 
into contact with pregnant women. The legislation resulted from 
the publicity surrounding two women, a ``cocaine mom,'' who 
used cocaine while 8 months pregnant, and Deborah Zimmerman, 
who allegedly was binge-drinking alcohol in order to kill her 
unborn baby. The cocaine mom repeatedly refused a doctor's 
pleas to stop using cocaine and had refused multiple offers of 
treatment. South Carolina's Attorney General argued 
persuasively that his State is making progress in solving the 
problem of pregnant addicts, mixing compassion with ``tough 
love.'' He cites the highest priority is sparing infants the 
``unimaginable suffering they experience when they come into 
the world as drug addicts. Some don't survive the trauma. 
Others are horribly impaired for the rest of their lives. Most 
experience exquisite pain during their first days.'' South 
Carolina's witnesses offered compelling evidence that by 
treating addicts as patients, allowing health care experts to 
intercede, but keeping law enforcement in the wings, prepared 
to act only in worst-case scenarios with treatment-resistant 
women, has resulted in successful interventions that render 
healthy mothers who can serve as fit parents, and healthy 
newborn children.
    On May 14, 1997, the subcommittee held a hearing 
highlighting the extraordinary efforts of the National Guard in 
the antidrug effort entitled, ``National Guard Support in the 
Fight Against Illegal Drugs.'' Historically, the National Guard 
has performed missions tasked by their respective Governor. 
However, as the drug epidemic has increased in this country, 
Governors have turned to the National Guard to combat the flow 
of illegal narcotics. To continue their high-level of mission 
performance, the Guard needs consistent support from Congress 
and the Pentagon.
    There are serious concerns that the fiscal year 1998 budget 
does not adequately support the needs of either their supply or 
demand reduction activities. A decrease in funding could result 
in severe reductions in aviation capabilities, intelligence, 
and engineering support. This hearing highlighted the 
successful efforts of the National Guard in tackling the rise 
in methamphetamine and heroin use, and their vital border 
support.
    The subcommittee received testimony from the Honorable Brad 
Owen, Lieutenant Governor of the State of Washington; the 
Honorable Michael Bowers, attorney general of the State of 
Georgia; Major General Russell Davis, Vice Chief of the 
National Guard Bureau; Mr. James Copple, president and CEO of 
the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America; and Mr. Ronald 
E. Brooks, chair of the drug policy committee, California 
Narcotics Officer's Association. The witnesses all testified 
regarding the value of National Guard counterdrug assistance. 
According to Attorney General Bowers, in 1996, National Guard 
assistance resulted in, ``. . . over 128,000 arrests and the 
confiscation of l,371 metric tons of processed marijuana, 
12,671 pounds of heroin, and 16,116 weapons.'' These statistics 
alone demonstrate the essential nature of the National Guard's 
long-term commitment to a drug-free America.
    During the 105th Congress the subcommittee conducted two 
oversight hearings on the issue of drug treatment programs and 
their effectiveness. On June 5, 1998 the subcommittee held a 
hearing entitled ``Cutting Edge Issues in Drug Testing and Drug 
Treatment.'' Witnesses at this hearing included Congressman 
Jerry Solomon of New York; Dr. Robert DuPont, president, 
Institute for Behavior and Health; Dr. Ian MacDonald, chairman, 
Employee Health Programs; Dr. Murray Lappe, president, National 
Medical Review Offices; Mark deBernardo, director, Institute 
for a Drug-Free Workplace; Dr. Tom Mieczkowski, professor, 
University of South Florida; Harold Green, president, 
Chamberlain Contracting Co.; Neil Fortner, vice president, 
Laboratory Operations, PharmChem Laboratories; Roxanne Kibben, 
president, National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse 
Counselors; and Dr. David Kidwell, chemist, Naval Research 
Laboratory.
    There is a consensus that effective treatment is a crucial 
component in the war on drugs. There are several issues which 
have arisen within the context of drug treatment. The most 
important is overcoming the denial inherent in the addicted 
condition. According to the witnesses who testified, the best 
way to overcome the addicts' dependency is a threefold 
approach: 1) drug test all employees on a random basis; 2) 
require that addicts and drug users successfully complete 
treatment; and 3) drug test regularly after treatment to ensure 
that the addict does not relapse. The workplace is a perfect 
crucible for the above model. More than 70 percent of those who 
use drugs in this country are employed. Many of those presently 
using, but not yet abusing, drugs are deterred from continued 
use by the above policy. This may be one of the most important 
goals of drug testing. For both the drug user and abuser, the 
loss of their jobs represents a powerful deterrent to continued 
drug use. The success of the model is unmistakable and 
beneficent. One employer, Harold Green, testified that all of 
his employees appreciated the fact that the only way to ensure 
a drug-free workplace was to drug test. Most employees believe 
that drug testing is a small price to pay to be able to work 
with fellow employees who are drug free. Many of the witnesses 
suggested that the government should set an example by drug 
testing and treating its employees. When the Navy began to drug 
test its sailors, it found that more than a third used drugs. 
After drug testing was implemented for a short period, drug use 
decreased to about 2 percent.
    Obviously, there are constitutional restrictions related to 
drug testing government employees as opposed to employees 
working in the private sector. To solve this problem, several 
witnesses testified to the efficacy of drug testing hair or 
conducting ocular screening, much less intrusive searches under 
the fourth amendment. According to the witnesses who testified 
about these lesser intrusions, hair samples can be tested up to 
90 days after drug use, whereas urine can only be tested for 
drugs a couple of days after use, and ocular screening has been 
endorsed by the American Civil Liberties Union. Virtually all 
witnesses concluded and testified that the treatment component 
was impotent without testing, and that drug testing must be an 
integral part of every treatment dollar spent by the 
government.
    The taxpayers of the United States pay in excess of $3 
billion for drug treatment. Unfortunately, it is very difficult 
to figure out how this money is being spent, let alone whether 
the money is being spent efficaciously. On July 22, 1998 the 
subcommittee held a hearing ``Drug Treatment Programs and the 
Criminal Justice System: Making Treatment Work'' in order to 
determine these issues. Witnesses at this hearing included Dr. 
Donald Vereen, Deputy Director, Office of National Drug Control 
Policy; Dr. Marsha Lillie-Blanton; Associate Director, U.S. 
General Accounting Office; Dr. Sally Satel, psychiatrist, Oasis 
Clinic; Dr. Eric Wish, Director, Center for Substance Abuse 
Research; Raymond Soucek, president, Haymarket Center; Bryan 
Hill, president, American Jail Association; Arthur Pratt, 
president, Life Effectiveness Training; Dr. Douglas Lipton, 
senior research fellow, National Development and Research 
Institute; and Dr. Faye Taxman, associate research professor, 
University of Maryland.
    Initially, the subcommittee heard testimony from Dr. Vereen 
and Dr. Lillie-Blanton to determine how the money was being 
spent. Neither could explain where the money was going in 
anything but the most general way, but both maintained that 
treatment ``works.'' Support for their position is based on a 
series of studies which claim extraordinary results. As was 
pointed out by some congressmen on the committee during 
questioning, all of these studies are flawed in that they 
failed to include the facts that most patients drop out of the 
programs, most cannot be located later, most are self-reporting 
their own drug use and criminality, and most refuse to take a 
drug test to support their self-reported abstinence. Finally, 
exacerbating otherwise skewed studies is the important fact 
that most treatment specialists consider that the treatment is 
successful when an addict uses drugs less than he/she did 
before. When these variables are factored in, probably less 
than 10 percent can be characterized as non-using addicts 1 
year after treatment.
    All witnesses testified to the importance of drug testing 
in the determination of success. One witness testified to the 
success of the Vietnam Veterans who were addicted to heroin in 
overcoming their addictions. Virtually all veterans who 
returned to the United States who were addicted were no longer 
dependent on drugs 1 year after their return. This tends to 
show, not only that addiction is not a disease but also, that 
environment and a change thereof might play an important role 
in overcoming addiction. Further, a panel of witnesses 
testified that treatment should be an integral part of the 
incarceration process for those inmates who desire it. 
Presently there is little opportunity for those incarcerated to 
get treatment. Many of those in prison have a drug problem. The 
prison and jail system should be a perfect setting for 
successful treatment, but it has not proven itself to be so to 
any degree in the past.
    The primary conclusions of the witnesses about success, in 
addition to the importance of drug testing, creating a new 
environment for the addict and treating the prisoners is that 
drug courts work (but could work better). For most addicts it 
is very important that the government set up a system that 
provides very powerful ``carrots'' and very powerful ``sticks'' 
in order for treatment to succeed--the drug courts could 
provide the ``carrots'' and ``sticks'' necessary to have an 
impact on the drug problem.
    On March 10, 1997, the subcommittee held a hearing 
entitled, ``Coast Guard Drug Interdiction Efforts in the 
Transit Zone.'' The purpose of this hearing was to examine the 
national security threat posed by the explosion of maritime 
drug trafficking in the transit zone, and better understand 
efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard to combat it. Of particular 
interest were: (1) the nature of drug trafficking activities in 
the transit zone, especially the Eastern Caribbean; (2) host 
nation impediments to an effective regional strategy; (3) the 
adequacy of the U.S. Coast Guard's capabilities to interdict 
drug trafficking; (4) the extent of Federal agency planning, 
coordination, and implementation of U.S. interdiction efforts; 
and (5) the needs of the ``front-line'' drug agents.
    At this hearing, testimony was received from Admiral Robert 
E. Kramek, President Clinton's Interdiction Coordinator and the 
Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, as well as several front-
line Coast Guard personnel, including Lieutenant Commander Mike 
Burns, a C-130 aircraft pilot; Lieutenant Commander Randy 
Forrester, an HU-25C aircraft pilot; Lieutenant Jim Carlson, 
Commanding Officer of the Coast Guard cutter Vashon; Petty 
Officer Mark Fitzmorris, a Boarding Officer on the Coast Guard 
cutter Tampa. Finally, the subcommittee heard testimony from 
Admiral Paul A. Yost, president of the James Madison Memorial 
Fellowship Foundation, and former Coast Guard Commandant, on 
how the Coast Guard effectively shut down the Caribbean to drug 
traffickers in the late 1980's.
    The subcommittee found that interdiction is vital. As 
stated by Admiral Kramek, ``When the correct resources are 
applied, as the Coast Guard has recently demonstrated during 
Operation Frontier Shield, we get a lot of bang for our buck''. 
Operation Frontier Shield was a ``surge operation'' implemented 
on October 1, 1996, was designed to deny smuggling routes into 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Using available 
intelligence, this concentrated effort resulted in the 
confiscation of almost 14,000 pounds of cocaine. Another 17,000 
pounds were jettisoned by smugglers during the first quarter of 
fiscal year 1997. Admiral Kramek testified to the importance of 
bi-lateral maritime agreements and how essential close 
cooperation is to their success. He noted that, currently, we 
have no such agreement with Mexico.
    The front-line Coast Guard Officers explained firsthand how 
intelligence, monitoring, detection, and ``end-game'' are 
linked for effective counterdrug operations; one link missing 
is failure. The importance of adequate resources for effective 
counterdrug operations was identified, including aircraft, 
patrol boats, DOD vessels, infrared and aperture radars, 
intercept radars, communications equipment, and other 
technology.
    Admiral Yost testified that, during his tenure as 
Commandant, the Coast Guard had more forces dedicated to drug 
interdiction (in 1990) than they have presently in 1997. He 
stated: ``I think that if you add assets to [the Drug War] you 
are going to reduce the amount of drugs coming across the 
Caribbean''. Subcommittee Chairman Hastert noted that our 
national strategy isn't a war anymore, but that the 
administration prefers to call it a cancer. He added, ``When 
something is a cancer, you don't usually win that. A war you 
can win. You have to put your resources out there and make sure 
you do win it''. A dominant theme was the cost-effectiveness of 
added resources for interdiction.
    On September 15, 1997, the subcommittee held a hearing 
entitled, ``Needle Exchange, Legalization, and the Failure of 
Swiss Heroin Experiments.'' The purpose of the hearing was to 
examine the current needle exchange programs in the United 
States, Europe, and in British Colombia which began as a way to 
deter the spread of HIV among intravenous drug users. Since the 
implementation of this program, however, in Europe and here in 
the United States, this initial goal has proven to be out of 
reach. Moreover, the programs appear to be genuinely harmful in 
most, if not all, locations described.
    Testimony was received from Ernst Aeschbach, M.D., vice 
president, Youth Without Drugs; Dr. Matthias Erne, expert on 
Switzerland Drug Policy; Mr. Robert Maginnis, senior policy 
advisor, Family Research Council; Ambassador David Jordan, 
former Ambassador to Peru, and professor, University of 
Virginia; Ms. Nancy Sosman, Coalition for a Better Community; 
and Dr. Peter Beilenson, commissioner, Department of Health, 
Baltimore City, MD.
    The subcommittee found that initiatives in other nations, 
which began similarly to programs in the United States, have 
proved to be highly destructive. They did not reduce the 
transmission of AIDS or HIV; in fact, in the Vancouver and 
Montreal studies, the incidence of AIDS transmission actually 
rose with the onset of needle giveaways. The programs were 
``moral compromises'' that provided drug paraphernalia to drug 
addicts for shooting an illegal drug into their veins. This is 
clearly the wrong message to send to America's children. The 
subcommittee heard testimony of a needle exchange program in 
Baltimore which may have had adequate ``exchange'' controls, 
but this program is not the norm and is also self-selecting; 
Baltimore virtually leads the Nation, today, in heroin 
addiction. Nancy Sosman testified that she was able to obtain 
needles, paraphernalia, and instructions on how to ``shoot up'' 
without providing any needles to ``exchange'' at the New York 
City program.
    Several hearings were held to highlight counterdrug efforts 
fought on foreign soil since these efforts are vital to keeping 
drugs out of our country. The United States has spent billions 
of dollars on international drug control and interdiction 
efforts but illegal drugs still flow into this country. A major 
factor is that international drug-trafficking organizations 
have become sophisticated, multibillion-dollar industries 
capable of changing tactics to elude new U.S. drug control 
efforts and corrupting the institutions of drug-producing and 
transit countries. U.S. efforts have also been hampered by 
competing foreign policy objectives, inconsistent funding for 
U.S. international drug control plans, and a lack of ways to 
measure the success of counternarcotics efforts.
    On March 12, 1998, the subcommittee held a hearing 
highlighting the efforts of the Departments of State, Defense 
and Justice in the counterdrug effort entitled, ``Oversight of 
U.S. Regional Counterdrug Efforts.'' Testimony was received by 
General Charles E. Wilhelm, Commander in Chief, U.S. Southern 
Command; Admiral Robert E. Kramek, Commandant, U.S. Coast 
Guard; Donnie Marshall, Deputy Administrator, Drug Enforcement 
Administration. In addition the U.S. General Accounting Office 
submitted written testimony for the record.
    Two areas of focus at this hearing were the loss of assets 
and funding for interdiction operations during the mid-1990's 
and the need for an influx of new assets. At this hearing 
Admiral Kramek testified that ``[the Coast Guard] now has 
approximately two-thirds of the resources, and about 50 percent 
of the shipdays, and less than 50 percent of the flight hours 
available than [the Coast Guard] had back in 1991-1992, 
entering the 1993 timeframe.'' Kramek went on to state that the 
``percentage of the drug budget [for] interdiction today is 
approximately 11 percent,'' whereas in the early 1990's it was 
``closer to 17-18 percent.'' Furthermore, ``[w]e cannot 
presently cover the Eastern Caribbean.'' General Wilhelm 
testified that Operation Caper Focus [an exercise to interdict 
the estimated 220 metric tons of cocaine transiting through the 
Eastern Pacific] was halted before it had been completed due to 
budget constraints. General Wilhelm estimated that U.S. 
Government assets currently cover only about 15 percent of the 
transit zone of the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific. One 
additional issue that was addressed, and that the subcommittee 
continues to monitor closely, is the maintaining of a forward 
presence for U.S counterdrug forces once the move of U.S. 
forces from Panama is complete. Currently, the United States 
Government and the Government of Panama have not been able to 
reach an agreement on the establishment of a Multinational 
Counternarcotics Center at Howard Air Force Base, therefore, it 
may be necessary to forward deploy air assets at other bases in 
Latin America. Without an ``in-theater'' air operations base it 
is estimated that 75 percent of the effectiveness of an air 
asset would be burnt in transit.
    The hub of counterdrug efforts overseas is Colombia. 
Colombia is the world's leading producer and distributor of 
cocaine, and remains a major source of heroin consumed in the 
United States. Since fiscal year 1990, the United States has 
programmed approximately close to $1 billion in assistance and 
equipment to support Colombian police and military units 
involved in counternarcotics activities. On February 14, 1997, 
the subcommittee held a hearing entitled, ``Oversight of United 
States Counternarcotics Assistance to Colombia.'' Witnesses at 
this hearing included Robert S. Gelbard, Assistant Secretary, 
Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, 
U.S. Department of State; General Harold Bedoya Pizarro, 
chairman, Joint Staff, Colombian Armed Forces; Major General 
Rosso Jose Serrano Cadena, director general, Colombian National 
Police; Honorable Morris Busby, Former Ambassador to Colombia 
and Former Ambassador-at-Large for Counter-Terrorism; and Major 
F. Andy Messing, Jr. USAR (Ret.), executive director, National 
Defense Council Foundation. At this hearing a number of issues 
were examined. These included: what levels of counternarcotics 
assistance is the Government of Colombia receiving from the 
United States Government; did President Clinton's decision to 
decertify Colombia in 1996 have a significant detrimental 
effect on the levels of counternarcotics support Colombia 
received from the United States via the Department of State and 
Foreign Military Sales [FMS]; how involved are the Colombian 
guerrillas in narco-trafficking; what are the goals of the 
Colombian Government for 1997 in the war against illegal drug 
production, manufacturing and the organized narcotics 
traffickers; what support will be necessary from the United 
States to accomplish these goals; what are the constraints that 
the United States Government faces in Colombia; how close is 
Colombia to civil war with the narco-guerrillas and how many 
Colombian National Police and Military personnel have lost 
their lives in direct combat with the narco-traffickers; what 
should the United States do to assure the most effective 
counternarcotics effort in Colombia by the Colombian National 
Police and Colombian Military; and has the administration's 
decertification of Colombia caused delays in the delivery of 
vital counternarcotics aid? The overarching conclusion was that 
additional support for the Colombian National Police is 
imperative to permanently winning the United States drug war.
    On July 9, 1997, the subcommittee held a second hearing on 
counternarcotics activities relating to Colombia entitled, 
``International Drug Control Policy: Colombia.'' Witnesses 
included Myles Frechette, Ambassador, United States Embassy, 
Bogota, Colombia; Jeffrey Davidow, Assistant Secretary of 
State, Bureau of Inter-American Affairs, Department of State; 
Robert Newberry, Principal Director, Drug Enforcement Affairs, 
Department of Defense; Donnie Marshall, Chief of Operations, 
Drug Enforcement Administration; Jane E. Becker, Acting 
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law 
Enforcement Affairs, Department of State; Henry L. Hinton, Jr., 
Assistant Comptroller General, United States General Accounting 
Office; and Jim Thessin, Deputy Legal Advisor, Office of Legal 
Advisor, Department of State. At this hearing an examination of 
the status of the promised 614 waiver for Colombia; the status 
of the placement of fiscal year 1997 appropriated DEA agents 
for Colombia; the delay in the production of documents, 
requested by General Accounting Office, for an examination of 
United States and Colombian efforts to combat drug trafficking 
activities; and the proposal by the Department of Defense, for 
expanded authority to provide enhanced interdiction 
capabilities of the counterdrug forces in Colombia were 
discussed. The hearing was characterized by a sense of enormous 
disappointment with the United States State Department and 
United States Embassy in Colombia both on policy decisions and 
management issues.
    According to estimates by the Department of State's Bureau 
for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs [INL], 
Mexico is a major transit point for cocaine entering the United 
States from South America, and a major source country for 
heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana. Today, at least 400 
tons of cocaine enter the United States annually, 70 percent 
across the Mexico-United States border; and 150 tons of 
methamphetamine are now produced in Mexico. Cross-border 
shipments of these drugs have increased markedly in the past 
several years.
    Close economic and political ties, in addition to the 2,000 
mile border, necessitate that there be a close relationship 
between the United States and Mexico in the ``war on drugs.'' 
Moreover, the fact that as much as 70 percent of the drugs 
trafficked into the United States comes through Mexico, and 
that the United States is the main destination for the drugs 
accentuates this necessity. Both Mexico and the United States 
agree that there can be no progress at halting this flow 
without attention and cooperation from each party. Accordingly, 
high ranking officials from both countries meet regularly 
(known as the High Level Contact Group) to discuss what can be 
done to improve United States-Mexico cooperation. This High 
Level Contact Group [HLCG] has a number of working groups that 
focus on specific problems between the United States and 
Mexico. The HLCG has moved forward, as documented in the 
publication of the United States/Mexico Bi-National Drug Threat 
Assessment in May 1997, and the United States/Mexico Bi-
National Drug Strategy, released in February 1998. The group is 
now focusing on what could be the hardest part yet, in setting 
benchmarks to measure progress on the strategy. Without these 
benchmarks it is difficult to judge the potential effectiveness 
of these agreements. However, it is worth noting that a concise 
and agreed list of problems, including some difficult areas 
such as corruption, weapons, and extradition of nationals, is a 
significant indicator of how seriously Mexico views these 
issues. The current strategy does not provide clear benchmarks 
and it is uncertain when such standards will be developed and 
agreed to.
    Despite the fact that Mexico has been annually certified as 
``fully cooperating'' in counter narcotics programs, there is 
still doubt as to whether this is a reflection of Mexican 
potential or actual performance. Members of both the House and 
the Senate introduced resolutions to overturn the President's 
decision in 1997 and 1998.
    The flow of illegal narcotics from Mexico to the United 
States is growing. Cocaine is flown successfully from Colombia, 
through Mexico, and into the United States. Methamphetamine 
precursor chemicals and increasingly the finished product as 
well, have been smuggled in greater and greater quantities into 
the West and Midwest of the United States. Mexico has mounted a 
large and continuing eradication effort. These have produced 
steady declines in the harvestable crops of marijuana and opium 
grown in Mexico. Methamphetamine production, however, has 
expanded. In addition, major criminal gangs, such as the 
Amezcua Contreras, Arellano-Felix, Amado Carrillo-Fuentes, 
Caro-Quintero, and Gulf Cartels are increasing in power. 
Moreover, the death of Amado Carrillo-Fuentes in 1997 has 
created a power struggle both within the organization and 
between other organizations to establish control over his 
organization. A reported alliance between the Arellano-Felix 
and Caro-Quintero organizations (``the Federation'') promises 
to enhance trafficking ability across the border.
    The subcommittee conducted two hearings on the issue of 
United States-Mexico counterdrug efforts. On February 25, 1997, 
the subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Counternarcotics 
Efforts in Mexico and Along the Southwest Border.'' Witnesses 
at this hearing included Congressman Henry Bonilla (R-TX); 
Thomas A. Constantine, Administrator, Drug Enforcement 
Administration; Robert S. Gelbard, Assistant Secretary, Bureau 
of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, 
Department of State; Mary Lee Warren, Deputy Assistant Attorney 
General, Department of Justice; Douglas M. Kruhm, Assistant 
Commissioner, U.S. Border Patrol; and Tony Castaneda, Chief of 
Police, Eagle Pass, TX. These witnesses testified to the fact 
that the growing influx of narcotics along the U.S. 
Southwestern border poses a direct, palpable, insidious and 
deepening national security threat.
    On March 18, 1998 the subcommittee held a joint hearing 
with the U.S. Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control 
entitled ``Oversight of United States/Mexico Drug 
Cooperation.'' Witnesses at this hearing included Ben Nelson, 
Director, International Relations and Trade Issues, National 
Security and International Affairs Division, U.S. General 
Accounting Office; Ambassador Jeffrey Davidow, Assistant 
Secretary of State, Bureau of Inter-American Affairs, 
Department of State; Donnie Marshall, Acting Deputy 
Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration; Rand Beers, 
Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics 
and Law Enforcement Affairs, Department of State; Mary Lee 
Warren, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, 
Department of Justice.
    Drug trafficking through the Caribbean region and into 
Florida is a major drug threat to the United States. According 
to United States law enforcement officials, up to 30-40 percent 
of the cocaine entering the United States may enter through the 
Caribbean section of the transit zone. During the past several 
years, traffickers in the Caribbean have shifted their 
operations from primarily air-related activities to maritime 
activities. In addition, traffickers are using improved 
technologies to counter efforts by U.S. agencies to identify 
and monitor their activities. In an effort to better understand 
the dynamic trafficking patterns of the Caribbean, the 
subcommittee on July 17, 1997, held a hearing entitled, ``Drug 
Interdiction in Florida and the Caribbean.'' Witnesses at this 
hearing included Newt Gingrich, Speaker, U.S. House of 
Representatives; Samuel Banks, Deputy Commissioner, U.S. 
Customs Service; James Milford, Deputy Administrator, Drug 
Enforcement Administration; Rear Admiral Norman Saunders, 
Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District, U.S. Coast Guard; 
Peter Girard, group supervisor for Cargo Theft, Miami Seaport, 
Office of Investigations, U.S. Customs Service; Mike Sinclair, 
Chief of Miami Seaport Cargo Inspection Team, U.S. Customs 
Service; James H. Wallwork, commissioner, Waterfront Commission 
of New York Harbor; Edward V. Badolato, chairman, National 
Cargo Security Council; and Art Coffey, international vice 
president, International Longshoremen's Association. This 
hearing focused on: 1) the nature and threat of drug-
trafficking activities in the transit zone with particular 
emphasis on south Florida and the northern Caribbean; 2) the 
capabilities of United States agencies to interdict illegal 
drugs in the Caribbean and in Florida's ports of entry; 3) the 
extent of Federal agency planning, coordination, and 
implementation of United States interdiction efforts in south 
Florida and the northern Caribbean; and 4) and the 
effectiveness of United States enforcement efforts in Florida's 
ports of entry. The importance of increased effort in this 
region was plainly corroborated.
    Field Hearings.--In addition to the 16 hearings held in 
Washington, members of the subcommittee traveled to several 
regions of the country to examine counternarcotics efforts by 
communities, State, and local law enforcement agencies, as well 
as cooperation by those groups with Federal counternarcotics 
agencies and vice versa. Survey after survey shows that drug 
abuse, especially among teens, is an increasing problem in the 
United States. Since 1991, teenage use of marijuana, inhalants, 
cocaine, methamphetamine, LSD, heroin, and other drugs has 
increased dramatically. This is a sudden reversal of successful 
antidrug policies in the 1980's, lowering cocaine use, for 
example, 70 percent in 4 years and reinforcing strong ``no 
use'' attitudes. In 1993, the trends began a dramatic reversal. 
Over the past several years, many communities--both rural and 
urban--have reported increasing difficulties in dealing with 
the effects of escalating drug use and drug-related crime. 
Local law enforcement authorities have been particularly 
frustrated as their communities have been subjected to an 
increase in violent crime and drug use. The subcommittee heard 
testimony at these field hearings highlighting the cooperative 
efforts of Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials 
who continue to take positive steps toward winning the war on 
drugs. Also apparent was the rising threat posed by traffickers 
employing more sophisticated technology. These field hearings 
highlighted two important conclusions. First, the most 
successful way to combat drugs is for entire communities to 
become engaged in tackling the issue, working in partnership. 
This includes families, schools, law enforcement, business, 
church, synagogue, and other community leaders. Second, 
interdicting drugs before they cross our border, either at 
their source or in transit, is essential to combating drug 
abuse and can be highly effective when properly funded. 
Effective drug interdiction, the most recent and best science 
indicates, raises drug prices, reduces drug availability and 
lowers drug purity. Accordingly, source country and transit 
zone programs can, if well managed, be highly cost-effective.
    On July 7, 1997, the subcommittee held two hearings in 
Illinois to examine the threat of drugs and gangs to kids in 
rural communities. In DeKalb, at the hearing entitled, ``Report 
From the Frontline: The Drug Threat to Teens in Our Rural 
Communities,'' testimony was received from the following 
witnesses: Ms. Pam Maakestad, whose son was a victim of drug-
related violence; ``Connie''--a teenager who has never used 
drugs; ``Jerome''--a teenager who formerly organized drug 
dealers; ``Derrick''--a former gang member; Mr. Mike Coghlan, 
former States attorney; Kris Povlson, project coordinator of 
the DeKalb County Partnership for a Substance Abuse Free 
Environment; Mr. John Nakonechny of DeKalb County Schools; Mr. 
Michael Haines, a professor at Northern Illinois University; 
Mr. Tim Johnson, DeKalb County States attorney; Sheriff Richard 
Randall of Kendall County; and Mr. Bob Miller, representing the 
Just Say No To Drugs Parade in Lee County.
    In Algonquin, at ``Report From the Frontline: Drugs and 
Gangs in McHenry County,'' testimony was taken from the 
following witnesses: Mr. Jerry Skogmo, the program director of 
the Renz Addiction Counseling Center; Mr. Carlos Chavez, 
coordinator of Youth Prevention Programs; Mr. Les Lunsmann and 
Mr. Bill LeFew, representing Communities Against Gangs; Mr. 
Gary Pack, McHenry County State's attorney; Mr. William Morley, 
Assistant Special Agent in Charge, Drug Enforcement 
Administration Chicago Field Office; and Sheriff Nygren of the 
McHenry County Sheriff's Department.
    When most people think of drugs and teens, they tend to 
think of impoverished urban areas crowded with crack dealers 
and gangs. Rural areas and small towns, such as DeKalb and 
Kendall, are generally not thought of as places where drug 
abuse is a problem. Unfortunately, this image no longer 
accurately reflects the true nature of the drug scourge in 
America. The victim's of this drug war painted a picture of the 
true status of drug use in this area. They related stories of 
drive-by shootings, kids as young as 11- and 12-years-old using 
heroin, and young people afraid to stand up to the gangs that 
terrorize their daily routine. This testimony was not meant to 
discourage the citizens of DeKalb and Algonquin, it was 
intended to send a message to Congress that the deadly epidemic 
is continuing and must be handled like the war on drugs it has 
become.
    Our public safety witnesses highlighted the role of our law 
enforcement officers as they face increasingly intense battles 
on the streets. With the rapid emergence of drugs such as 
heroin and methamphetamine which have been found to have purity 
levels high enough to kill a first-time user, the struggles 
facing our Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers 
multiply and increase in danger each day they report to work.
    Testimony from prevention groups and community coalition 
representatives described successful efforts being taken by 
citizens and members of the community to stop our kids from 
ever turning to drugs. As the burden on our law enforcement 
community continues to grow, the need for citizens in each and 
every community to take responsibility and play an important 
role in the battle against drugs is vital. The witnesses at 
both hearings have demonstrated that commitment and 
perseverance are essential in successfully keeping kids off 
drugs.
    On July 21, 1997, the subcommittee also held a field 
hearing at West Mesquite High School in Mesquite, TX entitled, 
``Report From the Frontline: The Status of Dallas' Fight 
Against Drugs.'' Witnesses included Paul Coggins, U.S. 
attorney, northern District of Texas; Donnie R. Marshall, Chief 
of Operations, Drug Enforcement Administration; Julio F. 
Mercado, Special Agent in Charge, Dallas Divisional Office, 
Drug Enforcement Administration; and Ken Yarbrough, chief of 
police, Richardson Police Department. These witnesses confirmed 
that cocaine continues to be readily available throughout the 
Dallas area; heroin remains available at all levels throughout 
northeast Texas; methamphetamine and amphetamine are trafficked 
in and around Dallas; and marijuana is encountered regularly by 
law enforcement authorities. The link between marijuana and the 
other drugs was made painfully clear. Additionally, the 
subcommittee visited a former crack house that was being 
transformed into usable living space by local business people, 
with the active support of the law enforcement community.
    On September 22, 1997, the subcommittee held a hearing in 
Aurora, IL entitled, ``Report From the Frontline: From South 
America to South Aurora.'' This field hearing highlighted the 
effect our counterdrug efforts in the source countries in South 
America have on the communities across the United States, like 
Aurora, IL. The subcommittee received testimony from the 
following witnesses: the Honorable Juan Carlos Esguerra, 
Colombian Ambassador to the United States; Lt. Col. Francis 
Kinney, Director of Strategic Planning for the Office of 
National Drug Control Policy; Mr. Juventino Cano, president of 
the Aurora Hispanic Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Bob Barwa, 
principal of East Aurora High School; Mr. Harold Osby, a former 
gang member; Mr. Mike Murphy, executive director of the Prayer 
Coalition for Reconciliation; Ms. Judy Kraemer, president of 
Illinois Drug Education Alliance; Sgt. Roy Garcia, of the North 
Central Narcotics Task Force, Illinois State Police; Chief 
Larry Langston of the Aurora Police Department; and Mr. Joseph 
Birkett, DuPage County State's attorney.
    This hearing focused on the nexus between drug cultivation 
in South America and how these deadly narcotics come across our 
borders and into our neighborhoods. The Colombian Ambassador 
discussed the country's persistent and courageous efforts to 
reduce drug cultivation and trafficking of the dangerous 
substances. State and local law enforcement witnesses testified 
to the various enforcement and prosecution issues inherent in 
the drug trade, as well as it's impact on drug-related criminal 
activity. Civic leaders described to our Members the various 
successful programs underway within the community to halt the 
spread of drug use, trafficking, and gang-related violence. All 
witnesses provided unique and invaluable information for the 
Members to bring back to Washington to assist in evaluating the 
current drug policy, as well as creating new legislative 
initiatives.
    On Monday, October 20, 1997, the subcommittee held a field 
hearing at Freehold Borough High School in Freehold, NJ. At 
this hearing the subcommittee heard testimony about rising drug 
use and violence in the community of Central New Jersey. 
Witnesses at this field hearing included Greg Williams, Chief 
of Domestic Operations, Drug Enforcement Administration; John 
Coleman, Special Agent in Charge, Drug Enforcement 
Administration; John Kaye, Monmouth County prosecutor; Michael 
Paquette, chief of police, South Brunswick Police; Captain 
Howard Butt, Narcotics Division, New Jersey State Police; 
Elliot White, director, Local Advisory Committee on Alcohol and 
Drug Abuse; Mary Pat Angelini, executive director, Substances 
Abuse Resources; Ernestine Winfrey, executive director, Mercer 
Council on Alcoholism & Drug Addiction; and Scott Sechrist, 
director, Good News Home for Women. In addition, local high 
school students contributed testimony regarding the current 
state of drug trafficking and abuse in their schools. Witnesses 
also testified to the effects drug use and availability had on 
their community and what is being done to effectively curb the 
spread. The community of Central New Jersey is proof that the 
social and economic problems caused by drug trafficking and use 
can occur anywhere, and can also be prevented when a community 
comes together to prohibit the spread of drug use by their 
young people.

2. Immigration and Naturalization Service Program Citizenship USA

    a. Summary.--This investigation of the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service's [INS] Citizenship USA Program [CUSA], 
initiated in June 1996, has uncovered a pervasive and alarming 
pattern of election-year fraud and abuses within the INS' 
naturalization process, the process by which resident aliens 
become American citizens. The subcommittee held three public 
hearings on the program, the second of which featured INS line-
agent whistleblowers.
    This politically-motivated program was evidently intended 
to naturalize 1.3 million people during fiscal 1996, concluding 
with the close of voter registrations in September 1996, just 
prior to the 1996 elections. The program eventually naturalized 
1.1 million people. This number represents a massive increase 
over previous years; from 1990 to 1994, INS naturalized about 
300,000 new citizens per year.
    Throughout the course of this program, legal and procedural 
requirements governing naturalization were consciously 
weakened, discarded or ignored. Immigration law requires each 
applicant for citizenship to have ``good moral character.'' 
This means that the applicant may not become a U.S. citizen if 
he has committed certain crimes, or lied to the INS about his 
criminal record. To enforce these requirements, the INS 
requires each applicant to disclose any criminal history on the 
application for citizenship, under penalties of perjury. More 
importantly, the INS takes fingerprints of each applicant and 
is required to submit them to the FBI. If a candidate's 
fingerprints match a criminal record on file with the FBI, the 
FBI sends a copy of the criminal record, or ``rap sheet,'' back 
to the INS. Because the rap sheet contains criminal charges, 
but generally does not report dispositions, the INS must then 
investigate the charges to discover resulting convictions and 
sentences. At that point, the INS examiner is able to match an 
application form with the applicant's complete criminal 
history. The examiner can then determine whether citizenship 
should be denied based on either (A) the seriousness of the 
criminal record, or (B) the applicant's failure to report it on 
his application.
    Historically, the INS' criminal background check process 
has suffered from a number of ingrained problems. They were 
described in reports issued in 1994 by both the Department of 
Justice Office of the Inspector General [DOJIG] and by the U.S. 
General Accounting Office [GAO]. The DOJIG and GAO reports 
pointed out that the INS' procedures left open the possibility 
that, in some cases, individuals with criminal records could be 
improperly naturalized. Both reports made strong 
recommendations to correct the serious flaws appearing in the 
process. However, for reasons that remain unexplained, the INS 
did not adopt the recommendations made by either DOJIG or GAO. 
Moreover, in many cases, the INS failed to submit fingerprint 
cards to the FBI, or submitted defective fingerprint cards 
which were rejected by the FBI. In other cases, the INS 
submitted fingerprint cards but failed to await the return of 
the a rap sheet before granting citizenship. Instead, under the 
enormous, knowingly generated load of the Citizenship USA 
program, the system broke down completely.
    Compounding the crisis, for many months, these problems 
were deliberately concealed by the INS. Beginning in September 
1996, the subcommittee requested detailed information and 
documents on the issue of criminal background checks. The INS 
refused to provide any information, and then went so far as to 
openly defy two congressional subpoenas. In addition, public 
statements made by senior INS officials and the INS press 
office were repeatedly misleading, even after receiving 
incontrovertible corrections from congressional investigators. 
For example, Alexander Aleinikoff, then the INS Executive 
Associate Commissioner for Programs (and who has left the 
agency), told National Public Radio in September that the 
problem was restricted to ``. . . perhaps 40 or 50 cases 
nationwide.'' The truth was somewhat different. Louis Crocetti, 
the INS' Associate Commissioner for Examinations, stated under 
oath during a congressional hearing last September that the 
number ``. . . was 60 for the entire naturalization program.'' 
To date, the INS still has not admitted the true scope and 
nature of its problems with criminal background checks, which--
at a minimum--involves tens of thousands of applications.
    Unfortunately, INS' disregard for its own procedures and 
safeguards has had predictable and serious consequences. On May 
12, 1997, DOJ, the parent agency over both the INS and FBI, 
reported to the subcommittee that out of 1,049,867 persons 
naturalized, 81,492 were identified as having FBI records which 
include INS administrative actions, dismissals, misdemeanor and 
felony arrests and convictions for serious and violent crimes 
such as drug trafficking, child molestation, assault, robbery, 
burglary, rape and murder; 124,740 persons were further 
identified as not having had definitive criminal history checks 
conducted because their fingerprint cards were rejected by the 
FBI because of poor quality prints; 55,750 persons were 
additionally identified for whom it could not and cannot be 
determined whether or not FBI record checks were ever 
conducted. Of the 81,492 persons identified as having FBI 
records, at least 5,500 were identified as convicted felons 
with disqualifying criminal histories. The DOJ and INS are 
currently trying to denaturalize these people, and determine if 
there are additional criminals who were granted citizenship, 
and if so, how many.
    DOJ's review process is still underway, and it is not known 
exactly how many of the quarter million cases under review 
should have been denied citizenship, based on criminal 
convictions and misrepresentation of criminal records. In many 
cases, especially the 180,000 who became citizens without 
having proper background checks, the full truth may never be 
known. In addition, fully remedying the problem may prove 
difficult or, in many cases, impossible, based on the automatic 
attachment of due process rights following naturalization, 
regardless of whether the naturalization in question was 
legitimate. The legal and logistical obstacles to removal of 
citizenship are mammoth, and the INS has historically 
denaturalized only 10 or 15 people per year. If thousands, much 
less tens of thousands, of people were improperly granted 
citizenship, the problem may never be fully remedied.
    One disconcerting aspect of the CUSA acceleration and 
waiver of critical regulations is the documented involvement of 
the White House, including intense involvement by the Vice 
President and several of his senior staff in the election-year 
acceleration.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's investigation and hearings 
have brought the full scope and nature of CUSA fraud, abuse and 
recklessness into the public eye, as media reports from coast 
to coast have described criminal activities and abuses of power 
wrought by this politically-motivated and undeniably errant 
program.
    The INS has belatedly enacted new regulations which allow 
the agency to conduct administrative denaturalization 
proceedings, and to theoretically permit denaturalization of 
people who have been erroneously naturalized. The INS has had 
statutory authority to enact such regulations since 1990, but 
has heretofore neglected to promulgate any such regulations. 
Responding to our congressional investigation, this is a small 
step in the right direction. These administrative proceedings 
will be substantially less time-consuming and burdensome than 
judicial denaturalization, which until now was the agency's 
only method of denaturalization. Unfortunately, for legal and 
logistical reasons, these new procedures are unlikely to be 
retroactively applied to the large number of people who were 
illegally and improperly naturalized under CUSA during 1996 or 
prior. This raises additional legal and national security 
concerns beyond the scope of this report.
    In addition, the DOJIG has undertaken its own investigation 
to which it is devoting considerable resources. At the request 
of the subcommittee and other congressional offices, GAO also 
conducted its own investigation. Specifically, they examined 
the findings and recommendations made by Peat Marwick in 
addition to reviewing new INS naturalization regulations and 
procedures.
    In sum, the INS, under intense pressure from Congress, the 
public, and the media, has taken incremental steps to reform 
its badly-damaged naturalization process. However, this is only 
a small beginning, and much remains to be done by the INS, DOJ, 
and the FBI. Continued congressional oversight is necessary to 
ensure the success of reform efforts.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held its third hearing on 
mismanagement of the naturalization process on March 5, 1997. 
The hearing, held jointly with the Subcommittee on Immigration 
of the Committee on the Judiciary, entitled, ``Improper 
Granting of U.S. Citizenship Without Conducting Criminal 
Background Checks,'' focused on the breakdown of safeguards at 
INS that led to the naturalization of at least 5,500 convicted 
criminals.
    Mr. Stephen R. Colgate, Assistant Attorney General for 
Administration, testified on behalf of DOJ. He was accompanied 
by Ms. Dawn Johnsen, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the 
Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice, and Mr. Gary 
Ahrens, KPMG Peat Marwick LLP. Mr. Colgate discussed the 
measures that DOJ was taking both to discover the exact 
magnitude of the problem and reinvent the naturalization 
process so that such abuses did not happen again. Mr. Ahrens 
discussed Peat Marwick's role in the naturalization review. Dr. 
Laurie E. Ekstrand, Associate Director for Administration of 
Justice Issues, General Accounting Office, discussed GAO's role 
in the review, which was to review Peat Marwick's methodology 
and implementation strategy.
    The Honorable Doris Meissner, Commissioner, Mr. David 
Rosenberg, Citizenship USA Program Director, Mr. Louis D. 
Crocetti, Associate Commissioner for Examinations, and Mr. 
David Martin, general counsel, testified for the Immigration 
and Naturalization Service. Mrs. Meissner denied any political 
influence was exerted on the program by the Clinton 
administration. She also discussed the new safeguards that INS 
instituted on November 29, 1996, that she believed would 
prevent such lapses in the future. She did not explain the 
apparent connections of the CUSA program to the 1996 Federal 
elections; nor did she address, at all, the failure to act on 
either past GAO or past DOJIG criticisms of and recommendations 
to INS. She offered no suggestions on how those responsible 
within INS should be held accountable, or how to address the 
legal and security concerns raised by the INS' abdication of 
responsibility in 1996. She explained that the Citizenship USA 
program had been implemented to address the surge in 
naturalization applications in the last few years while 
improving the entire process; she could not, however, explain 
why she had also, consonant with White House memoranda, 
simultaneously ramped up recruiting of applications in 1996. 
While she admitted that mistakes were made, she believes that 
new policies and procedures that INS recently implemented will 
preclude such errors in the future. On balance, the 
Commissioner appeared not to grasp the enormity of INS' 
misfeasance, and potential malfeasance, in 1996.

3. Department of Defense Inventory Management.

    a. Summary.--This investigation is exploring the entire 
universe of acquisition, storage, use and disposal of 
Department of Defense [DOD] supplies and repair parts, 
including everything from field rations and medical supplies to 
aircraft engines. The subcommittee's three policy goals were 
and are: (1) to identify more modern and efficient inventory 
management practices, which can simultaneously save taxpayer 
dollars and improve military readiness; (2) to insure that such 
practices, once identified, are fully implemented by DOD; and 
(3) to achieve substantial financial savings in inventory 
management, freeing up defense dollars for military 
procurement, research and development, combat training, and 
other war fighting necessities which have been under funded in 
recent years. By devoting consistent congressional attention to 
these issues, and by rendering assistance and applying pressure 
when necessary, the subcommittee hopes to assist DOD in 
formulating and executing a plan which will result in a 
substantially less expensive and more efficient system.
    Defense inventory management, for the last 6 years, has 
been identified by the U.S. General Accounting Office [GAO] as 
one of the 25 ``high-risk'' areas in the Federal Government. 
Defense inventory management was targeted as vulnerable to 
waste, fraud and abuse because of the enormous amounts of money 
spent on inventory and the inefficiencies which have long been 
rampant within the field.
    The Defense Logistics Agency [DLA] and the three service 
departments maintain extensive support and logistics 
infrastructure designed to supply our armed forces. 
Headquartered at Fort Belvoir, VA, DLA employs over 50,000 
military and civilian personnel worldwide and manages 
approximately 560 million cubic feet of storage space. DLA 
maintains a stockpile of millions of secondary inventory 
items--such as medical supplies, food, clothing and spare 
parts--worth an estimated $69.6 billion.
    The system continues to be based on ``just-in-case'' 
practices of overbuying and stockpiling excess inventory at 
many different locations and levels. This approach usually 
provides good availability of supplies and repair parts, but 
only by sacrificing efficiency and savings. However, modern 
methods of inventory management can provide both availability 
and efficiency, by making timely deliveries from centralized 
facilities. This has already been successfully demonstrated in 
certain areas of defense inventory management, such as medical 
supplies and food items.
    There are additional factors which aggravate the 
inefficiency of the inventory system. Cumbersome acquisition 
practices, which have begun to be reformed by Congress during 
the last two sessions, still contribute substantially to the 
problem. Furthermore, many of DOD's accounting systems are 
outdated and inefficient, which makes it difficult to identify 
exactly what inventory is in storage, or exactly how much money 
has been spent. This situation is further complicated by the 
fact that DLA, as well as the Army, the Air Force, and the 
Navy, all maintain their own logistics systems, which often do 
not share information in an efficient manner.
    As the military budget has decreased steadily, DOD's force 
structure and military readiness have suffered more than 
supporting infrastructure. At the same time that billions are 
wasted through inefficient inventory management and depot 
maintenance, there is less and less money for combat troops, 
combat training, military procurement, research and 
development.
    As part of the investigation, committee staff visited seven 
different military facilities, each of which added 
substantially to the committee's oversight investigation and 
plans for reform. On April 8-9, 1997, majority and minority 
staff from the committee, accompanied by personnel from the 
GAO, traveled to three different military facilities. The first 
stop was DLA headquarters at Fort Belvoir, VA, where the group 
was briefed by managers who provided an overview of DLA's 
current operations and plans for the future. The staff then 
traveled to Walter Reed Army Medical Center, in Washington, DC, 
to see DOD's innovative virtual prime vendor operations for the 
purchase of medical supplies. The group then traveled to the 
New Cumberland and Mechanicsburg supply depots in Susquehanna, 
PA. There are 90 warehouses at these two depots, each the size 
of approximately two or three football fields, and over $6 
billion worth of consumable and reparable parts are stored 
there. Compounding the acquisition of excess and unnecessary 
material is the enormous cost of continued storage for often 
obsolete or unnecessary inventory.
    On May 2, 1997, the staff and GAO personnel then traveled 
to Philadelphia to see the Defense Industrial Supply Center 
[DISC] and the Naval Inventory Control Point [NAVICP], where 
item managers determine the requirements for supplies, order 
new inventory, and give orders for storage and disposal. The 
DISC is responsible for hardware items--nuts, bolts, bearings, 
metal, electrical wiring, et cetera--and the NAVICP is 
primarily responsible for aircraft parts.
    From May 27 to May 30, 1997, the subcommittee staff 
traveled to the U.S. Army maintenance depot in Corpus Christi, 
TX, and the U.S. Air Force maintenance depot in Oklahoma City, 
OK. DLA storage and distribution facilities are collocated at 
these sites and support the depots. Helicopters and aircraft 
are upgraded and repaired at these facilities. The maintenance 
depots are major customers of the inventory system.
    b. Benefits.--Although there is much dispute about the 
complex issues involved in DOD inventory management, one thing 
is clear: substantial savings of hundreds of millions, if not 
billions, of dollars can be achieved from reform of the 
domestic defense infrastructure in general and defense 
inventory management in particular. However, the subcommittee 
does not suggest that money saved through improving the 
logistics system should be cut from the Defense budget.
    Rather, any savings that can be realized should be shifted 
toward procurement and modernization accounts that have been 
cut by more than 70 percent in real dollars as the Defense 
budget has been cut for 13 straight years. As the military 
budget has declined, the combat forces, or ``tooth,'' have 
undergone more severe reductions than the supporting 
infrastructure, or ``tail.'' Both DOD and Congress are 
committed to improving the ``tooth-to-tail'' ratio, and DOD 
recognizes that inventory management is one part of the 
``tail'' where significant savings may be realized. In 
comprehensive reform of support systems lies the opportunity to 
restore needed resources to the war fighters.
    In addition, even if DOD's budget was not continuing to 
decline, improving inventory management should still be a high 
priority. Good financial management and efficient utilization 
of resources are extremely important; reform of the system 
would be a laudable goal even if financial considerations did 
not now dictate it. Thus, saving billions of dollars through 
reform of inventory management is not only beneficial for the 
military but is compelled by our commitment to responsible 
fiscal management.
    DOD recognizes that it has to reform inventory management 
and is working with the subcommittee, GAO, and other 
congressional offices to resolve these long-standing problems. 
Serious and thoughtful reforms have been initiated by DOD over 
the last few years which should lead to substantial management 
improvements and cost-savings over the next several years. 
Nevertheless, this will be a long, difficult process which will 
certainly require vigorous congressional involvement to 
encourage DOD to continue to aggressively pursue reform.
    c. Hearings.--On March 20, 1997, the subcommittee held an 
introductory hearing on DOD inventory management practices and 
related issues entitled, ``Improving Defense Inventory 
Management.'' The hearing focused on general defense inventory 
management problems, measures undertaken by DOD to address the 
problems and the effectiveness of internal reforms, and the 
implications that extensive reform might have on DOD's budget, 
and ways that the committee, working in cooperation with DOD, 
GAO, and outside experts, can work together to address and 
solve inventory problems.
    Mr. James B. Emahiser, Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense for Materiel and Distribution Management, and Mr. 
Jeffrey A. Jones, executive director for Logistics Management, 
Defense Logistics Agency, presented DOD's perspective of the 
problem and discussed the measures that have been, or are 
being, implemented to modernize the logistics system. While 
they strongly disagreed with many of GAO's definitions and 
conclusions, they acknowledged that DOD is currently holding 
billions of dollars' worth of excess inventory. They testified 
that the purchase value of current excess inventory is 
approximately $12 billion, which for accounting purposes they 
value at about $300 million. This inventory is sometimes 
difficult to properly dispose of, but DOD recognizes that 
disposing of excess inventory, and avoiding purchases of more 
excess inventory, will ``free up'' scarce resources. Although 
further inquiry will follow in 1998, these DOD witnesses denied 
that DOD is continuing to buy inventory in excess of current or 
foreseeable requirements.
    Both witnesses stated that DOD has proposed incremental 
changes to improve support functions and operate more like a 
private business, but appeared resistant to dramatic or 
sweeping changes. Commercial practices, the DOD witnesses 
argued, are not entirely feasible for the military and that the 
burden of supplying the military cannot be shifted to the 
private sector. They cautioned that excessive outsourcing or 
privatization of support functions could adversely affect 
national security.
    The second panel was composed of personnel from GAO. Mr. 
Henry L. Hinton, Jr., Assistant Comptroller General, Mr. 
Kenneth R. Knouse, Jr., Assistant Director, and Mr. Robert L. 
Repasky, Senior Evaluator, presented an overview of the defense 
inventory problem, on which GAO has been reporting for over 30 
years and on which it has issued over 100 reports. The panel 
addressed problems ranging from adopting commercial sector best 
practices to trimming budgets for secondary inventory items. 
GAO asserted that inventory oversight is essential, and there 
remain weak financial accountability measures and a tendency 
toward overstated requirements. Within DOD's vast supply 
system, the GAO estimates that roughly half of the $69.6 
billion of secondary inventory items that DLA stockpiles--$33.7 
billion worth of inventory--is excess to DOD war reserve or 
current operating requirements. This excess inventory results 
in hundreds of millions of dollars wasted on storage costs each 
year. In addition to the problem of excess inventory from past 
purchases, it is likely that DOD is continuing to purchase and 
store more inventory than is needed for military requirements, 
or than would be needed if DOD's inventory management and 
maintenance operations were run more efficiently.
    Even though GAO asserts that over half of DOD's current 
inventory is excess to current operating or wartime 
requirements, they decline to advocate massive disposal of 
excess stocks. While they assert support for adoption of modern 
business practices, they appear somewhat short on action. DOD 
acknowledged, however, that the enormous amount spent on 
purchasing secondary inventory--approximately $15 billion a 
year, more than NASA's entire budget--makes reform imperative.
    The third panel was composed of Dr. Jacques A. Gansler (now 
serving as Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology), vice chairman, Defense Science Board, and Admiral 
Luther F. Schriefer (USN, Ret.), executive director, Business 
Executives for National Security. Both Dr. Gansler and Admiral 
Schriefer testified that ``billions of dollars'' could be saved 
through outsourcing and privatization of most domestic military 
``infrastructure'' functions. They asserted that moving 
commercial functions into the private sector would allow DOD to 
save money while putting greater focus on DOD's core mission--
preparing for and fighting wars.
    Dr. Gansler discussed the current imbalance in Defense 
spending, estimating that 55 percent of the Defense budget, or 
$140 billion a year, is spent on support and infrastructure. Of 
that, he testified that an estimated $60 billion is spent on 
logistics alone. He cited a November 1996 report by the Defense 
Science Board, entitled, ``Achieving an Innovative Support 
Structure for 21st Century Military Superiority,'' which claims 
reform consisting of privatizing and outsourcing most domestic-
based logistics and infrastructure functions could save $30 
billion a year, including $2.5 billion from inventory 
management accounts. These funds could then be shifted to 
modernization and training.
    Admiral Schriefer is part of a ``Tail-to-Tooth 
Commission,'' focused on ``re-engineering'' the Pentagon and 
spending money more efficiently. He argued, with 70 percent of 
Defense dollars going to pay for support and infrastructure 
``war fighters'' needs are going unmet. He stressed that DOD 
must learn from American industry. DOD must dramatically 
transform the way it manages inventories in order to be 
``globally competitive.'' He believes that, ``Revolution, not 
evolution'' is required. Admiral Schriefer recommended that DOD 
buy advanced software to manage the inventory; buy off-the-
shelf commercial products as much as possible; rely on 
contractor support and outsourcing maintenance as much as 
possible with new systems; and that inventory management be 
centralized.
    On July 24, 1997, the subcommittee held a second oversight 
hearing on DOD inventory management entitled, ``Reforming 
Inventory Management Through Innovative Business Practices.'' 
The subcommittee narrowed the focus of this hearing and 
specifically addressed the ways in which DOD could employ 
``cutting edge business practices'' to improve inventory 
management. Witnesses were asked to discuss the success that 
DOD has demonstrated with ``virtual prime vendor'' and ``direct 
vendor delivery'' practices in acquisition and delivery of 
medical and pharmaceutical supplies to over 200 medical 
facilities nationwide. Similar successes revolving around food 
and clothing items were discussed, and the feasibility of using 
virtual prime vendor and direct vendor delivery for other types 
of inventory items, such as hardware items, was explored.
    The first panel was composed of personnel from GAO. Mr. 
David Warren, Director, Defense Management Issues, National 
Security and International Affairs Division, Mr. Kenneth R. 
Knouse, Jr., Assistant Director, Mr. Robert L. Repasky, Senior 
Evaluator, and Mr. Matthew B. Lea, Senior Evaluator, discussed 
how American business has developed sophisticated methods for 
inventory management, ensuring both efficiency and economy. 
Many of these methods--such as ``just-in-time delivery,'' use 
of supplier parks, and prime vendor contracts--could be applied 
to DOD's inventory management operations for similar 
efficiencies and savings. Commercial methods could not be 
applied to DOD in a wholesale manner, but must be tailored to 
military readiness needs. The cutting edge ``best practices'' 
that GAO believes DOD should aggressively adopt include virtual 
prime vendor in combination with direct vendor delivery 
innovations. Using these practices, acquisition personnel are 
able to order items electronically. The prime vendor then has 
the items delivered directly to buyer, eliminating the need for 
inventory backup.
    GAO addressed DOD's success in using virtual prime vendor 
and direct vendor delivery practices in purchasing medical 
supplies, pharmaceuticals, and food. GAO asserted that by using 
direct vendor delivery for medical supplies and food items, 
which represent about 3 percent of inventory items for which 
these practices could be used, DOD saved $714 million over the 
past 6 years. GAO suggested that similar techniques be used for 
other categories of defense inventory items such as industrial 
hardware, fasteners, wiring, construction supplies, and similar 
types of common, commercially available material. The estimated 
value of these items in the inventory is $7.2 billion. If 
implementation of best practices for these items were 
successful, DOD could reduce their inventory dollar value by 
several billion dollars, as well as reducing future purchases 
of such items and improving service to DOD customers.
    One of GAO's chief criticisms was that DOD is not moving 
aggressively enough to adopt efficient, cost cutting measures 
at a time when the Department's budget is continuing to shrink. 
GAO cited service parochialism and a DOD supply and maintenance 
``culture'' resistant to institutional reform in identifying 
``major roadblocks'' to substantial changes. Overcoming these 
barriers will be necessary for DOD in the coming years.
    Dr. Edward Martin, Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Health Affairs, Mr. James B. Emahiser, Assistant Deputy 
Under Secretary of Defense for Materiel and Distribution 
Management, and Mr. Jeffrey A. Jones, Executive Director for 
Logistics Management, Defense Logistics Agency, testified for 
DOD. They discussed the success of reforms enacted to date and 
outlined additional reforms that DOD plans to implement in the 
future. Dr. Martin took the opportunity to discuss the history 
of the virtual prime vendor use for medical supplies and noted 
successes, difficulties encountered to date, and plans to 
improve the system in the future. When asked if additional 
legislation would be required to hasten reform efforts, Mr. 
Emahiser responded emphatically that it would not be required, 
and said he considered ``. . . existing legislative authority 
as sufficient to continue to appropriately implement innovative 
private sector practices.'' This conclusion remains subject to 
further scrutiny.

4. Combating Terrorism.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee initiated an oversight 
investigation of U.S. Government efforts to combat terrorism in 
the autumn of 1997. The subcommittee has since held three 
oversight hearings, conducted one large congressional 
delegation, and asked 11 Federal departments and 7 independent 
agencies for comprehensive information regarding their programs 
designed to ``combat terrorism.'' (``Combating terrorism'' 
refers to all programs designed to deter, defend against, 
counter, or manage the consequences of terrorist acts both 
domestically and abroad. ``Counter-terrorism'' refers to 
offensive measures meant to deter or counter terrorist acts. 
``Antiterrorism'' refers to defensive measures designed to 
reduce vulnerability of individuals and property. ``Consequence 
management'' refers to measures taken to manage the 
consequences of a terrorist attack. The Department of Defense 
[DOD] frequently uses the term ``force protection'' 
interchangeable with antiterrorism.) Such programs are 
currently executed by more than 40 Federal departments, 
agencies, bureaus and offices.
    The subcommittee initially focused on terrorism and the 
security of Departments of Defense and State personnel 
stationed in South West Asia, where, as in many other parts of 
the world, terrorism is a constant threat. In June 1996, 
terrorists employing a truck bomb killed 19 United States 
airmen and injured hundreds of others at the United States Air 
Force base at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, prompting a major 
review of force protection policy. The terrorist attacks on our 
embassies in East Africa have prompted a similar re-examination 
of security at State Department facilities. The subcommittee's 
purpose was to examine the threats facing U.S. Government 
personnel deployed abroad, the changes in force protection 
policy made as a result of terrorist attacks, the status of 
implementing new policies, and the success the United States 
has had in working with host countries to increase the security 
of U.S. personnel.
    There are approximately 25,000 United States military 
personnel (including naval personnel stationed off shore) and 
over 500 State Department personnel in the Persian Gulf region. 
Unfortunately, they have been, and continue to be, the target 
of terrorist extremists who are determined to force the 
withdrawal of United States forces from the Persian Gulf. Since 
the end of the Gulf war, there have been two terrorist attacks 
on United States military bases in Saudi Arabia, one in 
November 1995 and the other in June 1996, which killed 24 
United States personnel and injured hundreds of others. The 
terrorist groups that executed these attacks have not been 
definitively linked with any country in the region, although 
recent events indicate that terrorist financier Osama bin Laden 
may have been behind the attacks. These incidents focused 
congressional and public attention on force protection policy.
    Following the attacks, the Department of Defense undertook 
a thorough review of its force protection policies. The review, 
conducted by the Downing Assessment Task Force, completed its 
work in August 1996. The Downing Report found that the U.S. 
military lacked a comprehensive strategy for combating 
terrorism based on common guidance, standards and procedures. 
The report also includes a series of recommendations to improve 
the security of U.S. military personnel abroad. It stressed 
that a single entity within DOD should be responsible for 
antiterrorism and counterterrorism. Furthermore, the report 
called for greater interagency cooperation between the 
Departments of Defense and State in coordinating antiterrorism 
policy.
    The State Department and DOD are responsible for the 
security of all U.S. personnel abroad. However, they conduct 
their missions differently in accordance with the respective 
missions, polices and resources of their departments. For 
example, the State Department issues general security 
guidelines and instructions to which every State Department 
facility must adhere. The Defense Department, on the other 
hand, issues some guidance, such as vulnerability assessments, 
but is resistant to issuing prescriptive physical security 
standards, preferring to leave the decision of which security 
measures to implement to the field commanders. Reconciling the 
differences between the Departments of Defense and State is 
just one of the challenges confronting policymakers formulating 
comprehensive force protection policy.
    Congressional Delegation.--From November 17 through 
November 25, 1997, Subcommittee Chairman J. Dennis Hastert (R-
IL) was joined by Representatives Mark Souder (R-IN), Mark 
Sanford (R-SC), John Mica (R-FL), John Shadegg (R-AZ), and 
Delegate Eni Faleomavaega (D-AS) on a congressional delegation 
[CODEL] which traveled to Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, 
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Greece. Accompanying the CODEL were 
committee staff Dale Anderson, Robert Charles, Michele Lang, 
Kevin Long, and Andrew Richardson. The purpose of the trip was 
to conduct an in-country assessment of force protection and 
antiterrorism policy following the terrorist attack at the 
United States Air Force base at Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi 
Arabia in June 1996.
    The CODEL toured United States military bases and State 
Department facilities throughout the Middle East and Persian 
Gulf region, and at every stop, CODEL members were briefed on 
force protection and antiterrorism policy. The CODEL met with 
personnel from the Departments of State and Defense to 
determine what additional measures were necessary to protect 
our personnel deployed abroad to the maximum extent possible. 
Since the majority of the forces stationed in the countries of 
interest are actively involved in the containment of Iraq, 
CODEL members were also given mission briefs at all military 
facilities. Finally, the CODEL held meetings with diplomatic 
and military officials from host nations to learn about the 
level of cooperation and security provided to U.S. personnel 
from host nations.
    In Jerusalem, CODEL members met with senior officials in 
the Israeli Foreign Ministry, after which some members met with 
Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Mordechai while others met 
with Palestinian leader Chairman Yasser Arafat. At these 
meetings, Members took the opportunity to discuss the stalled 
Middle East peace process and other related issues.
    On November 19th, the CODEL traveled to Amman, Jordan, 
where the group visited the new United States Embassy and were 
briefed by Ambassador Wesley Egan. That evening the CODEL 
continued on to Kuwait City, Kuwait, and that night dinned as 
guests of Kuwaiti Minister of Information Saud Nasser Al-Sabah. 
On November 20th, the CODEL visited Camp Doha, a United States 
Army base outside of Kuwait City which maintains enough forward 
deployed military vehicles and equipment for a brigade. The 
base commander, Colonel Robert Polard, USA, briefed Members on 
security issues and the Army mission. From there the CODEL 
traveled to Ali Al-Salem Air Base, where the U.S. Air Force 
operates a radar facility. That afternoon, the CODEL took a 
sobering tour of the Khobar Towers complex at Dhahran, Saudi 
Arabia. The group saw the bombed-out buildings where 19 U.S. 
airmen died and hundreds more were injured when terrorists 
detonated a truck bomb in June 1996. That evening the CODEL 
arrived in Bahrain and Members and staff had the opportunity to 
meet with several United Nations weapons inspectors who had 
recently been forced to leave Iraq.
    On November 21st, the CODEL was briefed at the headquarters 
of United States Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, where the United 
States Navy has maintained a presence for almost 50 years. 
Following the briefing the group was flown out to the aircraft 
carrier U.S.S. Nimitz that was on patrol in the Persian Gulf. 
That afternoon the CODEL went on to Prince Sultan Air Force 
Base in Saudi Arabia. Following the attack at Khobar Towers, 
U.S. Air Force personnel in Saudi Arabia were relocated to this 
remote base, 90 miles south-east of Riyadh. Almost 4,000 men 
and women are stationed there, and Operation Southern Watch, 
which enforces the no-fly zone over southern Iraq, is run 
primarily out of this base.
    On November 22nd, the CODEL met and were briefed by 
Ambassador Wyche Fowler at the United States Embassy in Riyadh, 
following which the group traveled to Eskan Village, the Joint 
Task Force Southwest Asia headquarters. After meeting with the 
commander of the Joint Task Force, Major General Roger 
Radcliff, USAF, the group toured Eskan Village. Members then 
went to a private meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, the 
likely successor to King Fahd. On the evening of November 22nd 
the CODEL flew on to Incirlik, Turkey. The next morning the 
CODEL toured Incirlik Air Base and were briefed on the mission 
of the United States and British air forces operating out of 
Incirlik, which is to patrol the northern no-fly zone over 
Iraq. That afternoon the group traveled to Izmir, Turkey, and 
toured the facilities of an Air Force unit which supports NATO 
forces stationed in Turkey. On November 24th the CODEL traveled 
to Greece, and were briefed by United States Embassy personnel 
as well as Drug Enforcement Agents operating in Greece. The 
CODEL returned to the United States on November 25th.
    This trip gave Members and staff the opportunity to meet 
with Defense and State Department officials in-country and 
observe firsthand the conditions under which they live and work 
and the strenuous efforts being made to protect our deployed 
personnel. There is no doubt that both Members and staff 
returned with a greater appreciation and understanding of the 
difficult but important missions being carried out by our 
professional foreign service and military personnel.
    In the spring of 1998 the subcommittee broadened its 
oversight to include all U.S. Federal Government programs 
designed to combat terrorism. This examination would last for 
the duration of the 105th Congress. The overall objective is to 
identify duplicative programs and organizations as well as 
management practices which hinder rather than facilitate the 
fight against terrorists. While it is clear that the United 
States must be prepared to respond swiftly and effectively to 
acts of terrorism, it is imperative that Congress does not 
enact and fund programs haphazardly and lose sight of the need 
for a comprehensive framework through which to manage our 
combating terrorism programs. The background on this part of 
the investigation will be divided up into the following 
categories: policy and organization, the terrorist threat, the 
Domestic Preparedness Program (``Program''), and General 
Accounting Office reports.

                        POLICY AND ORGANIZATION

    A variety of Presidential directives, implementing 
guidance, Executive orders, interagency agreements, and 
legislation provide the framework for the Federal programs and 
activities to combat. While there is no single, comprehensive 
Federal law explicitly dealing with terrorism, dozens of laws 
have been enacted regarding U.S. efforts to combat terrorism, 
including the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 
1996, and Title XIV of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1997 (commonly referred to as Nunn-Lugar-
Domenici). Presidential Decision Directives 39, signed in June 
1995, and 62, signed in May 1998, provide the current framework 
and guidance for U.S. efforts to combat terrorism. These 
directives, combined with current law, outline the 
responsibilities of many Federal departments and agencies. Some 
of the most important are described below.
    National Security Counsel is to manage formal interagency 
coordination.
    The Central Intelligence Agency is to coordinate all 
terrorism-related interagency intelligence efforts. The CIA's 
Counterterrorist Center has established the Threat Warning 
Group to analyze threat reports and coordinate them with the 
intelligence community.
    The Department of State is to reduce vulnerabilities 
affecting the security of all personnel and facilities at 
nonmilitary U.S. Government installations abroad as well as the 
general safety of American citizens abroad. As the lead agency 
responsible for international terrorist incidents, the 
Department of State is also to work closely with other 
governments to carry out U.S. policy on combating terrorism. 
The Department of State manages the interagency Foreign 
Emergency Support Teams [FEST]. These teams are responsible for 
rapid deployment to manage terrorist-related crises abroad.
    The Department of Defense is to reduce vulnerabilities 
affecting the security of all U.S. military personnel (except 
those assigned to diplomatic posts abroad) and facilities both 
abroad and in the United States and provide support to the lead 
agencies.
    The Department of Justice, through the FBI, is the lead 
agency for responding to domestic terrorist incidents. The FBI 
manages the interagency Domestic Emergency Support Teams 
[DEST]. These teams are responsible for rapid deployment to 
manage terrorist-related crises domestically. This team would 
include both the DOD and HHS in supporting roles, and would 
arrive on the scene after the local and State first responders. 
The FBI is also responsible for tracking domestic terrorists, 
foreign terrorists operating within the United States, and 
providing relevant information to law enforcement entities 
through the Terrorist Threat Warning System. The FBI operates 
the Infrastructure Vulnerability/Key Asset Protection Program 
which maintains information on critical facilities throughout 
the United States to assist in contingency planning in the 
event that these facilities become terrorist targets. Through 
the FBI Awareness of National Security Issues and Response 
Program, U.S. businesses are warned of potential terrorist 
activity. The Federal Emergency Management Agency is the lead 
agency for consequence management of domestic terrorist 
incidents.
    The Department of the Treasury is to reduce vulnerabilities 
by preventing unlawful traffic in firearms and explosives, by 
protecting the President and other officials against terrorist 
attack and by enforcing law controlling the movement of assets, 
and imports and exports of goods and services under Treasury's 
jurisdiction.
    The Department of Transportation is to reduce 
vulnerabilities affecting the security of U.S. airports; all 
means of shipping under U.S. control; and rail, highway mass 
transit, and pipeline facilities.
    The Office of Management and Budget is to report to the 
President on the adequacy of funding for programs relating to 
combating terrorism. OMB is also responsible for ensuring that 
certain technology research, development, and acquisition 
efforts associated with combating terrorism are adequately 
funded.

Inter-Agency Working Groups and Commissions

    Among the over 40 U.S. Government departments, agencies and 
bureaus involved with combating terrorism, a number of 
interagency groups have developed. Within the National Security 
Counsel, the Deputies Committee Coordinating Sub-Group, which 
consists of representatives from State, Justice, Defense, CIA 
and the FBI, is in charge of reaching consensus on terrorism 
policy and operational matters. Their recommendations go to 
either the Deputies Committee or the National Security Advisor 
to the President.
    Under the Coordinating Sub-Group there is the Standing 
Interagency Working Group for Counterterrorism and the 
Community Counterterrorism Board Interagency Intelligence 
Committee on Terrorism. Chaired by the State Department, the 
Standing Interagency Working Group oversees activities of 
several interagency subgroups. The Community Counterterrorism 
Board, located in the CIA's Counterterrorist Center, oversees 
the Interagency Intelligence Committee on Terrorism which 
advises and assists the Director of Central Intelligence on 
coordinating national intelligence on terrorism issues. Agency 
membership to the Intelligence Committee has reached over 40 
Federal agencies.

Agencies' Weapons of Mass Destruction Response Capabilities

    Numerous agencies are independently developing capabilities 
related to weapons of mass destruction [WMD]. For example, 
there is the Army Technical Escort Unit; the Marine Corps 
Chemical Biological Incident Response Force; the National Guard 
Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection teams (currently being 
established); the PHS Metropolitan Medical Strike Teams; as 
well as specialized chemical teams at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, biological teams at the Center for Disease 
Control, and nuclear response teams at the Department of 
Energy.

                          THE TERRORIST THREAT

    A brief look at the most severe terrorist attacks directed 
at the United States, and the frequency and severity of 
domestic and international terrorist acts, may suggest that the 
Federal Government should be undertaking more thorough analysis 
of the terrorist threat before enacting programs to combat 
terrorism.
    Severe terrorist attacks have been carried out against the 
United States both domestically and abroad. Several times over 
the last two decades U.S. military forces stationed abroad were 
the target of extremist Islamic groups. In 1983, 241 service 
men were killed in Beirut, Lebanon, when Hizballah terrorists 
bombed the Marine Corps barracks. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 
was destroyed by a bomb while flying over Scotland, killing 189 
Americans. Libyan nationalists are suspected. In 1995 and 1996, 
a total of 24 service men were killed and hundreds others 
injured in two terrorist acts in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabian 
religious nationalists, perhaps supported by Saudi terrorist 
financier Osama bin Laden, are suspected in both incidents. 
This past August, terrorists struck United States embassies in 
Nairobi and Tanzania, killing over 250 people, including 12 
Americans. The United States claims that groups organized and 
supported by Osama bin Laden were responsible for the attacks.
    In recent years there have been two major terrorist attacks 
in the United States. Six people were killed and over 1,000 
injured in the attack on the New York World Trade Center in 
1993 by an Islamic terrorists cell led by Ramzi Yousef. In 
1995, 168 people were killed and hundreds were injured when 
Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols bombed the Murrah Federal 
building in Oklahoma City.
    These tragic acts are extremely alarming because they 
caused great loss of life and significant property damage. 
While the number of international and domestic terrorist acts 
is declining, the severity of some of those attacks is extreme. 
Furthermore, the three attacks against U.S. military personnel 
overseas demonstrate that terrorist acts can influence the 
deployment of forces abroad. However, absent from any of these 
attacks was the use of nuclear, chemical or biological [NBC] 
weapons. This is noteworthy because significant funding and 
planning is being dedicated to managing incidents involving NBC 
weapons. In the future it is likely that the weapons of choice 
for terrorists will continue to be explosives. Because both 
domestic and international terrorist groups have demonstrated 
the ability to employ larger conventional weapons, perhaps 
greater emphasis should be placed on managing the consequences 
of a large conventional device as opposed to planning for the 
consequences of a terrorist incident involving an NBC device.
    Of course there have been many other terrorist incidents 
each year, both domestically and abroad, which were not as 
destructive as the ones described above. While there were over 
300 international terrorist incidents in 1997, this is down 
significantly from a decade earlier, when there were more than 
double that number. Furthermore, a significant amount of the 
terrorist activity is concentrated in certain regions of the 
world. For example, the National Liberation Army and the 
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, both operating within 
Colombia, accounted for over 25 percent of confirmed and 
suspected terrorist acts in 1996 and 33 percent of such acts in 
1997. The Kurdish Workers party, Dev Sol, and the Turkish 
Communist party are all fighting the Turkish Government, and 
accounted for 23 percent of all international terrorist acts in 
1996. And while other groups such as the Irish Republican Army, 
the Basque Fatherland and Liberty (operating in Spain), and the 
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (operating in Sri Lanka) are 
considered international terrorist groups, their terrorist 
actions are confined largely to the geographic regions where 
they are pursuing their political objectives. In addition, a 
significant portion of all terrorist acts, 14 percent in 1996 
and 23 percent in 1997, were carried out by unknown groups.
    Between 1991 and 1996 there were approximately 12,950 
casualties of international terrorism, of which U.S. casualties 
were about 10 percent, or 1,382, including 56 deaths. Over 90 
percent of those casualties came from just two bombing 
attacks--the New York World Trade Center and Khobar Towers, 
Saudi Arabia.
    Depending upon how the data is analyzed and categorized, 
very different conclusions can be drawn as to the threat of 
international terrorism to the United States. Some methods for 
reporting international terrorist incidents may exaggerate the 
threat. For example, if an American tourist and several other 
foreign tourists in Spain are killed in a Basque terrorist 
attack, it is considered by the State Department to be an 
international terrorist incident and noted in its annual report 
entitled Patterns of Global Terrorism, even though the foreign 
tourists were not the target of the attack. Furthermore, lesser 
incidents involving Americans abroad, such as harassment by 
police and assault by intoxicated individuals, are included in 
the report entitled Significant Incidents of Political Violence 
Against Americans.
    Domestically, the FBI reported only three incidents of 
terrorism in 1996. One was the park bombing at the 1996 
Olympics in Atlanta, GA. The incident killed two people and 
wounded over 100. The other two incidents both occurred in 
Spokane, WA. One involved the bombing of a Planned Parenthood 
abortion clinic. The other involved the detonation of two pipe 
bombs, apparently related to a bank robbery. No one was injured 
in either incident. In 1997, there were 13 terrorists 
incidents. However, a single group was involved in 11 of those 
incidents. They sent 11 letter bombs to targets in United 
States prisons and an Arabic newspaper. None of them exploded.

          DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

    The subcommittee examined this program closely during the 
summer and fall of this year, and this program will be 
described extensively in this section, the GAO report section, 
and the hearing section. The Nunn-Lugar-Domenici legislation 
created the Department of Defense Domestic Preparedness 
Program, which tasks DOD with preparing local firefighters and 
emergency personnel to respond to a WMD incident. The 
Department of the Army was designated to execute the program. 
The Army Director of Military Support, which coordinates 
military assistance to civil authorities, and the Army's 
Soldier and Chemical Biological Command [SCBCOM] (formerly the 
Chemical and Biological Defense Command), which possesses the 
expertise to provide the necessary training, are responsible 
for implementing the program. Policy guidance is provided by 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Special Operations 
and Low-Intensity Conflict as well as the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Reserve Affairs. The Senior Interagency 
Working Group On Terrorism was established to coordinate 
Federal assistance with State and local governments. This group 
was disbanded in June 1998, and coordination of Federal efforts 
now lies with the National Security Council.
    There are 120 cities set to receive assistance. The two 
most critical elements of assistance are training and equipment 
loans. At the heart of the program is the train-the-trainer 
concept, in which personnel from SCBCOM train local police, 
fire, and medical personnel to respond to a WMD incident. The 
specialized Army training builds upon existing professional 
skills and focuses on the differences between dealing with a 
hazardous materials incident and a WMD incident. Once trained, 
these local personnel are supposed to train other first-
responders within their locality and are responsible for 
sustainment. The cities are also loaned $300,000 worth of 
equipment from SCBCOM, which may make recommendations as to 
what the cities should request. This list includes such 
equipment as personal protective suits and detection and 
decontamination devices. This equipment is then purchased by 
SCBCOM and distributed to the cities. To date over 30 cities 
have received equipment and training, the entire process of 
which takes over a year. The budget for the program was $36 
million in fiscal year 1997, $43 million for fiscal year 1998, 
and $50 million for fiscal year 1999. DOD expects to spend 
about $15 million for both fiscal years 2000 and 2001, by which 
time all 120 cities will have been trained.
    In addition to the training and equipment, DOD has 
established ``hotlines'' and ``helplines'' for inquiries 
regarding weapons of mass destruction. The hotlines are open 24 
hours a day, while the helplines operate during business hours.
    The Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] through 
the Public Health Service [PHS] has an important role in the 
Domestic Preparedness Program. While the Defense Department 
focuses training on the immediate response to a WMD incident, 
the PHS focuses on training local emergency service personnel 
how to deal with casualties through the establishment of 
Metropolitan Medical Strike Teams. These are not full-time 
operational entities. Rather, they are composed of local 
emergency medical personnel who are given specialized training. 
If a WMD incident were to occur, the Strike Teams would be 
activated by the local authorities to respond. The PHS had a 
budget of $6.6 million for fiscal year 1998 to establish the 
strike teams. This includes providing special medical equipment 
and pharmaceuticals to the localities and is similar to the DOD 
equipment loan. Lists are provided to local authorities who get 
to choose approximately $350,000 worth of equipment. The PHS 
also provides information to local and State public health 
officials about how they should respond in the case of a WMD 
incident.
    The Department of Justice and DOD are currently discussing 
whether to transfer executive agency authority for the Domestic 
Preparedness Program from the Department of the Army to main 
Justice to be administered through the FBI and the Office of 
Justice Programs. Such a move would strengthen Justice's 
position as the lead department for domestic terrorism 
response. Furthermore, it would relieve DOD of a responsibility 
with which, according to some officials, it has not been 
entirely comfortable. If such a transfer of executive agency 
status occurs, it is expected to take place October 1, 1999. It 
is unclear if this consolidation of power within the Department 
of Justice is a prudent move at this point.

                   GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE REPORTS

    At the request of several congressional offices, including 
the subcommittee, the U.S. General Accounting Office [GAO] has 
undertaken a major review of Federal efforts and programs 
designed to combat terrorism. Their work has been comprehensive 
and thorough, and to date has resulted in the issuance of four 
final reports and one draft report. A summary of the reports 
deserves inclusion here because GAO and subcommittee staff have 
worked together closely on this issue and these reports have 
been a great resource to the subcommittee.
    The first GAO report, the findings of which the 
subcommittee drew upon for the October 1997 hearing on force 
protection, was Combating Terrorism: Status of DOD Efforts to 
Protect Its Forces Overseas, (GAO/NSIAD-97-207). This report 
focused on actions that DOD has taken to increase the security 
of personnel stationed abroad since the November 1995 terrorist 
attack in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, that killed five American 
service men who were working at the Office of the Program 
Manager, Saudi Arabian National Guard; and the June 1996 
terrorist attack at the United States Air Force Base at Khobar 
Towers, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, that killed 19 American service 
men and injured hundreds others. The GAO concluded that 
although DOD personnel were more secure today, senior military 
officials stress that it is impossible to completely eliminate 
the threat of terrorism to our deployed forces and that some 
risk is inherent and must be accepted. Since the attack at 
Khobar Towers, DOD has taken several measures to improve its 
combating terrorism capabilities. A new office at the Joint 
Staff has been established to coordinate programs and institute 
a vulnerability assessment process. The geographic combatant 
commanders have also been given new antiterrorism 
responsibilities. However, GAO concluded that these initiatives 
have not provided a comprehensive framework for combating 
terrorism. GAO believes that departmentwide antiterrorism 
standards should be adopted that would include uniform 
vulnerability assessments and mandate certain physical security 
requirements. The State Department employs such a system. GAO 
argues that a comprehensive, consistent approach to 
antiterrorism using common standards would give commanders a 
more objective basis for determining whether they are providing 
adequate protection to their facilities and personnel. However, 
DOD maintains that assessing vulnerability and implementing 
countermeasures is the responsibility of the geographic and 
base commanders, and that any centralized guidance would 
infringe upon a commander's prerogatives.
    The second report is Combating Terrorism: Federal Agencies' 
Efforts to Implement National Policy and Strategy, (GAO/NSIAD-
97-254). This report discusses the efforts of more than 40 
Federal agencies, bureaus and offices to combat terrorism. The 
National Security Council [NSC] coordinates Federal efforts 
through the Interagency Working Group on Counterterrorism. The 
activities of the intelligence community are coordinated 
through the Interagency Intelligence Committee on Terrorism. 
The central elements of Federal efforts to combat terrorism 
are: the gathering and disseminating of terrorist related 
intelligence and preventing the entrance of terrorists into the 
United States; responding quickly to terrorist acts and 
managing the consequences of such acts, which includes 
designating lead agencies for crisis response, establishing 
interagency quick-reaction support teams, creating special 
operations teams or units, developing contingency plans, and 
conducting interagency or single agency training and exercises. 
For both crisis management and consequence management, Federal 
efforts include special teams and units to deal with weapons of 
mass destruction, whether they are nuclear, biological or 
chemical weapons; and assessing the capabilities of State and 
local governments to respond to and manage the consequences of 
terrorist acts involving weapons of mass destruction, and to 
provide assistance to State and local governments.
    The December GAO report, Combating Terrorism: Spending on 
Government-wide Programs Requires Better Management and 
Coordination, (GAO/NSIAD-98-39), highlights several problems 
with the management and coordination of Federal programs to 
combat terrorism. Currently, it is unknown how much money is 
spent on such programs. Available information indicates that 
almost $7 billion was spent on unclassified combating terrorism 
programs, with DOD accounting for $3.7 billion, or about 55 
percent of spending. Although the National Security Council is 
to coordinate counterterrorism policy issues and the Office of 
Management and Budget [OMB] is to assess competing funding 
demands, neither agency is required to regularly collect, 
aggregate, and review funding and spending data relative to 
combating terrorism on a crosscutting, governmentwide basis. In 
addition, neither agency determines priorities for combating 
terrorism programs or requires that programs be validated by 
threat and risk assessments. The absence of an overall command 
and control structure means that programs may not be properly 
focused and coordinated; high priority programs may not be 
adequately funded; and many programs may be duplicative and 
redundant.
    The report discusses how the Government Performance and 
Results Act should be applied to provide guidance to Federal 
agencies' efforts to combat terrorism. Agencies should develop 
coordinated objectives and performance measures that are linked 
to their annual and strategic plans.
    The report also mentioned differences between Presidential 
Decision Directive 39, which requires agencies to provide 
support for combating terrorism activities at their own 
expense, and the Economy Act, which requires reimbursement for 
services provided to other agency, which have caused 
disagreements between various agencies. For example, DOD wants 
reimbursement for assistance provided to the FBI, while the FBI 
claims that such reimbursement is not required. This 
disagreement has not been resolved. It is possible that as 
combating terrorism programs develop further, additional 
differences between Presidential directives and the codified 
law will arise.
    The GAO report, Combating Terrorism: Threat and Risk 
Assessments Can Help Prioritize and Target Program Investments, 
(GAO/NSIAD-98-74), was the first terrorism report on which the 
subcommittee was an official requester. It points out that many 
combating terrorism programs are being implemented in a vacuum 
without the benefit of proper threat and risk assessments. For 
example, as mandated by the Department of Defense Domestic 
Preparedness Program, the largest 120 cities in the United 
States will receive about $300,000 worth of training equipment. 
Yet no coordinated threat and risk assessments have been 
conducted by Federal, State or local governments. Such 
assessments could assist localities in determining the threat 
and what type of training and equipment they should receive. 
Such assessments are not required under the program. However, 
if properly applied, threat and risk assessments can provide an 
analytically sound basis for building programmatic responses to 
various identified threats, including terrorism, and could help 
cities prioritize their investments in weapons of mass 
destruction preparedness. The report also discusses how 
possible challenges to using threat and risk assessments could 
be overcome through Federal, State and local collaboration.
    The GAO notes the success that a private company has had in 
employing threat and risk assessments to identify risk and 
prioritize security measures for areas such as overseas 
corporate operations in hostile conditions to hiring practices. 
Such assessments were conducted by a multi disciplinary team of 
experts that reviewed threat information, the value and 
vulnerability of critical assets, and the probability and 
severity of a terrorist act. Subcommittee staff had the 
opportunity to meet with and were briefed by an official from 
this company.
    The most recent report, which is still in draft, is 
Combating Terrorism: Opportunities Exist to Gain Focus and 
Efficiencies in the Nunn-Lugar-Domenici Domestic Preparedness 
Program. The GAO discussed most of the findings of this report 
during our October 2, 1998 hearing. This report takes a 
comprehensive look at the program and identifies many problems 
with it's implementation. First, the 120 cities chosen for 
participation in the program were done so solely on the basis 
of population. This site selection method has resulted in 
several clusters of cities each receiving individual training 
and equipment when such cities would combine to form large 
metropolitan areas, the Los Angeles metropolitan area being the 
best example. In dealing directly with the cities as individual 
entities, as opposed to dealing with either the States or 
metropolitan areas, DOD did not build upon States' existing 
emergency infrastructure. Had DOD interfaced with the 
organizations and structures that actually respond to large 
scale emergencies, DOD could probably have consolidated 
training, made more effective equipment loans, saved money, and 
increased the overall value of the program.
    Second, the process through which equipment is provided 
could also be improved. The equipment given to the cities is on 
loan and according to the law may not be kept by the cities. 
However, DOD officials have readily admitted that they will not 
get the equipment back, and that for all intents and purposes 
the equipment is a grant. If DOD did repossess the equipment, 
it would most assuredly be worn-out and of little use to DOD, 
which would then be responsible for disposing of it. The 
equipment is also supposed to be used only for training and not 
operational purposes. But again, DOD officials concede that 
were an incident to occur tomorrow that the equipment would 
most certainly be used in an operational role.
    The cities are responsible for the upkeep of loaned 
equipment, even though many lack the technical expertise and 
funds to maintain it. In addition, most cities probably cannot 
afford to purchase their own operational equipment. It is 
likely that many cities are hoping that the Federal Government 
will provide additional equipment when the equipment loaned, 
which would have a service life of about 3 to 5 years, breaks 
down or wears out. There is some trepidation on behalf of DOD 
that they may very well be asked to provide additional 
equipment in the future, but there is no provision in the 
current law that requires them to do this. Finally, most of 
this equipment is designed to help cities counter the effects 
of an attack involving a WMD, even though most intelligence 
sources believe that conventional weapons will continue to be 
the choice of terrorists for the foreseeable future.
    The Department of Health and Human Services through the PHS 
is also providing equipment and pharmaceuticals to the cities 
for Metropolitan Medical Strike Teams. While part of the 
program, these lists are given to the cities separately from 
the DOD equipment lists. Cities therefore had to deal with two 
different bureaucracies and ensure that the equipment provided 
was compatible and interoperable. Still other Federal agencies, 
such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] and the 
National Guard, are providing training and consequence 
management programs and are failing to adequately coordinate 
all of their efforts, causing confusion among State and local 
officials.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee has many concerns regarding 
the manner in which the U.S. Government efforts to combat 
terrorism and currently being organized and executed. The 
subcommittee is thoroughly involved in the war on drugs and 
sees many disconcerting similarities between the two efforts. 
Both are conducted by literally dozens of agencies with no 
single political office in charge. As with the drug war, many 
agencies can gain or retain budgets and programs by saying that 
they are designed to fight terrorism. This has led to an 
explosion of Federal programs designed to combat terrorism 
(this point was the focus of our second oversight hearing, 
described below).
    On June 12, 1998, the subcommittee sent out an information 
request to 11 departments and 7 independent agencies which 
included most, if not all, of the over 40 agencies, offices and 
bureaus that currently execute a terrorism-related program. The 
subcommittee believes that many of these programs are being 
executed with poor or nonexistent policy and budget oversight 
from the Office of Management and Budget and the National 
Security Council. Furthermore, duplication of capability can be 
found throughout the executive branch, the capability to 
respond to the consequences of a weapon of mass destruction 
(described above) being one of the best examples.
    The subcommittee focused much of its efforts during the 
summer and fall on oversight of the government's ability to 
respond effectively to a terrorist incident involving a weapon 
of mass destruction on American soil, and believes that GAO has 
made many valid criticisms of the Domestic Preparedness 
Program. While experts may disagree as to the near-term 
likelihood of such an attack, the subcommittee is trying to 
determine if the program currently being implemented will 
adequately prepare local fire, police, and emergency service 
personnel for such a potentially devastating scenario. It 
appears as if coordination among the major departments could 
improve, and the potential for duplication of equipment, 
training and assets remains a concern.
    The Domestic Preparedness Program has matured to the point 
that we can fairly evaluate its performance, and implement 
measures that can improve the program. The subcommittee acted 
to do that this year. The subcommittee maintains that the 
increasing number of and funding for Federal programs designed 
to combat terrorism should be closely linked to valid threat 
and risk assessments. Neither the National Security Council, 
which is currently attempting to coordinate Federal 
counterterrorism efforts, or the Office of Management and 
Budget, require agencies to conduct risk and threat assessments 
prior to having their programs approved and funded. 
Subcommittee staff worked with the House National Security 
Committee on this year's Department of Defense authorization 
bill to include language requiring the Department of Justice to 
perform such assessments. It is now law. Further legislative 
action may be necessary to correct other deficiencies of the 
program, such as the status of the equipment loans and the 
manner in which DOD and the other executive branch departments 
interact with State and local entities.
    Overall, the subcommittee hopes that through aggressive and 
thorough oversight we can identify the flaws in the current 
Federal efforts to combat terrorism and remedy these 
deficiencies through legislation.
    c. Hearings.--On October 28, 1997, the subcommittee held a 
closed oversight hearing on the security of U.S. personnel 
stationed in South West Asia, entitled, ``Security Status of 
U.S. Personnel Overseas.'' The subcommittee examined the 
threat, from both terrorist and conventional military forces, 
to all U.S. Federal Government personnel, but especially 
Department of Defense and Department of State personnel, 
stationed in South West Asia; measures taken since the 
terrorist attack on Khobar Towers to increase the safety of 
United States personnel; and the success that the United States 
has had in coordinating with the governments of host countries 
in reducing the threat to United States personnel. This hearing 
also provided background information to the Members who 
traveled to Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, 
Turkey, and Greece in November 1997 to observe firsthand the 
threat conditions under which thousands of United States 
personnel operate.
    This hearing was prospective, not retrospective; it 
examined current and future force protection policy, not past 
policy. Therefore, the hearing did not address the attack on 
the United States Air Force base at Khobar Towers, the status 
of the continuing investigation, or the disciplinary actions 
taken by Secretary of Defense Cohen.
    Major General James C. King, Director for Intelligence, 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, provided an overview of the threat in 
the region. The Honorable H. Allen Holmes, Assistant Secretary 
for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, was 
accompanied by Brigadier General J.T. Conway, Deputy Director 
for Combating Terrorism, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Ambassador 
Holmes' office has responsibility for counterterrorism policy 
at the DOD. The Defense Department has the majority of 
personnel in the countries of interest and shares the 
responsibility for the security of personnel in these countries 
with the Department of State. The Honorable Eric Boswell, 
Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, testified on 
behalf of the Department of State. He discussed State's ongoing 
efforts to ensure the safety of all government personnel abroad 
who fall under the protection of the Secretary of State. The 
Honorable Jacquelyn L. Williams-Bridgers, Inspector General, 
Department of State, focused on the frequent inspections and 
examinations of State's security policies and facilities 
conducted by her office. Mr. Mark Gebicke, Director, Military 
Operations and Capabilities Issues, National Security and 
International Affairs Division, General Accounting Office, 
discussed the examination of force protection policy undertaken 
by GAO at the request of Congress following the attack at 
Khobar Towers. Since the hearing was closed, the testimony may 
not be summarized here. This hearing will not be printed.
    On April 23, 1998, the subcommittee held its second hearing 
entitled, ``Combating Terrorism: The Proliferation of Agencies' 
Efforts.'' This hearing was more general in order to broadly 
address the multifaceted and seemingly disjointed approach the 
Federal Government takes to combat terrorism. The hearing 
focused on the work done by GAO to date, described the current 
policies and organizations designed to combat terrorism, and 
discussed the international and domestic terrorist threat.
    Testifying before the subcommittee on the first panel was 
representative Ike Skelton, ranking minority member on the 
Committee on National Security and a member of the House 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Testifying on the 
second panel were Mr. Richard Davis, Director, National 
Security Analysis, National Security and International Affairs 
Division, General Accounting Office, accompanied by Ms. Davi 
D'Agostino, Assistant Director, National Security Analysis, 
National Security and International Affairs Division, General 
Accounting Office. Mr. Larry C. Johnson, a partner at BERG 
Associates and a former Deputy Director, Office of Counter 
Terrorism, Department of State, testified as an outside expert.
    Representative Skelton was our lead off witness because he 
has been actively engaged on the terrorism issue and was one of 
the initial requesters of the GAO reports on terrorism. He 
pointed out that there is no governmentwide collection and 
review of funding, no governmentwide priorities, no assessment 
process to coordinate and focus government efforts, and no 
government office with the authority to enforce coordination. 
Representative Skelton said that this lack of coordination is 
what got him interested in the terrorism issue in the first 
place. ``The left hand must know what the right hand is doing . 
. . one agency, whether the State Department, FBI, Department 
of Defense--you choose it--really [didn't] know what the others 
were doing.''
    Representative Skelton believes that the threat of 
terrorism is very serious, and cited many of the worst 
terrorist incidents to demonstrate the point, explaining how 
even as the absolute number of terrorists incidents is 
decreasing, the severity of some attacks has increased. He also 
discussed how our military might and substantial influence 
throughout the world will continue to drive our enemies to 
unconventional terrorists tactics. Last, he mentioned the 
current budgetary shortfalls at DOD and discussed the 
implications of giving DOD additional domestic terrorism-
related roles, even if they were only in support of agencies.
    Mr. Davis discussed GAO's work on terrorism. He began with 
an assessment of the threat, stating that conventional weapons 
will most likely continue to be the weapons of choice for 
terrorists, although the possibility of the use of chemical and 
biological weapons will increase in the future. Mr. Davis noted 
the lack of consensus among terrorism experts on the severity 
of the terrorists threat and the likelihood of the use of 
weapons of mass destruction.
    Mr. Davis then stressed the need for significantly greater 
interagency coordination than exists today. ``The challenges of 
efficient and effective management and focus for program 
investments are growing as the terrorism area draws more 
attention from Congress, and as there are more players and more 
programs and activities to integrate and coordinate.'' Mr. 
Davis emphasized that terrorism-related programs and resources 
should be directed based upon analytically sound threat and 
risk assessments using valid inputs from the intelligence 
community. He continued that the Domestic Preparedness Program 
did not require that threat and risk assessments be conducted 
prior to the training and equipment loan phase of the program, 
and recommended that law be amended to do so. Such assessments 
could help Federal, State and local authorities direct 
resources to where they will most likely be needed.
    Mr. Johnson began by stating that the terrorist threat is 
not as severe as is commonly portrayed, and that ``we're 
throwing too much money at it right now in an unwise way.'' He 
based his presentation on the terrorist threat on statistics 
compiled by the CIA, FBI, and Bureau of Diplomatic Security. 
Overall, acts of international terrorism are down substantially 
from their zenith in the mid-1980s. International terrorist 
attacks against Americans are not increasing in lethality, 
despite this perception. This point is illustrated by the fact 
that the two deadliest terrorism attacks against the United 
States were the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 
1983, which killed 241 Americans, and the bombing of PanAm 
Flight 103 over Scotland in 1989, which killed 189 Americans.
    He pointed out that in 1997, there were more international 
terrorist incidents in Colombia than any other country, despite 
a common belief that most terrorism occurs in the Middle East. 
Furthermore, radical Islamic groups that engaged in 
international terrorism were not dramatically increasing. The 
number of terrorist organizations that are active at any one 
time is limited, and that we shouldn't be worrying about ``a 
horde'' of terrorists. In addition, since the collapse of the 
Soviet Union in 1991, there has been a substantial drop-off 
terrorist activity by Marxist groups because their source of 
financing has disappeared, and this is partly responsible for 
the decline in international terrorism. He also discussed the 
growing connection between drug trafficking groups and 
terrorists organizations, and attributed this to the increasing 
risks of state-sponsored terrorism.
    Mr. Johnson also said that the threat from chemical and 
biological weapons is overstated, and that ``they become what I 
call weapons of mass distraction, not weapons of mass 
destruction.'' In short, Mr. Johnson believes that the current 
terrorist threat has been exaggerated, that the threat to 
Americans is currently low, and that the United States has a 
robust capability to combat terrorism.
    On October 2, 1998, the subcommittee held its third 
oversight hearing entitled ``Combating Terrorism: Status of the 
Department of Defense Domestic Preparedness Program.'' In light 
of the perceived increase in the probability of a terrorist 
attack on American soil involving a weapon of mass destruction, 
the subcommittee examined several aspects of the Domestic 
Preparedness Program and related issues, such as the roles 
played by the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Health and 
Human Services in implementing the program, the terrorist 
threat in the United States today, and the critique of the 
program by GAO.
    Testifying on the first panel were Mr. Richard Davis, 
Director, National Security Analysis, National Security and 
International Affairs Division, General Accounting Office; he 
was accompanied by Ms. Davi D'Agostino, Assistant Director, 
National Security Analysis, National Security and International 
Affairs Division, General Accounting Office. The other panel 
members were Mr. Larry C. Johnson, a partner at BERG 
Associates, and former Deputy Director, Office of Counter 
Terrorism, Department of State; Mr. Frank J. Cilluffo, a senior 
analyst for the Center for Strategic and International Studies; 
and Mr. Frederick H. Nesbitt, the director of governmental 
affairs, International Association of Fire Fighters.
    Testifying on the second panel for the Department of 
Justice were Mr. Robert M. Blitzer, Section Chief, Domestic 
Terrorism/Counterterrorism Planning Section, National Security 
Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Mr. Michael J. 
Dalich, Chief of Staff, Office of Justice Programs, Department 
of Justice. Representing the Department of Defense were Mr. 
Charles L. Cragin, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Reserve Affairs, and Mr. James Q. Roberts, 
Principal Director for Policy and Missions, Office of the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
Intensity Conflict. Dr. Robert Knouss, Director, Office of 
Emergency Preparedness, represented the Department of Health 
and Human Services.
    Mr. Davis and Ms. D'Agostino discussed GAO's most recent 
report, still in draft at the time of the hearing, on the 
Domestic Preparedness Program. The program has drawn praise 
from State and local governments. They credit the 
professionalism of the training they receive and the value of 
the equipment that is loaned to them. They also credit the 
program with raising their awareness of the dangers posed to 
their cities by weapons of mass destruction. Local officials 
also said that the efforts of the Federal Government have 
improved the working relationships of emergency services at all 
levels of government. Also, many officials commended DOD's 
willingness to modify the program based on their suggestions.
    Mr. Davis did have several criticisms, however. Using the 
Los Angeles metropolitan area as an example, he pointed out how 
eight program cities were within 30 miles of one another, yet 
DOD made no attempt to train them simultaneously or take 
advantage of the mutual aid agreements already in place between 
the cities. In general, DOD has not leveraged existing national 
and State emergency response structures.
    The equipment package has also created problems. The 
equipment provided by DOD was to be a loan, used only for 
training rather than operational purposes. But DOD readily 
admits that it is a grant for all intent and purposes, and that 
they do not want to recover the equipment, which would be 
worthless after several years usage. City governments have 
complained that they do not have the resources to maintain the 
equipment or purchase operational equipment. Furthermore, both 
DOD and HHS are providing equipment to the cities. Some of it 
is duplicative, and cities have had to deal with two separate 
bureaucracies in obtaining their equipment.
    Mr. Davis reiterated GAO's position that threat and risk 
assessments, not currently required under the program, were a 
useful tool which could modify training and equipment loans. 
Mr. Davis recommended that these deficiencies be corrected and 
noted that as only one-third of all cities are to have received 
training by the end of this year, there is ample time to 
implement and execute improvements in the program.
    Finally, Mr. Davis pointed out that an overarching national 
strategy is lacking, and that such an outline is essential to 
effectively spend the $7 billion currently being spent on 
terrorism-related programs annually. GAO believes that the 
National Security Council position of National Coordinator for 
Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counterterrorism should 
attempt to coordinate all government efforts. Mr. Davis noted 
that there have been discussions within the National Security 
Council to transfer authority for the program from DOD to the 
Department of Justice. Mr. Davis said that he was unable to 
judge the merit of the proposed transfer at this time.
    Mr. Johnson discussed what he perceived as the actual 
terrorist threat in the United States and whether or not the 
program was effectively meeting that threat. Terrorism in the 
United States is declining. This is because the FBI has been 
doing a good job of anticipating, detecting and preventing 
terrorists incidents. Internationally, terrorism is also 
declining, and the preferred weapons of choice for terrorists 
continue to be firearms and bombs. Regarding the threat from 
chemical and biological weapons, Mr. Johnson noted that Aum 
Shinrikyo wanted to employ those weapons and kill large numbers 
of people, invested millions of dollars in chemical and 
biological labs, and still experienced many obstacles. For all 
of their determination, they were only able to kill 12 people 
with sarin gas, their biological attacks were harmless, and the 
subways they attacked were operating normally within hours. He 
stated that some government officials have been reckless in 
describing the terrorist threat in the United States. ``It has 
been grossly irresponsible for several government officials to 
go out with this nonsense that any terrorist in a lab coat'' 
can create chemical and biological weapons and the delivery 
systems for them.
    Mr. Johnson believes that there are too many different 
Federal entities involved in combating domestically, and cited 
the duplication of capability to respond to incidents involving 
chemical or biological weapons as a good example. To begin 
with, the Domestic Preparedness Program is training local 
first-responders to deal with such incidents. Included in the 
1999 Defense Authorization bill was a provision to create 10 
National Guard Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection [RAID] 
teams to support local authorities in case of such an incident. 
There is also the Marine Corps Chemical and Biological Incident 
response Force, the Army Technical Escort Unit, the PHS 
Metropolitan Medical Strike Teams, and various hazmat units at 
the Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. Johnson stated that 
there should be one agency to conduct national responses, not 
the multiple organizations we currently have. Furthermore, he 
believes that firefighters, if properly trained and equipped, 
could handle the response mission quite competently, thus 
eliminating the requirement for many of the specialized teams 
listed above.
    Regarding the proposed shift of the program from DOD to the 
Department of Justice, Mr. Johnson believed that was a sound 
proposal, despite what he considers the FBI's poor history of 
fully cooperating with other agencies.
    Mr. Cilluffo noted that terrorism is first and foremost a 
psychological weapon, intended to sow fear and erode trust in 
government. He said that although a terrorist incident 
involving a WMD may be an outside possibility, the consequences 
would be severe, and might seriously shake the confidence of 
the American people in the government. The debate over whether 
or not a major terrorist incident could take place in the 
United States was ended, he asserts, with the 1993 World Trade 
Center bombing. The 1995 sarin gas attack on a Japanese subway 
demonstrated that chemical weapons could be used in a terrorist 
attack. As a result, WMD terrorism has figured prominently in 
most major national security reviews in recent years.
    Regarding the Domestic Preparedness Program, he endorsed 
conducting threat and risk assessments, although such 
assessments should not be the basis for establishing which 
cities are to receive assistance. He stated that ``a nationwide 
baseline of common policies, plans, procedures and resources, 
irrespective or resource-rich or resource-poor environments'' 
is required. He also stressed that operational exercises are 
critical in developing readiness and confidence in our ability 
to respond to a WMD incident. He closed by urging that the 
program be authorized beyond fiscal year 1999 and that DOD 
remain the executive agency.
    Mr. Cilluffo made two recommendations to strengthen 
domestic preparedness. One, that the government establish a 
commander-in-chief U.S.A. that would be responsible for 
homeland defense. Second, that a new federally funded research 
center be created to address the threat of biological weapons.
    Mr. Nesbitt was critical of the program, stating that 
overall it was ``surprisingly ineffective.'' He stated that 
realistic training had to be a much more important element of 
the program, and that the DOD training was too focused on 
``awareness training.'' This training is not appropriate for 
first responders, and the program should instead focus on 
operational, ``muddy boots'' exercises. Furthermore, he stated 
that because of high turnover rates of firefighters, periodic 
refresher courses from DOD are necessary. Contrary to GAO, he 
criticized the program for not allowing feedback or input from 
students. In addition, more specialized, durable equipment 
should be provided by DOD.
    He also said that a significant portion of the program's 
resources were consumed by bureaucracy at several different 
levels. He suggested that funding for terrorism emergency 
response training be provided directly to fire departments or 
to organizations that provide direct training to firefighters.
    He recommended that a single agency be identified to serve 
as a clearinghouse and coordinator for all of the various 
Federal programs. Regarding the transfer of the program to the 
Department of Justice from DOD, Mr. Nesbitt thought that was a 
bad idea, and that it made more sense to consolidate all 
domestic consequence management support programs in the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency.
    On the second panel, an issue that was addressed by all 
witnesses from the Departments of Defense and Justice was the 
proposed transfer of executive authority for the Domestic 
Preparedness Program from DOD to the Department of Justice. 
They described how officials from the National Security 
Council, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and 
the Director of FEMA had agreed upon transfer of authority 
beginning on October 1, 1999. Prior to that, representatives 
from the various departments and agencies will meet frequently 
to resolve the details. The purpose of the transfer would be to 
establish a single agency to provide first responder training 
and equipment. This decision is partly the result of complaints 
of too much bureaucracy at the Federal level and suggestions by 
State and local officials that there be only one agency from 
which to obtain training and equipment assistance. The 
subcommittee believes it is unclear if this transfer would 
accomplish that.
    Mr. Blitzer discussed the new National Domestic 
Preparedness Office that will be established within the FBI to 
help coordinate Federal support when the program is transferred 
to the Justice Department. He then discussed various efforts by 
the FBI and Department of Justice to improve coordination with 
local governments and described some of the suggestions they 
had received.
    Mr. Blitzer described the three basic categories of 
international terrorists: those supported by States such as 
Libya and Iran, those formalized organizations such as Hamas 
and Hizballah, and rogue terrorists such as Ramzi Yousef, the 
mastermind behind the World Trade Center attack. The FBI 
believes that the threat posed by these groups will continue in 
the future.
    When questioned about the utility of threat and risk 
assessments, Mr. Blitzer said that they ``will add value to the 
overall domestic preparedness effort.'' Mr. Blitzer indicated 
that the FBI would be prepared to carry them and that they 
would be testing a model for executing such assessments in the 
near future.
    Mr. Dalich described the future changes that will be made 
in the Office of Justice Programs [OJP] as the program is 
transferred to the Justice Department. OJP will provide the 
training and equipment support to help cities build response 
capability through it's new Office of State and Local Domestic 
Preparedness Support. He stressed how OJP will work very 
closely with the FBI's new Preparedness Office to coordinate 
assistance to State and local entities.
    He stated that OJP is already providing State and local 
jurisdictions financial assistance to train and purchase 
equipment through the Metropolitan Firefighters and Emergency 
Medical Services Training Program. (It is unclear to the 
subcommittee if this program will continue to exist once the 
Domestic Preparedness Program is transferred from DOD.) In 
fiscal year 1998, OJP opened the Center for Domestic 
Preparedness at Fort McClellan, AL, to conduct train-the-
trainer programs for State and local emergency responders 
similar to the DOD program. It is also trying to make technical 
information regarding these matters available to State and 
local officials.
    Mr. Cragin was the primary witness for the Defense 
Department. He said that every effort was being made to fully 
coordinate Federal terrorism policy across the entire executive 
branch, and to coordinate where appropriate with State and 
local governments. Both Mr. Cragin and Mr. Roberts defended 
DOD's implementation of the program to date, noting that they 
had closely followed the guidelines set forth in the original 
authorizing language. They noted that they had received mostly 
positive feedback from localities which had received the 
equipment and training, and further stated that they had made 
changes in the curriculum and presentation based upon 
suggestions they had received from participants.
    Mr. Cragin's written testimony stated that DOD was opposed 
to conducting threat and risk assessments as part of the 
program, believing that would require delaying implementation. 
Nevertheless, he recognized that the National Defense 
Authorization Act for 1999 had mandated the use of threat and 
risk assessments as part of the program.
    Dr. Knouss described the role of HHS through the Public 
Health Service. PHS has developed a number of programs to 
assist State and local authorities in the event of a terrorism 
incident involving a WMD. He described how responding to a 
chemical incident would be quite different from responding to a 
biological incident, and that PHS had taken steps to prepare 
for both. For a chemical incident, the PHS would assist 
localities prepare for transporting contaminated victims to 
hospitals, decontaminating them and providing the appropriate 
treatment. If local hospitals are overwhelmed, the National 
Disaster Medical System ``is being prepared to be able to 
transport people from the local community to regional or 
national institutions that can provide definitive medical 
care.''
    It is probable that a biological attack would only be 
recognized when large numbers of people began showing symptoms. 
PHS would help identify the pathogen, then provide the 
appropriate response which would include containment of the 
pathogen, mass care for those infected, and preparation for 
mass casualties. PHS has, as part of the program, been 
providing pharmaceuticals and other medical equipment to the 
cities to prepare their emergency systems for such an event.
    Although most of the witnesses on this panel seemed to 
agree that greater coordination and less duplication was 
necessary within the executive branch, none of them offered 
concrete suggestions as to how this may be accomplished, such 
as reducing the number of agencies with a terrorism-related 
role, or designating a single entity within the Federal 
Government that would have budget and operational authority 
over terrorism programs.

5. Oversight of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    a. Summary.--In accordance with the subcommittee's 
oversight responsibilities, the subcommittee took a review of 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration's [NASA] missions 
and long-term vision. In an environment of tight budgets, and 
NASA's being repeatedly directed to reduce its future year's 
budget levels, it is imperative that NASA have a focused 
mission and vision, and be ever-conscious of the costs and 
benefits of investments made.
    The subcommittee hoped to highlight NASA in the public eye 
as still being a symbol of our Nation's preeminent position as 
a scientific leader in the world, and illustrate to NASA the 
importance of vision, missions, and management. Additionally, 
the subcommittee will continue to take a broader look at the 
long-term importance of human space exploration, commercial 
opportunities in space, solar and alternative energy sources, 
the educational impact on kids of restarting space exploration 
and space development, and of balancing cost-efficiencies with 
long-term vision.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee's review of NASA's missions 
and visions focused attention on the overarching importance of 
having a well-defined and vision for future space exploration, 
potential space related commercial development, and 
technological and medical breakthroughs. In this time of down-
spiraling budgets, it is important to ensure that NASA's 
programs are properly defined, well-managed, and that the 
American taxpayer's expectation of responsible expenditures are 
met.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee held two hearings on this 
issue. On May 9, 1997, the subcommittee held it's first hearing 
entitled, ``Defining NASA's Mission and Americas Vision for the 
Future of Space Exploration.'' Testimony was received from Dr. 
Buzz Aldrin, former Apollo 11 astronaut and one of the first 
two men to walk on the Moon; Walt Cunningham, former astronaut 
who flew the first manned Apollo mission (Apollo 7); Story 
Musgrave, NASA astronaut who has flown six shuttle missions 
including the repair of the Hubble telescope; Ron Howard, movie 
producer/director and producer of the movie ``Apollo 13;'' Dr. 
Peter E. Glaser, vice president, Advanced Technology; Dr. David 
R. Criswell, director, Institute for Space Systems Operations, 
University of Houston; Dr. David Webb, consultant, Science & 
Engineering Education Council of Universities Space Research 
Association; and Dr. Richard Berendzen, professor of physics, 
American University.
    On May 19, 1997, the subcommittee held it's second hearing 
entitled, ``Defining NASA's Mission and America's Vision for 
the Future of Space Exploration--Part II.'' Testimony was 
received from Scott Carpenter, former Mercury 7 astronaut; 
Captain Eugene A. Cernan, USN (Retired), former Gemini 9, 
Apollo 10, and Apollo 17 astronaut, and the last man to have 
walked on the Moon; Dr. Buzz Aldrin, former Apollo 11 
astronaut; Mr. Joshua Ouellete, 15-year-old student, Academy of 
Science and Technology; Dr. Seth Potter, professor of applied 
physics at New York University; Dr. Bob Zubrin, president, 
Pioneer Astronautics; Mr. Tom Rogers, Near-term Commercial 
Space Transport Opportunities; and Dr. John Lewis, 
astrogeologist.
    Both hearings examined NASA's long-term mission, manned 
space travel, and the future vision of space exploration. Also 
explored were space station research, the discoveries of 
possible water on the Moon, microbes on Mars, breakthrough 
space-energy and space-medicine technologies, and the impact of 
renewed commitment to science, engineering and math on our 
Nation's youth through a renewed commitment to human space 
exploration. The hearings had a common theme of promoting a 
wise investment in America's future through space research, 
development, and exploration. Dr. Buzz Aldrin addressed the 
issues of revitalizing the inspiration that the United States 
had during the Apollo program which energized children to flock 
to math and sciences, reusable space transportation options as 
a good investment, private sector rocketry and space 
exploration, and the endless spin-off technologies and 
commercial development from manned missions to the Moon and 
Mars.

6. Oversight of the Census Bureau and Census 2000.

    a. Summary.--As per its responsibilities under the 
Government Reform and Oversight Committee's oversight plan for 
the 105th Congress, the subcommittee has conducted oversight of 
the Census Bureau's preparations for the 2000 decennial census. 
During the first session of the 105th Congress, this scrutiny 
focused primarily on the Bureau's controversial plans to use 
``sampling'' and ``statistical adjustment'' in the decennial 
census.
    Census oversight activities in 1997 by the subcommittee 
represented a continuation of efforts begun under the 
leadership of Chairman William F. Clinger, Jr., at the full 
committee level in the 104th Congress, and actively pursued by 
subcommittee staff in 1996. In a report issued by the committee 
during the 104th Congress, in September 1996, ``Sampling and 
Statistical Adjustment in the Decennial Census: Fundamental 
Flaws'', numerous concerns were articulated about the Bureau's 
sampling plan. These concerns included, but were not limited 
to, the lack of completeness in the Bureau's plan, the 
vulnerability of sampled census data to unacceptable rates of 
error and to political manipulation, issues such as the 
statutory legality and constitutionality of sampling, and the 
multi billion-dollar risk posed to American taxpayers if and 
when the Bureau's untested scheme was ruled illegal or 
unconstitutional by the courts.
    The response of the Census Bureau and Commerce Department 
to these criticisms was one of arrogant ambivalence, studied 
unconcern and, in general, capricious disregard for the 
concerns of Congress and the average American taxpayer. In 
dismissing the legitimate and bipartisan concerns of this 
committee and subcommittee, the Census Bureau indicated that it 
was entertaining no plans to reconsider its flawed, risky, and 
likely unconstitutional approach, or to re-evaluate its 
questionable methodologies. Instead, the Bureau chose to 
proceed apace with its Decennial Census Plan in an unmodified 
form, disregarding both the shortcomings raised by the 
committee and palpable concerns of American taxpayers.
    Early in 1997, as the subcommittee began its renewed 
oversight of the Bureau for the 105th Congress, two significant 
events occurred. In February, the General Accounting Office 
added the 2000 Decennial Census to its ``High Risk Series,'' a 
list of 25 Federal Government programs that present the most 
imminent danger of wasting taxpayers' funds while also not 
yielding satisfactory results. The primary reason that the 
Census plan was added to this list was the Bureau's self-
conceived, risky and controversial plan to use sampling and 
statistical adjustment in the 2000 Decennial Census. The GAO's 
report went on to severely criticize the Bureau for not 
outlining its plan adequately to Congress, failing to 
demonstrate to Congress what effects the new procedures would 
have, and failing to plan for the possibility that the use of 
sampling and statistical adjustment might be forbidden by 
Congress (or ruled illegal by the Courts), thus leaving the 
Bureau with no practical alternatives for taking the 2000 
Census. The addition of the 2000 Census to the High Risk Series 
was a reaffirmation of criticisms raised by the committee's 
1996 report, and further indicated that a drastic revision was 
necessary.
    The second key event was the March 1997 release by the 
Bureau of the ``Census 2000 Operational Plan.'' Upon examining 
this document, the subcommittee determined that despite 
numerous and varied criticisms of the Bureau's plans to use 
sampling and statistical adjustment, the Bureau was continuing 
to forge ahead with their plans to implement ill-conceived 
measures, heedless of the criticisms by the committee and GAO, 
and again with no alternatives or back-up plans available in 
the event of legal or practical failure.
    Following these two events, the subcommittee briefed 
leadership of the House and Senate on the dire risk posed to 
the taxpayers of a failed, inaccurate, potentially illegal and 
politically manipulated census in 2000. This briefing led the 
joint leadership to determine that the Bureau must be 
prohibited from proceeding any further with its plans to use 
either sampling and statistical adjustment.
    At the request of the leaders of the House and Senate, the 
subcommittee developed legislative language to prohibit the 
Bureau from proceeding further with its plans. This task was a 
difficult consensus building effort, as many legal experts 
believed that the Bureau's plan was already in violation of the 
law (13 U.S.C. 195) and the constitutional requirement that the 
Census be an ``actual enumeration.'' Accordingly, the 
subcommittee was asked to relegislate in an area in which the 
law was already established and the Bureau was openly acting in 
direct violation of it. After intense legal research, the 
subcommittee developed legislative language that reinforced the 
current statutory and constitutional ban against sampling and 
statistical adjustment, and further prohibited any Federal 
funds from being spent to ``sample'' or ``adjust the census'' 
in perpetuity. In May 1997, this language was added in 
conference to the conference report making supplemental 
appropriations for fiscal year 1997.
    In June, the President vetoed this supplemental 
appropriations bill, citing the census language as one of the 
principal reasons for his veto. After this Presidential veto, 
the subcommittee entered into negotiations with the White House 
and Commerce Department to reach a compromise acceptable to 
both parties. The result of these negotiations was a 
requirement that the Bureau prepare a detailed report of its 
plans and activities for Census 2000, including providing data 
on the sampling processes that had previously been withheld 
from the Congress. These reporting requirements were codified 
as Title VIII of Public Law 105-18, and became commonly known 
as the ``Riche Report.''
    The Riche Report was presented to Congress on July 14, 
1997. The subcommittee extensively scrutinized the report, 
concluding the Census Bureau did not comply either with the 
letter or in spirit with the legal requirements of Title VIII 
of Public Law 105-18. The subcommittee further discovered that 
the data provided by the Bureau was incomplete, superficial, 
and boldly stated claims for the ``accuracy of sampling'' which 
were and are unsupported by any corroborating facts. Adding to 
Members' concerns regarding the Bureau's claims of accuracy, 
the Bureau in August issued a revision of the report indicating 
that the estimates made in the July 14 report, concerning the 
rate of error for sampling in the 1995 test census, were 
understated. Indeed, the revised figures released by the Bureau 
indicated that the error rate for sampling was, in some cases, 
as high as 243 percent. This fact, coupled with the failure of 
the Bureau to objectively report or to accurately inform 
Congress on information it had possessed for nearly 2 years, 
caused grave and deepening concern among subcommittee members 
about the Bureau's basic competence and technical ability to 
carry out complex plans for the 2000 decennial census.
    When Congress reconvened in September, the subcommittee 
briefed the House and Senate leadership on its findings on the 
Riche Report. Fresh evidence of the Bureau's inability to 
execute its plans, its continued refusal to recognize that 
sampling and statistical adjustment of the census are of both 
questionable constitutionality and legality, coupled with the 
Bureau's continuing lack of candor or accurate information led 
the joint leadership to determine that another effort to 
prevent the Bureau from proceeding with this risky scheme was 
imperative. At the request of the bicameral leadership, the 
subcommittee assisted the Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Commerce, Justice, and State and Judiciary, in developing 
legislation which would address the Census Bureau's cavalier 
non-responsiveness to congressional concerns.
    The subcommittee worked throughout September and October 
with the Appropriations Subcommittee to develop legislation 
that would protect the American taxpayer and prevent the Census 
Bureau from proceeding with sampling until such time as the 
Supreme Court has issued a final ruling on its legality. This 
measure was designed to protect taxpayers from the risk of 
wasting billions of dollars on an illegal and misguided census. 
Additionally, legislation was developed to expedite the Supreme 
Court review process and improve the ``standing'' of the 
Congress and the administration to sue, as well as to increase 
the chances of resolution in 1998 by using precedent from the 
recent Byrd v. Rains case.
    The subcommittee ultimately entered into high-level 
negotiations with the White House and Commerce Department over 
the Census bill's language. A compromise was reached and 
language was included in the Conference Report on H.R. 2267, 
the Commerce, Justice, and State Appropriations Act for Fiscal 
Year 1998. In addition to preserving the expedited court review 
and ``standing'' language, this negotiated compromise imposed 
new disclosure requirements on all Census Bureau data releases 
and created a new, bipartisan Census Oversight Board to monitor 
preparations for the 2000 Decennial Census (as an adjunct to 
current congressional oversight). The new disclosure 
requirements mandate that all data released by the Census 
Bureau include the actual numbers of persons actually counted 
before any fictitious or estimated persons are added or 
subtracted by the device of ``statistical inference.'' This 
critical measure greatly assists congressional oversight by 
clearly delineating, both for Congress and the public, the 
explicit effects of sampling and statistical adjustment on 
previously concrete or ``actual count'' numbers. The 
subcommittee believes that this negotiated accord represented a 
major legislative accomplishment, and partially lifted the 
``veil of secrecy'' which had surrounded the Bureau's plans.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee was able to assist the U.S. 
House leadership in planning and authorizing a new Subcommittee 
on the Census, which received responsibility for census 
oversight from the Subcommittee on National Security, 
International Affairs, and Criminal Justice during the second 
session of the 105th Congress. The creation of this new 
subcommittee recognized the large and important undertaking 
attendant to oversight of the Decennial Census.
    c. Hearings.--The subcommittee conducted one comprehensive 
hearing on the census. This hearing was held in April 1997 and 
explored the subject of successful outreach for the census in 
``hard to enumerate'' minority communities.
    The subcommittee heard testimony from expert witnesses from 
the city of Milwaukee and the city of Cincinnati, communities 
whose efforts to promote the census in 1990 among minority 
groups widely recognized as superior. The subcommittee learned 
at this hearing that the key to the high levels of census 
participation in those communities was an aggressive effort to 
educate the public about the census and the necessity that all 
citizens return their census forms for the benefit of the 
community. The subcommittee further learned that these 
communities began their own local promotion and outreach 
efforts far in advance of the Census Bureau's efforts. This 
early start was credited for their high level of response and 
broad success. The subcommittee was dismayed to learn that the 
Census Bureau has not shown any substantial interest in using 
any successful local programs as models for promotion or 
outreach relating to the 2000 Decennial Census; instead the 
Bureau has focused efforts on statistical methodologies as a 
substitute for proper promotion and outreach efforts.

                   Subcommittee on the Postal Service

1. General Oversight of the U.S. Postal Service: The Inspector General 
        of the Postal Service and the Board of Governors.

    a. Summary.--Legislation passed in the 104th Congress 
created an independent Office of the Inspector General [OIG] of 
the Postal Service. Prior to enactment of Public Law 104-208, 
the Inspector General [IG] of the Postal Service concurrently 
held the position of the Chief Postal Inspector. In order to 
assure organizational independence of the Office of Inspector 
General of the Postal Service, the IG has the authority and 
responsibilities set out in the Inspector General Act of 1978, 
as amended. The duties of this office are separated from the 
duties of the office of the Inspection Service, thereby 
insuring the mission of the Office of the Inspector General is 
not compromised by apparent or actual conflicts of interest. 
The newly created office provides for oversight responsibility 
for all postal activities, including those of the Postal 
Inspection Service. The Postal IG may initiate, conduct and 
supervise U.S. Postal Service [USPS] audits and Postal 
Inspection Service investigations, however, the IG is directed 
to avoid duplication of work undertaken by the Postal 
Inspection Service. The Chief Postal Inspector is required to 
report to the IG any significant investigations being carried 
out by the Inspection Service. The new Inspector General, Karla 
W. Corcoran, was appointed on December 23, 1996, within 90 days 
of enactment of the law, by the Governors of the U.S. Postal 
Service and sworn in on January 6, 1997. The act requires that 
all measures necessary for establishing an Office of Inspector 
occur no later than 60 days after the Inspector General's 
appointment. The Inspector General serves for a period of 7 
years in this nonpolitical appointment and may be removed by 
written concurrence of at least seven members of the Board of 
Governors, and only for cause.
    The IG testified that a transition team of 12 officials 
with diverse professional experience from the Postal Service 
and other Federal agencies was building a foundation for the 
OIG. The first priority while developing the staffing and 
operational plans of the office was to ensure continuity of the 
operations of Inspector General. Additionally, the team 
assembled a pay and benefits package comparable to other 
offices of Inspectors General, assembled the framework for a 
budget to fund the office, and created a memorandum of 
understanding with the Chief Inspector. The decision was made 
to let the OIG conduct all financial statement audit activities 
above the district level. The office would also conduct postal-
wide performance audits, developmental audits, contract 
administration audits, and new facilities construction audits 
for acquisitions in excess of $10 million. In carrying out 
investigations, the OIG will have primary responsibility for 
bribery, kickback, conflict of interest and systemic 
investigations including issues regarding worker's 
compensation. The OIG will provide oversight for embezzlement 
cases of more than $100,000 but will conduct investigation or 
partner with the Inspection Service on cases involving 
executives. In the program area, the OIG will oversee the 
Postal Service's rate making programs, revenue generation 
activities and labor-management issues. The transfer of 
functions between the Office of the Inspector General and the 
Inspection Service is envisioned to take place within a 5-year 
strategic plan projection. The plan was approved by the 
Governors. The Inspector General assured the subcommittee that 
nothing in the designation of functions would limit her 
authority. In their March 1997 meeting, the Governors approved 
a resolution authorizing the Office of Inspector General, in 
accordance with the Inspector General Act, to carry firearms, 
serve subpoenas and warrants and to make arrests, subject to 
the necessary approval of the Attorney General. The Inspector 
General said that the Governors had approved a 60-day interim 
budget of $5 million.
    During questioning by Members, and in response to written 
questions, the IG answered that the OIG will review what 
whistle blower protections are available for postal employees 
who disclose waste, fraud or abuse and that she would support 
an effective approach that will enable the OIG to better 
protect whistle blowers and enhance reporting of wrongdoing to 
the OIG. The chairman of the Board of Governors, Tirso del 
Junco, M.D., testified on behalf of the 11-member Board. Nine 
of the members are appointed by the President and confirmed by 
the Senate. The other two members are the Postmaster General 
and the Deputy Postmaster General. The Governors are chosen 
generally to represent the public interest and not as 
representatives of specific interests. The Governors oversee 
the activities of executive and operating management within the 
Postal Service. It reviews business practices, directs and 
controls expenditures, conducts long-range planning and sets 
major policy on all postal matters. The Governors of the Postal 
Service guide the operations of an entity with revenues in 
excess of $56 billion and more than 760,000 full-time 
employees. The Board functions with four key committees: 
audits, compensation, strategic planning and capital projects. 
The Board chairman reported that the Board has continually 
improved its by-laws to sharpen the focus of the standing 
committees.
    Dr. del Junco reported that the Postal Service had 
completed its two best financial years in postal history, with 
about $3.4 billion in net income, or more than the total net 
income of all previous years of Postal Service operations. Much 
of this income is designated for the restoration of equity and 
recovery of prior year's losses. In the previous year, the 
Postal Service reduced its negative equity by 37.4 percent, 
down to $2.6 billion. The chairman emphasized that the Postal 
Service has reduced its negative equity by more than half in 2 
years.
    The Governors have directed the Postal Service to proceed 
with its most ambitious capital investment program, $12 billion 
over the next 5 years, in facilities, technology and equipment. 
The Governors also instructed the Postal Service to sustain 
efforts to control labor and transportation costs and to enter 
the next century as a productive and stable entity, enabling 
the Service to keep postal rates steady and affordable. Dr. del 
Junco emphasized that the basic mission of the Postal Service 
was to provide a fundamental, universal public service.
    Dr. del Junco reported that the overnight delivery scores 
are close to meeting the year's goal of 92 percent on-time 
performance. The Postal Service's workload is 603 million 
pieces of mail per day (or 182 billion pieces a year) delivered 
to 128 million addresses, 6 days per week. This represents 43 
percent of the world's total mail volume. Areas for improvement 
include meeting 2- and 3-day service standards and better 
controlling postal costs--80 percent which are attributed to 
labor.
    Dr. del Junco testified that the Governors will scrutinize 
the strategic and performance plans prepared under the 
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 to help direct 
the course of postal management.
    The Governors acknowledged the importance of the office of 
the new Inspector General and the need for cooperation between 
the staffs of the Inspector General and the Inspection Service. 
They reported progress in setting up the new OIG and showed 
confidence and support in the matter.
    b. Benefits.--The appointment of an independent Inspector 
General of the Postal Service provides for an autonomous and 
strong oversight entity that can conduct and supervise audits 
and investigations separate from the control of postal 
management. The OIG will be instrumental in providing 
leadership and coordination and will be able to recommend 
policies to promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness 
within the Postal Service. Furthermore, an independent OIG of 
the Postal Service, as OIGs of other Federal agencies, can 
detect waste, fraud and abuse within the Service. Prior to the 
establishment of this separate office, these functions were 
under the authority of the Inspector General/Chief Postal 
Inspector who was responsible to the Postmaster General. It is 
apparent that an IG independent from the agency management 
hierarchy can more effectively perform oversight duties of the 
Postal Service. An indication of support and confidence from 
the Board of Governors in establishing the Office of the 
Inspector General is essential to its proper functioning.

2. General Oversight of the U.S. Postal Service: The General Accounting 
        Office and the Postmaster General.

    a. Summary.--During the past 3 fiscal years the Postal 
Service reported a surplus of nearly $4.6 billion--$1.770 
billion in Representatives 1995, $1.567 billion in fiscal year 
1996, and $1.264 billion in fiscal year 1997. Though the bottom 
line appears positive, the Postal Service has been plagued with 
other problems. The accounting period prior to the hearing 
showed volumes and revenues were lower than expected and the 
yearly surplus was several million short of the previous year's 
total. During fiscal year 1996, five of the Postal Service's 
six product lines lost market share and it was expected that 
there would be a general rate increase. Additionally, the 
Postal Service activities garnered unintended publicity; 
specifically, evidence of the marketing department's budget 
overruns, questionable ethics of postal officials, and large 
compensation and retirement packages for senior management. 
Some expressed concerns about the forthcoming changes in 
uniform procurement for Postal Service personnel.
    Mr. Motley of the General Accounting Office emphasized the 
need for improving internal controls and performance of the 
Postal Service. He reported that the Postal Service met or 
exceeded its on-time delivery goals for Overnight Mail. 
However, delivery of 2 and 3-day mail did not score well. Mail 
volume grew at half the projected rate and labor costs 
continued to account for about 80 percent of the operating 
costs, with a projected increase of 6 percent in 1997 for 
compensation and benefits.
    The GAO opined that the Postal Service's success would 
depend on its ability to control operating costs, strengthen 
internal controls, and ensure the integrity of its services. It 
found weaknesses in the internal controls that contributed 
unnecessarily to increased costs. Lack of verification in the 
Express Mail corporate accounts caused the Service to lose 
about $800,000 from the Express Mail service alone. Similarly, 
verifications by supervisors of clerks acceptance of bulk mail 
were not performed in about 50 percent of the cases--this 
service accounted for almost half of the Postal Service's total 
revenue.
    The Postal Service has been lax in following required 
procedures for acquisitions of real estate and equipment 
purchases. The USPS spent about $89 million on penalties and 
unusable or marginally usable property.
    There were ethical violations in some purchases because the 
contracting officer failed to correct situations in which 
individuals had financial relationships with the Postal Service 
and offerors. The Office of Government Ethics, in reviewing the 
Postal Service ethics program, reported that all areas required 
improvement and made a number of recommendations and conducted 
three reviews to follow up on its recommendations.
    GAO studied the process of post office closures and 
reported that 3,900 post offices have been closed since 1970; 
470 post offices were reported in emergency suspension status.
    In addressing the issue of postal reform, GAO emphasized 
the importance of recognizing the significance of the Private 
Express Statutes. The potential consequences of relaxing them 
could result in affecting postal revenues and the ability of 
the Postal Service to offer its public service mandates. Though 
the public would benefit from improved service through 
competition, the Postal Service is facing severe competition in 
the communications market. The Postal Service is now competing 
in the international mail market and has more flexibility in 
setting those rates than rates in the domestic market. However, 
it is still losing business because rates are not competitive 
and delivery service is not reliable.
    Mr. Motley stressed that congressional oversight remains 
key to improving the organizational performance of the Postal 
Service, particularly in labor-management relations where 
unresolved disputes hinder productivity. Grievances which 
require formal arbitration have increased 76 percent from 
fiscal year 1993 to fiscal year 1996. Difficulties ensue 
because the Postal Service, the unions and management 
associations do not agree on how to address the problems. GAO 
identified the Government Performance and Results Act [GPRA] as 
a mechanism that could outline common objectives, strategies 
and development of a framework of agreement. Since successful 
labor-management relations are critical in achieving success, 
the GPRA could be instrumental to the Postal Service and its 
employees in understanding its mission and developing 
strategies to be used in attaining result-oriented goals. 
Oversight of the Postal Service's automation program will need 
to be continued as billions of dollars have been spent in this 
endeavor. The Postal Service has an ambitious, $21 billion, 5-
year capital investment plan for 1997-2001. This will be spent 
for technological investments, infrastructure improvements, 
upgrading the vehicle fleet and improving customer service.
    In his prepared remarks, Postmaster General Marvin Runyon 
acknowledged the assistance given by the GAO and for their 
advice and recommendations. He reported that the Office of 
Government Ethics, after its third follow-up review, wrote to 
the Postal Service that all the recommendations contained in 
the OGE's report in reference to the Postal Service ethics 
program have been implemented. The PMG testified that the 
Inspector General had made progress in establishing the office 
with the support of the Inspection Service and the Postal 
Service and pledged continuing support. He also praised postal 
employees responsible for the delivery of mail. He reported the 
success of overnight First-Class mail delivery, even during 
peak holiday delivery periods and that the Postal Service is 
doing financially well even without a rate increase, which 
other delivery entities have imposed on their customers. Though 
the Postal Service has maintained the same rates for 3 years, 
mail volumes, however, are not as great as anticipated.
    The Postal Service is modernizing its mail system, 
continuing classification reform, expanding process management 
and accelerating investments in automation and robotics. He 
reported a 5 year plan for investing $14 billion in automation 
and ensuring equipment and facilities for consistent service. 
He expected bar coding on all mail by the end of 1998 and 
adding value to products, such as redesigning the Priority Mail 
network to ensure speed, reliability and reasonable price. The 
Global Priority Mail Network is expanding to give American 
businesses a cost-effective vehicle to deliver goods overseas.
    Mr. Runyon ensured commitment to the precept of universal 
delivery and an obligation to grow and to sustain the postal 
network, as it has done for the past 221 years. Each generation 
of communication innovation, such as the telephone, telegraph, 
fax and e-mail has challenged the postal system. However, the 
challenges are greater today than ever before. Computers, 
telephones, electronic funds transfers are cutting directly 
into First-Class Mail, the core of postal business and the 
basis for universal delivery. Electronic data transactions in 
the business-to-business arena is expected to triple. There is 
also diversion to electronic banking, payments and 
communication of the household to business mail. Additionally, 
Federal and State governments are encouraging electronic 
transfers in paying taxes by business and individuals and in 
the payment of Government funds to individuals.
    Mr. Runyon testified that the Postal Service is prepared to 
work with the subcommittee on H.R. 22 and shaping final 
legislation. The consensus for change would include 
preservation of universal service, provide a practical 
incentive to control costs, support progressive products that 
meet the customer's and marketplace needs and a modernized 
ratemaking system that replaces the present complex, costly, 
inflexible and time-consuming process. The Postal Service would 
support pricing freedom with the appropriate index controls 
which reflects the industry it serves, in this case the mix of 
labor and technology.
    The Postmaster General commented on the ongoing, 8 month, 
Department of Justice investigation on the Coca-Cola matter 
explaining that he had invested $13,000 in Coca-Cola stock in 
1977. When he went to the Tennessee Valley Authority he put the 
stock into a blind trust where it remained until 1992 when he 
left TVA. His financial advisor encouraged him to get out of 
the blind trust because it was not meeting market value. In 
1994, the PMG spoke with his general counsel and ethics advisor 
to inquire whether it was necessary for a PMG to have a blind 
trust. He was advised that it was not customary nor necessary. 
The counsel, financial advisor and the Office of Government 
Ethics helped to remove the blind trust. The concept of an 
alliance between the Postal Service and Coca-Cola originated in 
the marketing department, not by the PMG, though he had 
attended some meetings. The PMG was advised that he should 
recuse himself from the discussions because of ownership of 
stocks. He divested himself of the stock and recused himself 
from discussions. Ultimately, the project was never instituted.
    b. Benefits.--The hearing documented continuing problems 
with labor-management policies and its effect on the Postal 
Service to function in a competitive communication world. The 
hearing emphasized need for the Government Performance and 
Results Act, which provides a mechanism to focus on the Postal 
Service's mission and to establish its goals for its current 
and future role. The hearing put on record the need, and the 
Postal Service's support, for change in the 27 year structure 
which is proving to be outdated in the current electronic age 
and which may restrict the Postal Service from fulfilling its 
mandate because of mail volume declines and financial concerns. 
The testimony will be useful in refining the language of H.R. 
22, the Postal Reform Act of 1997.
    c. Hearings.--The General Accounting Office and the 
Postmaster General appeared before the subcommittee on April 
24, 1997, in a hearing entitled, ``General Oversight of the 
U.S. Postal Services.''

3. U.S. Postal Service: Little Progress Made in Addressing Persistent 
        Labor-Management Problems.

    a. Summary.--The General Accounting Office in its 1994 
report, U.S. Postal Service: Labor-Management Problems Persist 
on the Workroom Floor, reported that the major postal unions, 
management associations and the Postal Service agreed that 
improvements in labor-management were necessary, however, were 
unable to agree on a mutual approach to remedy the problem. In 
its September 1997, report, U.S. Postal Service: Little 
Progress Made in Addressing Persistent Labor-Management 
Problems, GAO discussed the challenges which remain and the 
progress which has been made to improve labor-management 
relations, and the implementation of some GAO initiatives which 
had been suggested. GAO testified that since the 1994 report, 
the Postal Service had improved its financial performance and 
its First-Class Mail delivery but little had been done in 
improving labor-management problems, much of which exists 
because of an autocratic management style and an inappropriate 
and inadequate performance management system. Service 
performance, affecting efficiency and competitiveness, are 
adversely affected because of these ongoing relationships.
    Many of the problems are acerbated because of the continued 
reliance on interest arbitration, a significant rise in the 
number of grievances which have been appealed and many awaiting 
arbitration, and because the parties cannot agree on common 
approaches to rectify the issues. Recurrent issues arising 
under interest arbitration include the union's concerns 
regarding wage and benefit increases and job security, and 
management's concerns regarding cost cutting and flexibility in 
hiring. In the interest of efficiency and lower costs, 
grievances should be settled at the lowest possible levels. 
However, in 1994, 65,062 grievances were at the area office 
level, and in 1996, the number increased to 89,931, a 38 
percent increase. The number of backlogged grievances awaiting 
arbitration by a third-party arbitrator increased from 36,669 
cases in 1994 to 69,555 cases in 1996, an increase of almost 90 
percent. Management and employee unions blamed each other for 
the backlogged cases.
    One of the initiatives proposed by the GAO was to establish 
a framework of common goals that could help labor and 
management improve their relations and working conditions. The 
PMG proposed a labor-management relations summit 2 years ago, 
however, the identified parties were unable or unwilling to 
convene a meeting because of contract negotiations. Because of 
difficulties in convening the summit, the Postal Service 
contacted the director of the Federal Mediation and 
Conciliation Service. Subcommittee Chairman McHugh also 
encouraged the director to assist the USPS in bringing the 
parties together. The summit ultimately met on October 29, 
1997. The GAO stated that such meetings would be helpful to 
smoothing labor-management relationships.
    The Postal Service, unions and associations implemented, or 
attempted to implement, 32 improvement initiatives suggested by 
GAO. However, they approved the goals of 10 these initiatives. 
GAO reported that it was difficult to determine the results of 
the implementations because some had just been implemented, 
some were only partially put in place because of disagreements 
on how to implement them and some were discontinued because the 
participants could not agree on how to use the initiatives to 
better the postal work environment. The key, GAO believes, is 
for the parties to agree on common approaches for addressing 
labor-management problems though continued adversarial 
relations could escalate difficulties and hinder efforts for 
progress. Presently, there was no clear solution, but the GAO 
identified some strategies for dealing with the entrenched 
issues: use of a third-party facilitator, the requirement of 
the Government Performance and Results Act and the H.R. 22 
proposed Postal Employee-Management Commission.
    The director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation 
Service submitted testimony presented by Eileen B. Hoffman, 
director, Office of Special Projects. The FMCS became involved 
in the labor-management issues because the GAO suggested a role 
for the entity in helping postal management, unions and 
associations make changes in adversarial labor-management 
relationships and enhancing the quality of work life for postal 
employees. Subcommittee Chairman McHugh wrote to the director 
encouraging assistance in the matter to the extent the agency's 
resources would permit. Careful staff work, extensive 
interviews of major participants, briefing sessions, off-the-
record informal meetings and organization of working 
committees--requiring extensive preparatory work and time--were 
necessary prior to the summit which convened on October 29, 
1997. Presidents of each of the four major labor organization, 
three management associations, the Postmaster General, chief 
operating officer and vice president for labor relations 
participated. FMCS reported that tangible results were evident 
in dealing with issues of contract administration, grievance 
and arbitration backlogs and root causes of labor-management 
discord; however, much more needs to be done.
    The National Association of Letter Carriers, the American 
Postal Workers Union and the Postal Service signed an agreement 
to address grievance and arbitration backlogs. The APWU and the 
Postal Service agreed to a plan for the previously negotiated 
``co-mediation'' process. Training by FMCS of specially trained 
labor and management co-mediators started in June 1997. An 
evaluation system and a code of conduct for co-mediators will 
be established. The APWU and the Postal Service agreed to 
experimenting with having some grievances resolved by an 
outside party. Following 7 months of discussion, the NALC and 
the Postal Service reported successful efforts in testing a 
revised dispute resolution process which has fewer steps and 
uses specially trained labor-management representatives. The 
results will be evaluated after the end of the first test year 
to determine if the revised process should replace the system 
negotiated in their National Agreement.
    FMCS proposed that participants of the summit jointly 
engage in strategic planning based on the premise that labor 
and management must collectively answer how the Postal Service 
wants to compete and succeed to the benefit of the agency, 
unions, employees and customers in an era when the information 
industry is experiencing unprecedented changes driven by 
competitive pressures, new technology and customer demands. 
FMCS encouraged Postal Service management and postal union 
leaders to be familiar with other industries that have 
negotiated and developed changes with their unions to respond 
to competitive pressures to ensure the industry's survival. 
High performance companies and their unions make an effort to 
assure that each employee understands the need for change and 
the consequences of inaction. The following companies were 
mentioned for their significant roles in meeting challenges: 
Saturn and Ford Motor Co.s and the United Auto Workers; Nabisco 
Biscuit Co. and the Bakery, Confectionery, and Tobacco Workers 
Union; Harley-Davidson Motor Corp. and the International 
Association of Machinists; Kaiser Permanente Corp. and the 
Service Employees International Union and other unions 
affiliated with the Industrial Union Department of the AFL-CIO. 
For cooperative efforts to succeed, management should regularly 
share business information with labor and unions should remain 
committed to improve relationships.
    Postmaster General Runyon agreed with the GAO that little 
progress had been made in labor-management relations but was 
encouraged by positive changes that are being made and 
commitments from postal stakeholders. When he became PMG in 
1993, Mr. Runyon instituted the application of the Baldrige 
criteria for business excellence and, by 1995, the USPS 
instituted its own version, CustomerPerfect!, focusing on 
raising service levels and improving finances. This model 
provides employees with skills for understanding the Postal 
Service goals, creating a safer environment, developing skills 
necessary for responsiveness and service, and satisfying 
customers. The Postal Service has invested more than $600 
million in providing training to employees. Service and 
customer satisfaction are up and serious injuries are down.
    The PMG has made employee relationships a top priority. He 
mentioned that a better method for measuring the workplace 
environment needs to be implemented. He reported innovative 
approaches to reduce grievances such as: Accelerated 
Arbitration, Mediation, and ``Redress''--an Alternative Dispute 
Resolution method used in Equal Employment Opportunity 
complaints. Through training and systems improvements, the PMG 
is working to resolve conflicts before they generate 
grievances. In an effort to find solutions to labor-management 
problems, Postal management approves the concept of an 
independent labor commission as proposed in H.R. 22. The PMG 
suggested that the members should come from the private sector, 
outside of the postal community, and that the duration should 
be limited to 1 year. He concluded that the Postal Service 
management was committed to immediate action as everyone in the 
Service has a stake in success.
    Moe Biller, president of the American Postal Workers Union, 
AFL-CIO testified that there were substantial problems with the 
analysis and conclusions of the GAO report. He said that the 
current, persistent labor-management problems are a result of 
top management decisions. He pointed to the number of 
unresolved grievances, Merit Systems Protection Board filings, 
EEO complaints and the observation that there has been no 
negotiated contract with any of the labor unions in the past 10 
years. Mr. Biller took exception to GAO's report because it did 
not mention Postal management's efforts to persuade postal 
employees, Congress and the public that Postal employees are 
overpaid and under productive. This has been a source of 
diminishing morale. Other sources of antagonism and loss of 
morale are the outsourcing of postal work and legislative 
proposals for privatization of the Postal Service.
    Mr. Biller reported that the Joint Labor-Management 
Cooperation Memorandum did not live up to its expectations but, 
where there was cooperation, the results could have far 
reaching effects. He reported that the Postal Service had its 
own agenda in the mediation of grievances instead of joint 
understanding as required by the memorandum. APWU agrees that a 
better-trained, less-autocratic management team would be more 
desirable in ending current Postal Service labor-management 
problems. Another identified problem is the ratio of managers 
to employees which is 1 to 23 in mail-processing operations. In 
this managerial hierarchy, it appears that there is no 
mechanism for an improper decision by a supervisor to be 
overruled, causing further employee frustration because of 
abuse of employee rights. He also alleged union-busting and 
harassment and intimidation of union officers by local 
management. Mr. Biller said that labor-management relations are 
at an all-point low and getting worse because the Postal 
Service has rules which are different for employees and 
different for supervisors, postmasters and managers.
    William H. Young, vice president for the National 
Association of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO, testified that GAO's 
methodology was fundamentally flawed because labor relations 
does not lend itself to numerical methodology; it is 
extraordinarily complex. He also objected to government 
monitoring and intrusion into collective bargaining. Labor-
management issues should be settled by the parties involved. He 
reported that there are strong indications that the parties 
have a strong understanding of joint interest stemming from 
joint concerns. There is an effort to reduce current backlog of 
cases by instituting a 1-year test aimed at reducing the number 
of arbitrations and expediting action on grievances. The Postal 
Service and NALC will conduct joint testing of how letter 
carrier work can be modified to meet future needs by becoming 
more efficient, highly productive and more competitive. There 
is mutual recognition that management and the union work 
cooperatively. Furthermore, the union and the Service have 
agreed on procedures to mollify the ``fourth bundle'' dispute 
which has been a major cause for dissent.
    William H. Quinn, president of the National Postal Mail 
Handlers Union testified that the GAO in its 1994 report had 
correctly identified the autocratic corporate culture as the 
cause of labor-management disputes. In the 1997 report, GAO was 
correct in concluding that little progress had been made but 
faulted GAO for not elaborating on the underlying reasons for 
the autocratic management style. Postal management has 
systematically told its employees that they are overpaid, under 
productive and that their jobs can be contracted out; they are, 
therefore, a disposable part of postal operations. 
Simultaneously, the Postal Service has had record delivery 
scores and the largest surpluses in its history, and the 
managers benefit from bonuses. This leads to managers not 
treating the employees with dignity and the rise of labor-
management tensions and grievances. He said that some managers 
believe that there is an advantage of having a backlog of cases 
because nothing is done, except an occasional GAO report.
    Prior to postal reorganization in 1992, grievances were 
heard by the first level of appeal beyond the employee's 
immediate supervisor; now the manager of distribution 
operations hears the grievances. This is generally the same 
manager who made the decision or took the action about which 
the employee is complaining. Mr. Quinn suggested that the way 
to eliminate this would be to provide an early independent 
review of each grievance. Managers are not held responsible nor 
penalized for deteriorating employee relations in their 
organization.
    Mr. Quinn said that the programs cited in the GAO report as 
helpful in improving labor-management relations and were 
initiated unilaterally by the Postal Service without feedback 
from the employee organizations. The GAO reported that the 
``pay for performance'' programs would improve labor relations. 
Mr. Quinn disagreed and stated that his union had no interest 
in a pay plan which would be based on piece-work. He stated 
that the NPMHU is opposed to an independent commission to 
review the state of labor relations. This must be resolved by 
the parties involved.
    Mr. Smith, president of the National Rural Letter Carriers' 
Association [NRLCA] stated that the rural letter carriers have 
an evaluated pay system that is made up of three basic 
measurements and assigns a time value to each component in the 
job: mileage, boxes and mail count--each type of mail has a 
different time value. Salaries are set on a time basis. Rural 
letter carriers, of all postal employees, have the highest 
customer satisfaction index and the highest employee 
satisfaction index. They are generally self-supervised and 
disagreements do not occur on a daily basis, only at the time 
of route evaluation or adjustment, and automation changes.
    The union encourages local stewards to be accessible to 
members and management to correct problems before they become 
grievances and carriers are encouraged to be proactive in 
solving problems. Because the union retains ownership of 
grievances beyond step 1, when it observes several grievances 
regarding the same issue, it encourages them to become a single 
class action grievance. The association modified the grievance 
process in the 1995 negotiations in an effort to reduce the 
number of grievances appealed to step 3. Step 2 grievances are 
at the district level thereby taking the grievance out of the 
local office. Since 1982, the Postal Service and the NRLCA have 
a strong quality of work life/employee involvement process 
which has also reduced grievances. Mr. Smith said that although 
the association had supported the Economic Value Added program 
it is seeing evidence that the EVA is causing pressure on 
Postmasters to meet External First-Class [EXFC] scores which 
may lead to increased grievances.
    The National Association of Postal Supervisors [NAPS], 
represented by Vince Palladino, president, reported that there 
was some improvement in lower-level labor-management relations 
but more work is necessary. In an effort to deal with labor-
management difficulties at the Postal Service, the association 
would support, with qualifications, the provision in H.R. 22 
which would establish a Presidential Postal Management 
Commission. The Commission should be established only if other 
methods to rectify the situation from within fail. If that 
should happen, Mr. Pallidino recommended that all affected 
parties should come to an agreement regarding the extent and 
seriousness of outside competition. The legislation states that 
the members of the Commission should be from outside the Postal 
Service. He suggested that Commission members should have a 
historical perspective of and have familiarity with the Postal 
Service. The Commission should report its findings within a 
year.
    Though pre-summit meetings were held, there was no 
consensus of the direction in which the Postal Service should 
move it was to remain a viable entity. Mr. Smith was doubtful 
that there could be a resolution to labor-management problems 
from within the Postal Service. However, he was encouraged 
after the just-concluded summit that this dialog would be 
conducted on a regular basis under the expertise of the Federal 
Mediation and Conciliation Service. Two task forces were formed 
aimed at promoting better understanding of the collective 
bargaining process and to providing strategic planning 
initiatives aimed at identifying problems confronting the 
Postal Service. The Service will now be holding managers 
accountable for labor-management relations through improved 
treatment of people on the workroom floor and contract 
compliance.
    Hugh Bates, president of the National Association of 
Postmasters of the United States [NAPUS] reported that 
postmasters report mistrust in all regions. Intimidating action 
from top management causes unrest among employees. He lauded 
congressional oversight and the GAO report, without which 
progress would not have occurred. The GAO reported on 10 
initiatives, 4 of which affect NAPUS, Associate Supervisor 
Program [ASP], Performance-Based Compensation, CustomerPerfect! 
and Summit Meetings.
    NAPUS agrees with the concept of ASP but is concerned with 
the inconsistency as to eligibility and intent of the program. 
NAPUS does not subscribe to the Economic Value Added variable 
pay program because it excludes all non-exempt employees. Sixty 
percent of postmasters are non-exempt. NAPUS is currently 
monitory CustomerPerfect! and is generally supportive of the 
program as long as the common goals are to provide quality 
service. Mr. Bates reported that NAPUS would fully participate 
to improve labor-management relationships. He suggested a 
management style which permits employees to learn from their 
mistakes, which can be corrected through mentoring and 
assistance, not punishment.
    Joe Cinadr, national executive vice president of the 
National League of Postmasters (the League) agreed that labor-
management problems arose from a lack of trust. He was 
encouraged by the Memorandum of Understandings signed between 
the Postal Service and some unions which are hopeful signs but 
too recently signed to evaluate. The League did not endorse the 
Economic Value Added [EVA] program because it excluded 60 
percent (mostly women and minorities) of the Postmasters who 
are considered non-exempt employees. The inequities of the pay 
and benefits package create friction between Postmasters and 
their superiors. Mr. Cinadr said that traditional levels of 
cooperation could be retained by including all Postmasters in 
the bonus program. In reference to the labor-management Summit, 
the League saw more area of agreement than disagreement. He 
explained that the commission as proposed in H.R. 22 should 
include the ``voice of the employee'' instead of all 
commissioners coming from outside the Postal Service.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee has long monitored labor-
management relations and has great concern about the lack of 
morale among employees, the lack of trust between management 
and labor, the dehumanization of employees on the workroom 
floor and the cost of grievances to the bottom line of Postal 
Service revenues. The GAO study leading to a report has 
encouraged the Postal Service and its stakeholders to convene a 
summit whence the dialog has begun toward a common goal. The 
subcommittee hearing was not only informative but created an 
additional dialog among the parties and again alerted the 
parties that if progress in resolving the problems among 
themselves is not possible, legislative action may be the only 
corrective action available.
    c. Hearings.--A hearing entitled, ``Improving Labor 
Management Relations in the Postal Service'' was held on 
November 4, 1997.

4. International Mail Market.

    a. Summary.--The Postal Service is promoting its 
international mail service and competing with foreign and 
domestic shipping companies. The rate structure for domestic 
mail is highly regulated and the process is time consuming. 
However, the international rate structure is more flexible and 
the Service is able to compete more aggressively. The Postal 
Service has become quite successful in this new venture and a 
worthy competitor. Complaints from its rivals suggest that the 
Postal Service competition for the international market is 
strong. Global Package Link is a new electronic system utilized 
by catalog companies that ship more than 10,000 parcels a year. 
The Postal Service offers a discount to the shippers, 
guarantees delivery within a week and helps the shippers to 
clear overseas customs requirements. USPS rivals claim that the 
Postal Service is using government privileges in fulfilling its 
international business. This matter was addressed by amendment 
in the 1998 Treasury, Postal, General Government appropriations 
bill but defeated on the House floor because of the nature of 
the amendment and the fact that the subcommittee and the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight had requested the 
General Accounting Office to report on the Global Package Link 
Service to determine whether the Postal Service receives 
special treatment from foreign customs offices in countries to 
which the Postal Service offers this product. The subcommittee 
is also awaiting written answers to inquiries directed to the 
Postmaster General. The chairman has requested the General 
Accounting Office to evaluate the issue of international mail. 
This study is in progress. It will examine the requirements 
that foreign customs' administrations place on the Postal 
Service's Global Package Link service and will compare those 
requirements to those that private carriers face for similar 
international package delivery services.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee is intent in ensuring that 
the Postal Service competes effectively and fairly in the 
international mail market; therefore, it is imperative to know 
whether, and to what extent, customs treatment by major trading 
partners of items sent via Global Package Link differ from 
customs treatment afforded equivalent shipments by private 
companies.
    c. Hearings.--None.

5. Electronic Commerce.

    a. Summary.--The Postal Service is entering into a highly 
technological and competitive age that is challenging it for 
its products and its delivery mechanisms. In order to survive 
the competition, the Postal Service must become more innovative 
and efficient. Products which the Postal Service has developed 
or anticipates developing were not envisioned when 
reorganization took place in 1970. This challenge has brought 
forth questions of statutory and regulatory constraints for the 
Postal Service which need to be discussed and understood. The 
recurring question is what effect the answers may have on the 
Postal Service's ability to develop, test and market electronic 
products and how it can provide and price these products. The 
Postal Service may need to participate in joint ventures or 
strategic alliances. These partnerships should be known as 
should the costs associated with non-postal activities. 
Subcommittee Chairman McHugh has requested the General 
Accounting Office to assist in evaluating the issues.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee is refining a major reform 
bill which will give the Postal Service greater flexibility and 
the ability to become competitive and keep its profits, rather 
than breaking even as has been its mandate over the past 27 
years. The subcommittee must know what the Postal Service 
considers its core products and those it considers its 
competitive products and if this will change over the next 5 
years. The subcommittee would also like to know how the change 
will affect the Postal Service's ability to finance its 
universal service obligations.
    c. Hearings.--None.

6. Outsourcing.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee is interested in the range of 
outsourcing of postal contracts. The General Accounting Office 
has been asked to provide an evaluation as to how much 
outsourcing of work will reduce costs for the Postal Service 
and what areas outside contracts may be utilized.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee recognizes that a Postal 
Service which is efficient and can make cost savings will be in 
a better position to fulfill its mandates. To this end, it is 
important that the Postal Service be able to institute its 
goals in the most efficient manner and build in efficiencies. 
The information gathered in this investigation will enable the 
Postal Service is serve its stakeholders and customers in the 
most cost-effective manner.
    c. Hearings.--None.

7. Investigation of the Postmaster General: For Knowingly Participating 
        as a Government Officer or Employee in Which he had a Financial 
        Interest.

    a. Summary.--The subcommittee learned that the Postal 
Service was proposing to form an alliance between the U.S. 
Postal Service and the Coca-Cola Co. At the same time, it 
became known that the Postmaster General had acquired about 
1,000 shares in the company in 1977. Therefore, there was an 
impression of conflict of interest in the PMG participating in 
any discussions and action in this venture.
    The subcommittee initiated its own investigation into the 
matter but the Department of Justice had commenced a civil 
action against the Postmaster General. The Department of 
Justice had requested that the Postal Inspection Service carry 
out the investigations in this case. One of the issues which 
the subcommittee became concerned with was the potential for 
inaccurate investigations if they were conducted by a 
department of an agency over the head of the agency. Pursuant 
to the oversight responsibilities of the subcommittee, the 
chairman sent several letters to the Department of Justice, to 
the Attorney General and to the Office of the Assistant 
Attorney General for Legislative Affairs for a report on the 
matter. The Department of Justice, however, was extremely slow 
on its investigations and, in tardy responses indicated that it 
was unable to provide the information in light of the 
Department's criminal investigations, but assuring the 
subcommittee that it was conducting its investigations 
diligently. The subcommittee had to curtail its inquiry and 
investigation in this matter until the case was resolved in a 
civil settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice after a 
14-month review. The civil settlement concluded that the 
Department of Justice found no evidence that the PMG acted with 
improper intent or to profit personally. However, to avoid the 
appearance of impropriety, Mr. Runyon agreed to a settlement of 
$27,550 which represents the gain on his Coca-Cola stock during 
the 11-week period in 1996 after he signed his Executive Branch 
Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report showing that he 
owned Coca-Cola stock and the date on which he formally recused 
himself from consideration of the potential marketing alliance.
    The Postal Service did not finalize the venture with the 
Coca-Cola Co.
    b. Benefits.--The American public benefits from the 
oversight process which implements a high standard of 
accountability for its elected and publicly appointed 
officials.
    c. Hearings.--None.

8. General Oversight of the U.S. Postal Service: The Inspector General, 
        U.S. Postal Service; the General Accounting Office; the 
        Postmaster General & Chief Executive Officer.

    a. Summary.--The Office of the Inspector General of the 
U.S. Postal Service was established by enactment of Public Law 
104-208. Since 1988 and prior to that 1996 legislation, the 
Postal Inspection Service performed the duties of the Office of 
the Inspector General. The new law states the Governors of the 
Postal Service shall appoint and shall have the power to remove 
the Inspector General. The Postal Inspector General has the 
authority and responsibilities set out in the Inspector General 
Act of 1978, as amended, relating to detecting, reporting and 
preventing fraud, waste and abuse in the programs and 
operations of the U.S. Postal Service. Karla Corcoran, 
Inspector General, U.S. Postal Service, was sworn into office 
on January 6, 1997. She testified on the second year of 
existence of the Office of the Inspector General [OIG]. 
Progress has been made in meeting legislative mandates, 
building infrastructure, hiring employees, conducting audits, 
investigations and other reviews. The OIG submitted the first 
semiannual report prepared by that office. It is a unified 
approach with the Postal Service and the Inspection Service, in 
keeping with the intent of the Inspector General Act, and 
provides a comprehensive representation of the OIG-related 
work. With more employees being hired, the OIG is starting work 
on new issues such as contract monitoring, labor management and 
ratemaking. The emphasis is hiring employees with recognized 
professional certifications. The total number of employees 
hired from government, Postal Service and the private sector by 
mid-September will be 380. The OIG plans to hire sufficient 
staff to work on agency-wide, systemic issues rather than 
concentrating on individual cases. The OIG is working with the 
Postal Inspection Service to ensure an orderly transfer of 
functions. Much of the work will involve educating Postal 
Service employees, customers, management and other stakeholders 
about the functioning of the Office of the Inspector General. 
Additionally, Inspector General Corcoran testified that her 
office is conducting a series of reviews to address the 
critical issue of the year 2000 problem which, without 
correction, could thwart mail movement or subvert financial 
management systems; the Postal Service manages more than 600 
computer system applications related to internal and external 
operations. The Office of the Inspector General found that the 
Postal Service's procedures for receiving fuel needed to be 
improved and that it needed to comply with environmental laws 
and to improve quality assurance efforts. The OIG has taken 
over full responsibility for the Hotline, including the 
Inspection Service Postal Crimes Hotline, which has handled 
more than 15,000 calls of inquiry and complaint. Of these, 
1,600 have been handled or retained for evaluation and 
potential action. The OIG's audit responsibility for labor-
management are issues of discipline, grievance and appeals, and 
workplace relations. The Postal Service is one of the Nation's 
largest employers, with 800,000 employees. There are more than 
100,000 grievances at the regional or national level awaiting 
arbitration. The majority leader asked the OIG to identify the 
top 10 management problems in the Postal Service. The list 
provided to the majority leader included workers' compensation, 
electronic commerce, data integrity and workplace violence.
    Bernard L. Ungar, Director, Government Business Operations 
Issues, General Accounting Office testified that the Postal 
Service faces significant challenges as it ventures into the 
next millennium. The Service maintained 3 years of overall high 
performance. In 1997 the net income was more than $1 billion 
and the on-time delivery scores for First-Class Mail was also 
high at 92 percent with a total mail volume of about 191 
billion pieces. The total revenue generated in 1997 was $58 
billion--the highest revenue level reported in the last 3 
fiscal years. Mr. Ungar observed that Service can maintain a 
high income level while providing improved service to its 
customers. These facts may look optimistic, but Mr. Ungar 
cautioned that there are spheres of concern. For instance, the 
2- and 3-day delivery scores for 1997 were reported to be 76 
and 77 percent, respectively but they had declined from the 
1995 and 1996 levels which were in the high 70's for 2-day 
delivery and 80 percent for 3-day delivery. These declines 
could reinforce the concerns of postal patrons who have 
complained that the emphasis given by the USPS to overnight 
mail has been a detriment to two- and three-day mail delivery. 
The USPS has acknowledged that despite increased overall mail 
volume, some types of mail have declined or has grown slowly. 
Express Mail packages have declined because of the inability of 
the Postal Service to offer volume discounts to large business 
mailers. The Postal Service anticipated a growth increase of 
2.5 percent for First-Class Mail, but this category grew only 
1.5 percent due mainly to electronic mail and banking 
functions. A downward trend is anticipated by the Postal 
Service for future years, resulting in significant losses in 
this category of mail. International mail also declined in 
recent years due to determined efforts by competitors. Because 
of the large net income achieved by the Postal Service over the 
past 3 fiscal years, questions have been raised about the need 
for increasing postal rates and the data used to justify the 
rate increases.
    The General Accounting Office has determined that labor-
management relationship in the Postal Service is in constant 
need of repair and is one of the most serious internal problems 
confronting the organization. In 1994, the GAO reported that 
much of the labor-management problems resulted from autocratic 
management styles, adversarial attitudes of employees, unions 
and postal management and an inappropriate and inadequate 
performance management plan. Initiatives had been established 
after the GAO October 1997 report on labor management 
relations, but the results were not reported due to those 
initiatives being discontinued or recently implemented. There 
were also disagreements among the parties which prevented some 
initiatives from being fully implemented. Employee grievances 
continue escalating, showing that problems on the workroom 
floor are persisting. However, in late October 1997, 
representatives of the four major postal unions, and Postal 
Service officials, facilitated by officials of the Federal 
Mediation and Conciliation Service [FMCS] started summit 
meetings as proposed in the GAO report of 1997. The GAO reports 
that FMCS concludes progress has been made in addressing labor 
management issues though underlying problems and challenges 
still exist. It is possible that labor negotiations and 
elections of officers in two of the largest postal labor unions 
may affect labor-management relations. Collective bargaining 
negotiations, expected to commence in August 1998, will occur 
after the elections. Previously, negotiations between the union 
officials and the Postal Service have been punctuated by 
disagreement and dispute, resulting in the need for 
arbitration.
    The GAO reported on DPS (Delivery Point Sequencing) as a 
part of the overall automation program--the efficient sorting 
of letters that have been barcoded by the Service or by 
business customers of the USPS. The goal was to save letter 
carrier workhours by providing already sequenced letters for 
delivery. However, the implementation of DPS fell behind 
schedule due to delays in obtaining equipment and a shortage of 
barcoded letters. The USPS subsequently revised its overly 
optimistic DPS goals and benchmarks. The Postal Service 
determined that workhours were saved, however, there was a 
decrease in city carrier street efficiency causing a reduction 
of expected results. The National Association of Letter 
Carriers concluded that the inefficiency was caused by DPS work 
methods. The Service is improving supervision of the street 
operations and testing delivery methods and performance 
standards. The disagreement with the union has resulted with 
the filing of numerous grievances, some of which were settled 
through national arbitration. The GAO observed that the Postal 
Service's Strategic Plan in response to the requirements of the 
Government Performance and Results Act had various strengths, 
especially the emphasis placed on the achievement of 
performance results and improvement of postal operations so 
customers can benefit from better postal products and services 
in a competitive environment. The plan provided useful data on 
the vision of the Postal Service future and how those results 
were going to be achieved. The GAO was currently reviewing the 
Annual Performance Plan for fiscal year 1999 and reported that 
the plan did a good job in its strategy of measuring 
performance goals and reviewing results. However, the GAO 
articulated that the plan could better link strategies and 
resources with performance goals.
    The GAO reported on its studies on USPS management and 
operations, (cost overruns at the Chicago Post Office; 
procurement of postal uniforms; emergency suspensions of 
operations at post offices), work related to postal reform 
(mail box restriction, governance of the Postal Service, 
observations on proposed revisions to postal reform 
legislation) and ongoing GAO work related to competition 
(Global Package Link, role of the USPS in the Universal Postal 
Union, and USPS development of new postal products) and 
diversity issues (promotions of women and minorities into 
higher postal management positions, diversity training for 
postal employees--particularly in sexual harassment and equal 
employment opportunity, and trends in the Federal EEO 
caseload).
    The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 abolished the Post 
Office Department and created the U.S. Postal Service [USPS]. 
This entity is an independent agency, directed by an 11-member 
Board of Governors which includes 9 Governors, the Postmaster 
General and the Deputy Postmaster General. The nine Governors 
appoint the Postmaster General. The Postal Service determines 
the types and levels of postal service it provides and how much 
revenue it needs to provide services. This hearing provided the 
subcommittee its first opportunity to question Postmaster 
General Henderson who assumed his position on May 16. Mr. 
Henderson is the 5th career postal employee, of 72 Postmaster 
Generals, who have assumed this position. The Postmaster 
General reported that service rates are up; audit reports for 
the latest quarter in 1998 showed that 94 percent of local 
First-Class Mail arrived overnight; 2- and 3-day service 
increased 6 points over the same period a year ago. He reported 
that Priority Mail is improving and that the Postal Service is 
working with its customers to improve service for advertising 
mail and publications. Though postage rates remained the same, 
revenue is ahead 3 percent from a year ago, therefore, the 
Postal Service expects to further reduce its negative equity. 
The Postal Service delivers 630 million letters and packages 
daily. The Postal Service intends to continue providing 
universal service at affordable prices, therefore, performance 
must continue to increase, along with better reliability, 
accuracy and value. The Postmaster General testified that the 
Postal Service plans to spend billions of dollars in technology 
and infrastructure to increase efficiency and effectiveness. 
The Postal Service will attempt to improve the skills of its 
personnel and make the Postal Service an organization where its 
employees take pride and ownership in their work. The keys 
would be fairness, opportunity, safety and pride. Mr. Henderson 
testified that the Postal Service wants to find solutions to 
workplace threats and violence. Labor-management is the PMG's 
top priority. The PMG testified that contract talks will 
commence in August as a prelude to negotiations with unions; 
labor contracts with three unions expire on November 20, 1998. 
The preliminary talks give both parties an opportunity to 
negotiate agreements--it has been over a decade since a labor 
contract has been negotiated. The PMG wants to deliver a 
contract that works for postal customers and, at the same time, 
sets a solid financial infrastructure for the future. Mr. 
Henderson stressed that the historic mission of the Postal 
Service must be carried out even though customer needs in the 
competitive market-place have changed. He said that he would 
work with the subcommittee in formulating the right mix of 
public policy by defining strategy and values, implementing 
strong processes, taking advantage of technology and by 
managing people, performance and public policy.
    b. Benefits.--The information provided by the Postmaster 
General, the Inspector General and the General Accounting 
Office will enable the subcommittee to further monitor the 
progress of the Postal Service in its delivery of mail, the 
status of labor-management relations, and data quality to 
further gauge the need for increase of postage rates, if and 
when necessary, and the justification for the increase. The 
dialog between the witnesses and the subcommittee gives 
Congress an opportunity to explore issues which were raised, 
such as continued instances of wasteful purchases and capital 
spending. As postal watchdogs, the GAO and the IG reported a 
broad range of postal operations identifying a number of 
initiatives which provide a framework for future study and 
investigation. Close oversight by the subcommittee will guide 
the Postal Service in revenue protection, and its adherence to 
its own performance plans.
    c. Hearings.--Hearing entitled ``General Oversight of the 
U.S. Postal Service'' was held on June 10, 1998.

9. Oversight of Labor-Management Issues.

    a. Summary.--Labor-management issues dominate much of the 
contact between the subcommittee, Members' offices and 
correspondence from postal employees. This issue was studied in 
depth by the General Accounting Office in 1994 and in 1997; 
however, the GAO continues to report that problems exist. The 
Postmaster General has indicated that labor-management 
relations will be one of his priorities, however, the number of 
grievances has not abated. The subcommittee has consulted with 
the Office of the Inspector General to monitor episodes of 
labor-management disputes to determine if they are systemic or 
incidental. Though the OIG does not have the resources and 
personnel to evaluate individual cases, they are kept on file, 
should other instances in that geographical area arise.
    b. Benefits.--As the subcommittee continues to monitor 
labor-management in the Postal Service, the chairman has 
retained in H.R. 22 the provision to require an independent 
study. The language provides that the Board of Directors shall 
contract with the National Academy of Public Administration 
[NAPA] to conduct an independent study as to how employee 
management relations within the Postal Service may be improved. 
The Academy will involve labor, supervisory, and managerial 
organization of the Postal Service in developing the design and 
specific objectives of the study. NAPA will consult with 
representatives of the Postal Service, labor, supervisory and 
managerial organizations, on the progress of the study and will 
provide opportunity for those organizations to review and 
submit written comments on the final report. NAPA will submit 
its final report to the President, the Congress, the Postal 
Service, and the labor, supervisory and managerial organization 
of the Postal Service no later than 12 months after the date on 
which the contract for the study was entered into. The 
subcommittee continues to believe that a healthy dialog and 
understanding of the employees' point of view, the proper 
training of supervisory personnel, and the vision of a common 
goal would be fundamental in forming a smooth working 
relationship.
    c. Hearings.--None.

10. Electronic Postal Diversion.

    a. Summary.--The Postal Service is facing an era where its 
methods of delivering mail are being challenged as old-
fashioned. Delivery mechanisms have been changed and diverted 
into electronic transmittals. Some of these methods were not 
even a concept when the Postal Service was reorganized in 1970 
and its impact has not been fully assessed. For instance, 
catalogs, once usually available just through the Postal 
Service, can now be obtained on-line over the Internet. Some 
companies have announced that they will offer their customers 
secure electronic trade confirmations as an option to 
traditional hard copy paper trade confirmations sent by mail. 
Users benefit from this offer because of the speed of the 
communication, and peace-of-mind that their trade information 
is being kept confidential. This diversion of traditional 
postal mail delivery of time-based and event-driven documents 
reduce corporate printing, postage and handling fees. Instead 
of paper envelopes, the system delivers secure, personalized, 
interactive and branded electronic envelopes to millions of 
customers through standard electronic mail. The process is a 
cost saving measure and increases customer satisfaction because 
of faster, higher response rates and increased sales 
opportunities. This system is being used in financial services 
to create, deliver and process trade confirmation, account 
summaries, stock alerts and billing statements over e-mail. The 
Postal Service must become more innovative and productive to 
resist the onslaught of an electronic postal diversion. The 
Postal Service may need to forge alliances in the private 
sector to circumvent the results of a massive diversion of 
mail, yet, it must maintain a balanced approach with postal 
unions in order to get their support and confidence. The 
Federal Government is also turning to an electronic checking 
system and is pilot testing the project to pay government 
contractors electronically. It is expected that electronic bill 
presentment will cut mailing costs by more than $1 billion, 
and, by year 2000, the base will grow to almost $8 billion; 
American utilities could save $1.2 billion in billing costs 
alone by using electronic bill presentment and payment. 
Colleges and universities are now starting to accept 
applications via computer; scores for standardized tests are 
sent electronically to institutions of higher learning. The 
types of mail affected by electronic diversion are the types of 
information usually sent by First-Class Mail, the bread-and-
butter of the Postal Service.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee continues to refine 
legislation which will enable the Postal Service to have 
greater flexibility in offering products within its mandates 
and the ability to become competitive. However, the 
subcommittee will focus on the Postal Service's obligation to 
offer universal service at competitive rates.
    c. Hearings.--None.

11. ``.us'' Domain Space.

    a. Summary.--The U.S. Postal Service has been preparing to 
commit substantial resources to speed up the development of .us 
for use in electronic commerce. Under the current .us domain 
name registrations scheme, there is no central registry for 
.us. The University of Southern California's Information 
Sciences Institute delegates registration and maintenance of 
.us domain of about 1,000-Internet service providers and 
individuals. The administration is funded by Network Solutions. 
The current structure of the .us domain is used mainly by those 
entities that do not fall under the .gov domain, such as 
cities, counties, and local school districts. .us names become 
long because they are based on geographic locations, but it was 
believed that this would make them appropriate for postal 
service addressing. Most other countries have their own country 
domain, managed by the government. The Commerce Department was 
exploring the potential of a similar domain for the Nation. The 
Postal Service proposal indicated that it would work with the 
private sector in developing a commerce-enabling space 
promoting classified business addressing.
    Chairman McHugh was concerned with the Commerce 
Department's National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration [NTIA] notice published in the August 4, 1998, 
Federal Register asking for comments relating to administration 
and possible expansion of the .us domain space. The concern was 
that the notice lacked vital information that would be required 
for the public to provide meaningful comments regarding the 
U.S. Postal Service proposal that it fund the .us registry and 
also develop and coordinate the processes for expanding the use 
of the .us domain. The Postal Service proposed supplementing 
current e-mail accounts by linking a .us Internet address to 
the corresponding physical addresses of businesses and 
households throughout the Nation. Officials of the Postal 
Service and the White House Office of Science and Technology 
Policy agreed that the public should be given the opportunity 
to comment on the matter and provided NTIA specific language 
asking for comments on the USPS proposal. However, NTIA did not 
include the language in its published notice, therefore, the 
public was not notified about this major proposal which has the 
potential to affect communications and commerce. The Postal 
Service's plan raises questions of public policy, the future 
role of the Service and the future of the Internet. 
Additionally, the Postal Service proposal raises issues of 
appropriate law enforcement authority. The Attorney General is 
presently considering a Postal Service request for a delegation 
of authority to allow it to enforce laws related to electronic 
services.
    b. Benefits.--The public must be fully informed regarding 
any advances and future of the Internet. The public must also 
be safeguarded from undue, unfair competitive advantage in the 
communications field which may accrue to the Postal Service. 
Issues regarding the Postal Service's interest in the managing 
.us, and perhaps going beyond the scope of its primary and 
original mission must be aired and answered before it 
undertakes this new assignment. Ultimately, the public must be 
given the opportunity to comment on the issues.
    c. Hearings.--None.
                            III. Legislation

                            A. NEW MEASURES

                   Subcommittee on the Civil Service

1. H.R. 240, the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1997.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-40, March 20, 
1997.
    b. Summary of measure.--H.R. 240 strengthens veterans' 
preference and increases employment opportunities for veterans. 
It permits preference eligibles and certain other veterans to 
overcome artificial restrictions on the scope of competition 
for announced vacancies, establishes an effective redress 
system for veterans who believe their rights have been 
violated, makes knowing violations of veterans preference laws 
a prohibited personnel practice, provides preference eligibles 
with increased protections during reductions in force [RIF], 
requires agencies to establish priority placement programs for 
employees affected by a RIF and apply veterans' preference when 
rehiring from the list, extends veterans' preference to certain 
positions at the White House and in the legislative and 
judicial branches of government, requires the Federal Aviation 
Administration to apply veterans' preference in reductions in 
force, and provides veterans' preference eligibility for 
service in Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 240 was introduced on 
January 7, 1997 by Subcommittee Chairman Mica and referred to 
the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in 
addition to the Committees on House Oversight, the Judiciary, 
and Transportation and Infrastructure. The subcommittee held a 
hearing and mark up on February 26, 1997, and the subcommittee 
favorably forwarded the bill to the full committee for 
consideration. The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
considered the legislation on March 12, 1997. Subcommittee 
Chairman Mica offered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, which was approved by voice vote. The Committee 
favorably reported the bill, as amended, to the full House by 
voice vote. On April 9, 1997, the House passed H.R. 240, as 
amended, and on April 10, 1997, the bill was referred to the 
Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs. (For further developments 
on this issue, see paragraph 14 below.)
    d. Hearings.--``H.R. 240, Veterans' Employment 
Opportunities Act of 1997'' was held on February 26, 1997. 
Witnesses at that hearing were James B. King, Director of the 
Office of Personnel Management; Emil Naschinski, assistant 
director, National Economics Commission, the American Legion; 
Sidney Daniels, director, National Veterans Employment 
Assistance Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United 
States; Charles L. Calkins, national executive secretary, the 
Fleet Reserve Association; Larry D. Rhea, deputy director of 
Legislative Affairs, Non Commissioned Officers Association of 
the United States of America. In addition, a written statement 
was submitted by Ronald W. Drach, national employment director, 
Disabled American Veterans.
    Director King emphasized the administration's strong 
support for the principle of veterans' preference and agreed 
that ``[s]trengthening employment opportunities for veterans is 
a worthy goal.'' He lauded the success of the Clinton 
administration in hiring veterans during a time of government 
downsizing. Director King also indicated that he had suggested 
to veterans's service organizations an alternative to H.R. 
240's RIF provisions. That alternative would have allowed 
unlimited ``bumping'' and ``retreating'' rights for veterans 
only. However, he also indicated that he would support any 
approach that the organizations believed would work toward the 
goal of strengthening veterans' preference in RIFs. Finally, 
Director King recommended that Congress allow OPM sufficient 
time to promulgate regulations implementing any changes in RIF 
laws and to prevent against the disruption of RIFs that are 
underway on the effective date of the legislation.
    Mr. Naschinski testified that the American Legion supports 
H.R. 240, which he called ``long overdue.'' He emphasized the 
importance of the bill's redress mechanism to veterans in 
providing an ``effective, efficient and user friendly'' appeals 
system for veterans. The American Legion, according to Mr. 
Naschinski, ``firmly believes that the major problem with 
veterans' preference is that veterans do not have an adequate 
redress system for instances of discrimination.'' The American 
Legion also supports the bill because it would protect veterans 
from such unfair personnel practices as single-person 
competitive levels during RIFs and would provide veterans with 
enhanced opportunities to find another job if RIFed. Mr. 
Naschinski also took issue with the claim that veterans' 
preference is unfair to women and minorities, pointing out that 
it is completely neutral with regard to the veterans' gender 
and ethnicity. He also testified that the percentage of 
minorities serving in the armed forces is double the percentage 
of minorities in the population. Finally, Mr. Naschinski 
emphasized that veterans are among the more stable and 
productive members of society, being familiar with leadership 
and having an excellent work record.
    Mr. Daniels testified that the VFW strongly supports H.R. 
240, which is a priority item on the organization's legislative 
agenda for 1997. In the view of the VFW, this legislation is 
especially important to veterans who may be facing job loss due 
to continuing downsizing of the Federal Government. In 
particular, the VFW supports the legislation's curbs on the use 
of single-position competitive levels and enhanced assignment 
rights for preference eligibles, which will discourage the use 
of ``designer RIFs'' that threaten veterans' preference. Mr. 
Daniels also testified that the equal access provisions of the 
bill will greatly assist many highly qualified veterans who are 
potential candidates for Federal employment to apply and 
compete for Federal jobs. Allowing qualified veterans to 
compete for jobs that are currently open only to insiders, he 
emphasized, will not only result in more women and minority 
veterans obtaining employment, but also increase the pool of 
highly qualified candidates and enhance the overall quality of 
the Federal workforce. The VFW also fully supports the redress 
mechanism in the legislation and making violations of veterans' 
preference a prohibited personnel practice in all Federal 
agencies.
    Mr. Calkins testified that the Fleet Reserve Association 
supports this legislation because it reinforces the Nation's 
commitment to its veterans. He testified that while some 
Federal agencies support veterans' preference in principle, 
they circumvent it in practice and answer to no one. He pointed 
out that an unsuccessful applicant who suspects discrimination 
based on race, sex, or religion can appeal to the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission for a remedy, but a bypassed 
veteran now has no similar recourse. The Fleet Reserve 
Association also supports making violations of veterans' 
preference a prohibited personnel practice for disciplinary 
purposes because it strengthens the enforcement of veterans' 
preference laws. Mr. Calkins also rebutted the argument that 
veterans' preference is unfair to women and minorities by 
pointing out that more women and minorities are now recruited 
for the armed services and that women are no longer restricted 
to traditional roles outside of the combat theater.
    Mr. Rhea testified that enacting this legislation is a high 
priority of the Non Commissioned Officers Association [NCOA]. 
The NCOA believes this bill will provide key ingredients that 
have been missing from veterans' preference law for 50 years, 
an adequate and fair enforcement mechanism and protection for 
veterans during RIFs. Veterans' preference, Mr. Rhea testified, 
has become an ``unfilled earned right'' simply because 
veterans' preference laws lack an effective enforcement 
mechanism.'' He also emphasized that veterans' preference 
creates a preference based upon honorable military service for 
veterans of either sex.
    In his written statement, Mr. Drach emphasized the support 
of the Disabled American Veterans for the legislation equal 
access provisions and redress mechanism. With respect to the 
equal access provision, he pointed out that veterans were in 
fact Federal employees while in the military and made many 
personal sacrifices to be a Federal employee. Accordingly, the 
legislation appropriately prevents agencies from barring many 
veterans from competing for civilian jobs simply because they 
are not currently civilian employees. He also argued that 
neither veterans nor veterans' service organizations have ever 
had access to a meaningful redress system and characterized the 
redress mechanism established in this bill as an ``extremely 
important provision.''
2. H.R. 1316, to amend Chapter 87 of Title 5, United States Code, with 
        respect to the order of precedence to be applied in the payment 
        of life insurance benefits.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-134, June 
18, 1997.
    b. Summary of measure.--H.R. 1316, as amended, amends 5 
U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 8705 and 8706. It directs the Office of 
Personnel Management [OPM] to obey certain domestic relations 
orders when paying the proceeds of life insurance policies 
under the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance program 
[FEGLI] and permits courts to direct the assignment of such 
policies to individuals specified in domestic relations orders.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 1316 was introduced on 
April 14, 1997 by Representative Mac Collins (GA). The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on 
April 14, 1997, and it was referred to the Subcommittee on the 
Civil Service on April 15, 1997. The subcommittee held a mark 
up on June 10, 1997. No amendments were offered, and the 
measure was ordered favorably reported to the full committee by 
a voice vote. On June 11, 1997, the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight met to consider the bill. Subcommittee 
Chairman Mica offered an amendment, which was approved by voice 
vote. The committee favorably reported the bill, as amended, to 
the full House by voice vote. H.R. 1316, as amended, passed the 
House on June 24, 1997 on the Corrections Calendar and was 
passed by the Senate on June 18, 1998 by unanimous consent. The 
President signed it on July 22, 1998. It became Public Law 105-
205.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 1316.
3. H.R. 1836, Federal Employees Health Care Protection Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-374, 
November 4, 1997.
    b. Summary of measure.--H.R. 1836 amends several provisions 
in Title 5, United States Code. It provides the Office of 
Personnel Management [OPM] additional tools to fight waste, 
fraud, and abuse in the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
Program [FEHBP]. With these tools, OPM will be able to deal 
swiftly with health care providers who try to defraud the 
FEHBP. OPM will be better equipped to bar health care providers 
who engage in misconduct from participating in the FEHBP or to 
impose monetary penalties on them. The bill also provides that 
an association of organizations may underwrite health care 
plans in the FEHBP, and it broadens the current statutory 
language preempting State insurance laws.
    In addition, the bill permits certain employees of the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation [FDIC] and the Federal 
Reserve Board (Fed) to participate in the FEHBP, and it 
requires OPM to encourage carriers who contract with third 
parties to obtain discounts from health care providers to seek 
assurances that the conditions for the discounts are fully 
disclosed to such providers. It also establishes statutory 
requirements for readmitting health care plans sponsored by 
employee organizations that have previously discontinued 
participation in the FEHBP. Under current law, when a health 
care plan discontinues participation in the FEHBP, OPM must 
distribute the remaining contingency reserves to those plans 
that remained in the FEHBP in the contract year after the 
discontinuance. This bill requires OPM to complete the 
distribution by the end of the second contract year after the 
plan is discontinued.
    The maximum amount of the physicians comparability 
allowance under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5948 is increased from $20,000 to 
$30,000.
    The bill also amends 5 U.S.C. Sec. 8902(k) to explicitly 
permit carriers to provide for direct access and direct 
payments to licensed health care providers who are not 
currently enumerated in the statute.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Chairman Burton introduced 
H.R. 1836 on June 10, 1997. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on June 10, 1997, 
and it was referred to the Subcommittee on the Civil Service on 
June 11, 1997. The subcommittee favorably reported the bill, as 
amended, to the full committee by a voice vote. On October 31, 
1997, the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight met to 
consider the bill as amended by the subcommittee. Chairman 
Burton offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute, 
which was adopted by voice vote. The committee ordered the 
bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full House by voice 
vote. The bill passed the House on November 4, 1997 and was 
referred to the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs.
    The Senate passed H.R. 1836, with an amendment, by 
unanimous consent on September 30, 1998, and the House agreed 
to the Senate amendment on October 5, 1998 by voice vote under 
suspension of the rules. The President signed H.R. 1836 on 
October 19, 1998, making it Public Law 105-266.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 1836. However, 
aspects of the bill were examined during the hearing on FEHBP 
rate hikes described in Section II. B. 9. (Subcommittee on the 
Civil Service).
4. H.R. 2675, the Federal Employees Life Insurance Improvement Act.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-373, 
November 4, 1997.
    b. Summary of measure.--H.R. 2675, as amended, improves the 
life insurance benefits available to Federal employees under 
the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance program [FEGLI]. It 
directs the Office of Personnel Management [OPM] to submit a 
legislative proposal for offering Federal employees group 
universal life insurance, group variable universal life 
insurance, and additional voluntary accidental death and 
dismemberment policies. In addition, it permits employees to 
continue unreduced additional optional life insurance coverage 
beyond their 65th birthday at their own expense and to purchase 
larger amounts of optional life insurance on family members.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2675 was introduced on 
October 21, 1997 by Subcommittee Chairman Mica. The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on 
October 22, 1997, and it was referred to the Subcommittee on 
the Civil Service on the same day. The subcommittee held a mark 
up on October 22, 1997. Representative Cummings (MD) offered an 
amendment that was adopted by voice vote. On October 31, 1997, 
the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight met to 
consider the bill as amended. Chairman Burton offered an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute that incorporated the 
subcommittee's amendments, which was adopted by voice vote. The 
committee favorably reported the bill, as amended by the 
subcommittee, to the full House by voice vote. It passed the 
House on November 4, 1997, and was referred to the Senate 
Committee on Governmental Affairs.
    The Senate passed the bill, with amendments, on October 5, 
1998. (Those amendments directed OPM to conduct a study of 
group universal and group variable life insurance rather than 
submit a legislative proposal, make miscellaneous amendments to 
5 U.S.C. Chapter 87, and increase from 30 to 60 days the period 
employees and OPM have to appeal decisions of the Merit Systems 
Protection Board. The Senate amendments are described in Senate 
Report 105-337.) On October 8, 1998, the House agreed to the 
Senate amendments by voice vote under suspension of the rules. 
The President signed H.R. 2675 on October 30, 1998, and it 
became Public Law 105-311.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 2675. However, 
the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance program was examined 
in the hearing described in Section II. A. 4. (Subcommittee on 
the Civil Service).
5. H.J. Res. 56, celebrating the end of slavery in the United States.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--Resolves that the celebration of 
the end of slavery is an important and enriching part of our 
country's history and heritage and provides an opportunity for 
all Americans to learn more about our common past and to better 
understand the experiences that have shaped our Nation and 
directs that a copy of this joint resolution be transmitted to 
the National Association of Juneteenth Lineage as an expression 
of appreciation for its role in promoting the observance of the 
end of slavery.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.J. Res. 56 was introduced 
by Representative Watts (OK) on February 26, 1997 and was 
referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. 
The Committee approved and ordered it reported to the House on 
June 11, 1997. The House passed the measure on June 17, 1997 by 
the Yeas and Nays of 419-0 (Roll Call Vote No. 207). The Senate 
received the bill on June 18, 1997.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings.
6. H. Con. Res. 95, recognizing and commending American airmen held as 
        political prisoners at the Buchenwald concentration camp during 
        World War II for their service, bravery, and fortitude.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--Recognizes and commends the 82 
American airmen held as political prisoners at the Buchenwald 
concentration camp during World War II for their faithful 
service, personal bravery, and exceptional fortitude; and 
requests that the President issue a proclamation recognizing 
and commending, by name, the service, bravery, and fortitude of 
those airmen.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Weldon (FL) 
introduced H. Con. Res. 95 on June 10, 1997. It was referred to 
the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and the 
Committee discharged the bill on September 5, 1997. The House 
passed H. Con. Res. 95 by voice vote under suspension of the 
rules on September 16, 1997. It was received in the Senate and 
referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings.
7. H. Con. Res. 109, recognizing the many talents of the late James M. 
        (``Jimmy'') Stewart and honoring the artistic, military, and 
        political contributions he made to the Nation.
    a. Report number and date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--Congress recognizes the many 
talents of the late James M. (``Jimmy'') Stewart and honors the 
artistic, military, and political contributions he made to the 
Nation.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The legislation was 
introduced by Representative King (NY) on July 8, 1997. The 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight waived 
jurisdiction on July 10, 1997, and the bill was passed by the 
House on September 16, 1997 under suspension of the rules. It 
was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee 
on Judiciary.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings.
8. H.R. 2526, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to make the 
        percentage limitations on individual contributions to the 
        Thrift Savings Plan more consistent with the dollar amount 
        limitation on elective deferrals, and for other purposes.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report No. 105-809, 
October 10, 1998.
    b. Summary of measure.--This bill authorizes Federal 
employees to begin participation in the Thrift Savings Plan 
[TSP] immediately upon being hired rather than waiting a year 
as is required by current law. This legislation also authorizes 
new Federal hires to contribute eligible rollover distributions 
from qualified trusts, including private sector 401(k) 
accounts, to the Thrift Savings Fund. Finally, this bill allows 
employees to contribute to the TSP up to the current IRS limit 
(now $10,000 per year), regardless of income level.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Constance A. 
Morella (MD) introduced H.R. 2526 on September 23, 1997, and 
the bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight. On September 29, 1997, the bill was referred to the 
Subcommittee on the Civil Service. On July 21, 1998, the 
subcommittee considered the bill, and forwarded the bill to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight by voice vote. On 
July 23, 1998, the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
considered the bill, and ordered the bill to be reported to the 
House by voice vote. The House did not consider the bill.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 2526.
9. H.R. 2566, the Civil Service Retirement System Actuarial Redeposit 
        Act of 1998.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-757, October 
1, 1998.
    b. Summary of measure.--This legislation would expand the 
class of Federal employees under the Civil Service Retirement 
System who may elect to receive actuarially reduced annuities 
in lieu of redepositing the amount of retirement contributions 
previously refunded to them, plus interest.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Constance A. 
Morella (MD) introduced H.R. 2566 on September 26, 1997. On 
September 26, 1997, the bill was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the 
Subcommittee on the Civil Service on October 1, 1997. The 
Subcommittee on the Civil Service considered the bill on July 
21, 1998 and forwarded the bill by voice vote to the Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight. On July 23, 1998, the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight considered the 
bill. An amendment to the title was offered by Representative 
Constance A. Morella. The amendment passed by voice vote. By 
voice vote, the Committee ordered H.R. 2566 to be reported to 
the House. The House did not consider the bill.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 2566.
10. H.R. 2943, to amend Title 5, United States Code, to increase the 
        amount of leave time available to a Federal employee in any 
        year in connection with serving as an organ donor, and for 
        other purposes.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-752, September 
28, 1998.
    b. Summary of measure.--Under this legislation, a Federal 
employee may use paid leave not exceeding 7 days in any 
calendar year to serve as a bone marrow donor, and paid leave 
not exceeding 30 days to serve as an organ donor.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Elijah E. 
Cummings (MD) introduced H.R. 2943 on November 8, 1997. The 
bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight. In addition, on November 17, 1997, the bill was 
referred to the Subcommittee on the Civil Service. On July 21, 
1998, the Subcommittee on the Civil Service considered the 
bill, and forwarded it by voice vote to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. On July 23, 1998, the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight considered the 
bill, and, by voice vote, ordered H.R. 2943 to be reported to 
the House. The bill passed the House by voice vote under 
suspension of the rules on October 5, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 2943.
11. H.R. 3249, the Federal Retirement Coverage Corrections Act.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-625, Part I, 
July 14, 1998.
    b. Summary of measure.--Through no fault of their own, 
thousands of Federal employees have been erroneously placed in 
the wrong Federal retirement system. The vast majority of these 
errors involve misclassifications in either the Federal 
Employees Retirement System [FERS] or the Civil Service 
Retirement System [CSRS]. When these errors are discovered, the 
Office of Personnel Management [OPM] and other Federal agencies 
must correct the mistake by automatically enrolling 
misclassified employees in the correct system. Because these 
corrections do not currently include make-whole relief, their 
effects are often devastating for the employees involved.
    The Federal Retirement Coverage Corrections Act addresses 
this problem and accomplishes a number of objectives. It 
provides comprehensive coverage of retirement coverage errors. 
Employees affected by an error are provided a status quo 
option, and employees' Thrift Savings Plan [TSP] accounts are 
made whole. Agencies are held accountable for their mistakes. 
Unfair tax consequences of corrections are prevented. To ensure 
fairness and accuracy, the bill requires centralized oversight 
of the corrections process and provides affected employees with 
administrative and judicial review. The bill protects the 
integrity of the Social Security trust funds, and it protects 
all employees from reductions in force [RIFs] to pay for the 
required remedies.
    The bill provides a consistent framework to correct all 
retirement coverage errors for employees with accounts in the 
Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund [CSRDF] and also 
covers former employees, annuitants, and survivors. It extends 
the same correction options to employees in retirement systems 
for the Foreign Service and the Central Intelligence Agency.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Subcommittee Chairman Mica 
(FL) introduced H.R. 3249 on February 24, 1998 after the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight's Subcommittee on 
the Civil Service held a legislative hearing on the 
subcommittee chairman's mark. The bill as introduced reflected 
amendments to the subcommittee chairman's mark offered at that 
meeting by Mr. Cummings and Mrs. Morella.
    The bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight and, in addition, to the Committee on Ways and 
Means on February 24, 1998. On March 5, 1998 the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight considered the bill. 
Subcommittee Chairman Mica offered an amendment in the nature 
of a substitute, which was adopted by the committee. The 
committee ordered H.R. 3249, as amended, reported to the House. 
The Committee on Ways and Means considered H.R. 3249 on June 
25, 1998. Chairman Archer (TX) offered an amendment in the 
nature of a substitute, which was adopted by the committee by 
voice vote, and the committee ordered the bill, as amended, 
reported to the House.
    H.R. 3249, as amended by the Committee on Ways and Means, 
passed the House on July 20, 1998 by voice vote under 
suspension of the rules and was referred to the Senate 
Committee on Finance.
    d. Hearings.--An oversight hearing, ``Agency Mistakes in 
Federal Retirement--Who Pays the Price?,'' was held on July 31, 
1997. This hearing is described in Section II. B. 5 
(Subcommittee on the Civil Service).
    A legislative hearing, ``H.R. 3249, The Federal Retirement 
Coverage Corrections Act,'' was held February 24, 1998. 
Witnesses included: Mr. William E. Flynn, Associate Director, 
Retirement and Insurance Service, Office of Personnel 
Management; Mr. Roger W. Mehle, Executive Director, Federal 
Retirement Thrift Investment Board; Mr. Thomas O'Rourke, 
partner, Shaw, Bransford & O'Rourke, Washington, DC; and Mr. 
Daniel F. Geisler, president, American Foreign Service 
Association.
    Mr. Mica noted that this legislative hearing fulfilled a 
commitment made last October to make correction of Federal 
retirement coverage errors the first order of business for 
1998. He added that the remedy proposed in this legislation is 
long overdue, and observed that the problem was first brought 
to the Congress' attention in 1989. The employees and 
annuitants who have been affected by these agency mistakes have 
had no effective redress. The subcommittee worked closely with 
the Committee on Ways and Means and the Joint Committee on 
Taxation to coordinate an integrated resolution of tax and 
Social Security issues related to these corrections. This 
legislation also incorporates procedures to address comparable 
mistakes in retirement coverage experienced in the Foreign 
Service and in the intelligence community retirement systems. 
Although the bill is still being developed, the affected 
employees should not have to tolerate additional delays in 
enacting this long overdue framework for future remedies.
    Mr. Flynn testified that the administration strongly 
preferred legislation that it had prepared to deal with the 
problem of misclassified employees and urged the subcommittee 
to use that bill rather than the chairman's mark as the basis 
for legislation. He contended that the administration's bill 
represented the consensus of a number of agencies to resolve 
the myriad intricate and intertwined aspects of the problems 
created by agency errors. In his view, corrective legislation 
must meet four discrete objectives:
          (1) the remedy must demonstrate that the government 
        cares about Federal employees who have been harmed by 
        retirement coverage errors and is committed to an 
        equitable solution for these employees and their 
        families;
          (2) employees should have a choice between corrected 
        coverage and the benefit they expected to receive 
        without disturbing Social Security coverage laws;
          (3) the options provided to the employee should be 
        easy to understand; and
          (4) administrative aspects of the remedy should be 
        minimized to keep the solutions simple and timely.
He argued that the administration's bill satisfies these 
criteria. Mr. Flynn also testified that there were 
``fundamental differences'' between the administration's bill 
and the language under consideration by the subcommittee. Under 
both approaches, he said, employees who were erroneously placed 
in CSRS or CSRS-Offset will have the option of retroactive 
placement in FERS, but only under the subcommittee's proposal 
would individuals electing FERS coverage be entitled to a 
substantial agency-funded payment to the TSP. He pointed out 
that misclassified employees may make retroactive contributions 
to the TSP and receive matching contributions and earnings.
    Mr. Flynn acknowledged that the subcommittee's proposal is 
based upon rules applicable to defined contribution plans in 
the private sector. However, he contended that private sector 
rules were inappropriate because Federal employees may 
participate in both defined contribution and defined benefit 
plans. He also argued that government make-up contributions to 
the TSP on behalf of individuals create ``intractable'' 
problems involving cost, equity, and complexity, while the 
administration's plan provides adequate ``make whole'' relief 
by offering CSRS or CSRS-Offset coverage as alternatives to 
FERS. According to Mr. Flynn, this approach is satisfactory 
because employees ``will always receive at least as much as 
they believed they were going to get.'' In contrast, he 
contended that the subcommittee's approach would overcompensate 
some employees and under compensate others. Finally, Mr. Flynn 
also argued that the subcommittee's approach was unnecessarily 
complex, in part because it held agencies accountable for their 
errors rather than make payments from the retirement fund.
    Mr. Mehle presented the views of the Thrift Board and 
emphasized that the Thrift Board does not take a position on 
the appropriateness of benefit levels available under the 
retirement programs or the TSP. He also noted that the Thrift 
Board first addressed the problem of misclassified employees in 
1989 when it proposed legislation to permit agency payments of 
lost earnings when agencies failed to permit timely employee 
contributions to the TSP. That proposal was enacted. However, 
Congress did not then adopt the Thrift Board's suggestion that 
it allow misclassified employees to elect to remain in the 
CSRS, even though the Board recognized then that the procedures 
it recommended would not provide an adequate remedy in the case 
of a long-standing retirement coverage error. In his testimony, 
Mr. Mehle acknowledged that many employees may be disadvantaged 
by current rules that leave them responsible for making up lost 
employee contribution, either because they have only a 
relatively short period of active service before retiring or 
because they lack the financial resources to make themselves 
whole.
    Both the administration and subcommittee proposals, Mr. 
Mehle noted, would allow affected employees to elect coverage 
under CSRS or CSRS-Offset and predicted that most would choose 
that option. He also noted that whereas the administration's 
proposal would simply apply existing correction law, the 
subcommittee's approach would create a new system to deal with 
misclassification errors. However, he contended that the 
subcommittee's proposal might create unintended consequences 
and impose significant administrative burdens on the Thrift 
Board. The unintended consequences largely consisted of what he 
considered disparate treatment of affected employees. He also 
argued that because the corrective mechanism under the 
subcommittee proposal differed so substantially from current 
rules, the Thrift Board would not be able to use its existing 
software or computers to perform calculations and, 
consequently, would have to contract for that service. In 
addition, he argued that the Thrift Board would not have ready 
access to the information it would need to perform the tasks 
assigned to it under the subcommittee proposal.
    Mr. O'Rourke testified that he is an attorney in private 
practice who specializes in tax, pension, and estate issues. He 
is currently representing a number of Federal employees who 
were improperly placed in the CSRS and then involuntarily 
switched to FERS. He estimates that he has been contacted by 
approximately 50 such individuals. The losses these individuals 
suffer, he stated, result from the fact that FERS participants 
will receive significantly smaller annuities than their CSRS 
counterparts and have been denied the opportunity to 
intelligently plan for a FERS retirement by building up an 
adequate TSP balance. He also described the ``anguish and 
frustration'' these retirement coverage errors have caused the 
employees who have contacted him. Two of his clients have 
suffered heart attacks, one has had a nervous breakdown as a 
result of the stress created by this problem, and a number have 
described marital problems. They have found agency personnel 
sympathetic to their plight, but impotent to provide a 
satisfactory remedy under existing law.
    Mr. O'Rourke emphasized that legislation is necessary to 
resolve the problem of misclassified employees. After reviewing 
both the administration's proposal and the subcommittee's, Mr. 
O'Rourke concluded that the subcommittee's approach was 
preferable. He believed that both proposals took positive steps 
to protect affected employees by allowing them to choose 
retirement coverage that provides essentially the same benefits 
they thought they would earn. However, he found the 
administration's approach unfair to individuals who, after 
being notified of the retirement coverage error and removed 
from CSRS, have attempted to mitigate their losses. In his 
view, the administration's draft would not make such 
individuals whole and would even punish them further by 
inflicting significant financial harm on them whichever option 
they chose. Employees who choose FERS coverage would lose 
forever the earnings on contributions they could have made 
during the period of erroneous coverage. Those who elect CSRS-
Offset would be exposed to additional income taxes and penalty 
taxes based upon distributions from their existing TSP 
accounts.
    In contrast, Mr. O'Rourke testified, the subcommittee's 
approach attempts to make individuals whole and would not 
expose them to additional tax burdens. He also contended that 
the subcommittee's proposal includes a ``reasonable and 
objective mechanism'' to provide make-whole relief for those 
electing FERS coverage that prevents individuals from making 
TSP investment decisions based upon hindsight, yet relieves 
them of the financial burden of correcting an error they did 
not cause.
    Nevertheless, Mr. O'Rourke criticized the subcommittee's 
draft for requiring employees to make retroactive Social 
Security contributions. In the private sector, he pointed out, 
such costs would be borne by employers, and he believed the 
Federal Government should bear the same burden it imposes on 
other employers. He also faulted both proposals for not 
explicitly preserving employees' rights to relief under other 
statutes, such as the Federal Tort Claims Act and the Back Pay 
Act. This, he argued, is necessary to permit employers to 
compensate employees for all of the harm they have suffered as 
a result of these agency errors.
    Mr. Geisler testified on behalf of the American Foreign 
Service Association [AFSA]. AFSA is a professional association 
for 23,000 active and retired foreign service officers and 
specialists, and it serves as the bargaining agent for foreign 
service personnel at the State Department, the Agency for 
International Development, the U.S. Information Service, the 
Commerce Department's Foreign Commercial Service, and the 
Department of Agriculture's Foreign Agricultural Service.
    In AFSA's view, employees who are victims of these agency 
errors should have real options, which requires make-whole 
relief of the kind provided in the subcommittee proposal. He 
illustrated this by citing the example of a foreign service 
officer who was erroneously placed in the Foreign Service 
Retirement and Disability System, which is analogous to CSRS, 
on January 1, 1987. This error was not discovered until August 
1997. Upon discovery, he was placed in the Foreign Service 
Pensions System [FSPS], which is similar to FERS. The agency 
credited the individual's TSP account with the automatic 1 
percent agency contribution for the period of erroneous 
coverage, and will make retroactive contributions with the 
appropriate agency match. However, because the TSP is an 
integral part of the FSPS, the individual is now faced with the 
need to make up 10 years worth of contributions. And even if he 
makes such contributions, he will lose the earnings he would 
have realized on those TSP contributions had they been made 
over the years. Mr. Geisler pointed out that employees who do 
not have much discretionary income cannot reasonably be 
expected to immediately contribute years of foregone employee 
contributions. Consequently, they would be left with inadequate 
retirement coverage.
    AFSA believes the make-whole relief in the subcommittee's 
proposal permits employees the opportunity to make real 
choices. Mr. Geisler believes the averaging methods proposed in 
the subcommittee's draft benefits those on the lower end of the 
pay scale more than higher-paid employees. Nevertheless, he 
found it a fair approach because it prevents the use of ``20/20 
hindsight'' by making retroactive investments without risk and 
it helps those lower-paid employees who need it most. Under the 
subcommittee's approach, Mr. Geisler believes individuals will 
be able to choose freely the retirement system that is best 
suited for them rather than being forced to remain in the older 
system simply because they cannot afford to make prohibitively 
high TSP contributions.
12. H.R. 4259, the Haskell Indian Nations University and Southwestern 
        Indian Polytechnic Institute Administrative Systems Act of 
        1998.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-700, September 
9, 1998.
    b. Summary of measure.--Under this legislation, Haskell 
Indian Nations University (Haskell) and Southwestern Indian 
Polytechnic Institute [SIPI] may conduct 5-year demonstration 
projects to establish alternative personnel systems, including 
alternative retirement plans, that meet their needs as higher 
educational institutions without regard to most civil service 
laws.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Vince 
Snowbarger (KS) introduced H.R. 4259 on July 16, 1998. The bill 
was referred on that date to the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce, and, in addition, to the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight. On July 23, 1998 the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight considered the bill. 
Representative Elijah E. Cummings (MD) offered an amendment in 
the nature of a substitute, which was not adopted by the 
committee. The committee ordered H.R. 4259 reported to the 
House without amendment. On October 6, 1998, the House passed 
the bill by voice vote after defeating an amendment offered by 
Representative Cummings by a vote of 181-244 (Roll Call Vote 
No. 485). The Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent on 
October 15, 1998, and the President signed it on October 31, 
1998. It is now Public Law 105-337.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 4259. However, 
the need for additional personnel flexibility and portable 
retirements were examined in Section II. B. 16. (Subcommittee 
on the Civil Service).
13. H.R. 4280, to provide for greater access to child care services for 
        Federal employees.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-756, October 
1, 1998.
    b. Summary of measure.--This legislation would authorize 
Federal agencies to use funds appropriated for Federal 
employees' salaries and expenses to help Federal employees pay 
for child care.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Constance A. 
Morella (MD) introduced H.R. 4280 on July 21, 1998. The bill 
was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight. On July 23, 1998, the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight considered the bill. Representative Benjamin A. 
Gilman (NY) offered an amendment to H.R. 4280. The amendment 
consisted of the text of H.R. 2982. Representative Gilman's 
amendment passed by voice vote. Representative Henry A. Waxman 
(CA) offered an amendment to Representative Gilman's amendment. 
Representative Waxman's amendment also was passed by voice 
vote. The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight passed 
H.R. 4280, as amended, by voice vote and ordered the bill to be 
reported to the House. On October 1, 1998, the bill was 
referred sequentially to the Committee on House Oversight. H.R. 
4280, as originally introduced, was passed by the House on 
October 5, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H.R. 4280.
14. S. 1021, the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998.
    a. Report number and date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--S. 1021, as introduced, was 
identical to H.R. 240, which is described in paragraph 1 above.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Senators Chuck Hagel (NE) 
and Max Cleland (GA) introduced S. 1021 as an identical 
companion bill to H.R. 240 on July 16, 1997. It was referred to 
the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, which reported the 
bill, as amended, on September 21, 1998 (Senate Report 105-
340). On October 5, 1998, the Senate passed S. 1021, as further 
amended, by unanimous consent. (The Senate amendments narrowed 
the circumstances under which veterans could overcome 
restrictions on the scope of competition for Federal jobs; 
eliminates provisions strengthening veterans' protections 
during reductions-in-force and making individuals who served in 
Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia eligible for veterans' 
preference; and added provisions relating to Federal 
contractors.) The House agreed to the Senate amendments under 
suspension of the rules on October 8, 1998. The President 
signed S. 1021, as amended, on October 31, 1998, making it 
Public Law 105-339.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on S. 1021. However 
the subcommittee did examine the House bill, H.R. 240, in the 
hearing described in 1(d) above.
15. H. Con. Res. 302, recognizing the importance of children and 
        families in the United States and expressing support for the 
        goals of National KidsDay and National Family Month.
    a. Report number and date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--The resolution recognizes the 
importance of children and families to the future of the United 
States; expresses support for the goals of National KidsDay and 
National Family Month, as established by KidsPeace; and 
encourages the people of the United States to participate in 
local and national activities and celebrations recognizing 
National KidsDay and National Family Month.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Paul McHale 
(PA) introduced H. Con. Res. 302 on July 20, 1998, and on July 
24, 1998, it was referred to the House Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight. The House passed the resolution under 
suspension of the rules on October 8, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H. Con. Res. 302.
16. H. Res. 520, congratulating Mark McGwire of the St. Louis Cardinals 
        for breaking the Major League Baseball single season home run 
        record.
    a. Report number and date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--The resolution congratulates and 
commends Mark McGwire of the St. Louis Cardinals for breaking 
the Major League Baseball single-season home run record, for 
bringing great excitement to the 1998 Major League Baseball 
season, and for being an inspiration to the youth of America 
and the world and baseball fans everywhere.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative James M. 
Talent (MO) introduced H. Res. 520 on September 9, 1998. On the 
same day it was referred to the House Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight. The House passed the resolution by voice 
vote under unanimous consent on September 15, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H. Res. 520.
17. H. Res. 536, congratulating Sammy Sosa of the Chicago Cubs for 
        tying the current major league record for home runs in one 
        season.
    a. Report number and date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--The resolution congratulates and 
commends Sammy Sosa of the Chicago Cubs for his amazing 
accomplishments and thanks him for a summer of unsurpassed 
baseball excitement.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Luis V. 
Gutierrez (IL) introduced H. Res. 536 on September 15, 1998. On 
the same day, the House passed the resolution by voice vote 
under unanimous consent.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H. Res. 536.
18. H. Res. 590, recognizing and honoring Hunter Scott for his efforts 
        to honor the memory of the captain and crew of the U.S.S. 
        Indianapolis and for the outstanding example he has set for the 
        young people of the United States.
    a. Report number and date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--The resolution recognizes and 
honors Hunter Scott for his efforts to honor the memory of the 
captain and crew of the U.S.S. Indianapolis and for the 
outstanding example he has set for the young people of the 
United States.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Joe 
Scarborough (FL) introduced H. Res. 590 on October 9, 1998 and 
was referred to the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the same day. On October 10, 1998, the House 
agreed to the resolution, as amended, by voice vote under 
suspension of the rules.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on H. Res. 590.
19. S. Con. Res. 83, remembering the life of George Washington and his 
        contributions to the Nation.
    a. Report number and date.--None.
    b. Summary of measure.--The resolution calls upon the 
Nation to remember the life of George Washington and his 
contributions to the Nation; and requests and authorizes the 
President of the United States:
          (1) to issue a proclamation calling upon the people 
        of the United States:
                  (a) to commemorate the death of George 
                Washington with appropriate ceremonies and 
                activities; and
                  (b) to cause and encourage patriotic and 
                civic associations, veterans and labor 
                organizations, schools, universities, and 
                communities of study and worship, together with 
                citizens everywhere, to develop programs and 
                research projects that concentrate upon the 
                life and character of George Washington as it 
                relates to the future of the Nation and to the 
                development and welfare of the lives of free 
                people everywhere; and
          (2) to notify the governments of all Nations with 
        which the United States enjoys relations that our 
        Nation continues to cherish the memory of George 
        Washington with affection and gratitude by furnishing a 
        copy of this resolution to those governments.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Senator Warner (VA) 
introduced this resolution on March 10, 1998, and it was 
referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary, which reported 
the resolution without amendment on October 8, 1998. The Senate 
passed S. Con. Res. 83 on October 9, 1998. The resolution was 
referred to the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight. On October 15, 1998, the Committee was discharged by 
unanimous consent and the House passed the resolution by voice 
vote.
    d. Hearings.--There were no hearings on S. Con. Res. 83.

                Subcommittee on the District of Columbia

1. H.R. 514, District of Columbia Inspector General Improvement Act of 
        1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-29, March 
18, 1997.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 514, the District of Columbia 
Inspector General Improvement Act of 1997, amends the District 
of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 
1978 to allow, at the request of the Inspector General of the 
District of Columbia, the director of personnel to waive the 
residency requirement for employees of the Office of the 
Inspector General.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The bill was introduced by 
Representative Thomas M. Davis (VA) on February 4, 1997. It was 
referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
and subsequently referred to the Subcommittee on the District 
of Columbia on February 10, 1997. The subcommittee forwarded 
the bill, amended, to the full committee on February 11, 1997. 
On March 12, 1997, the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight ordered the bill, as amended, reported to the House, 
by voice vote. The House passed the legislation on March 18, 
1997, as amended under suspension of the rules, on March 18, 
1997. The measure was passed by the Senate on March 20, 1997, 
and the President signed the bill on March 25, 1997, becoming 
Public Law 105-7.
    d. Hearings.--None were held.
2. H.R. 2015, Balanced Budget Bill.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-149, June 
24, 1997; Conference House Report 105-217, July 30, 1997.
    b. Summary of Measure.--A portion of this bill contained 
the entire final version of H.R. 1963, which was named Title 
XI--District of Columbia Revitalization, cited as the, 
``National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 
Improvement Act of 1997''.
    This section of the bill contained changes made in the 
District of Columbia in the following major areas: District of 
Columbia Retirement Funds, Management Reform Plans, Criminal 
Justice, Privatization of Tax Collection and Administration, 
Financing of District of Columbia Accumulated Deficit, District 
of Columbia Bond Financing Improvements, and a Miscellaneous 
Chapter. Section by section highlights are as follows:
Subtitle A--Unfunded Pension Liability
    Subtitle A lifts the burden of the $4.8 billion unfunded 
pension liability for police and firefighters, teachers, and 
judges of the District of Columbia created when the Federal 
Government transferred those pensions plans to the District of 
Columbia in 1979. The bill has the Secretary of Treasury assume 
the payment of benefits to currently retired DC teachers, 
police and firefighters. The judges become a separate Federal 
plan under the Federal takeover of the District courts (Chapter 
4). There is a ``freeze date'' (June 30, 1997) mandating that 
no further benefits may be earned under the existing plan. 
Because of the freeze date there can be no ``gaming'' of the 
system where people retire normally or on disability and 
receive more benefits from the Federal Government than they 
would have otherwise.
    The Secretary will transfer from the DC Retirement Board 
approximately $3.2 billion in assets and deposit them in a new 
DC Retirement Fund in the Treasury. Six months after enactment 
of this legislation the Treasury will set up another account, 
the DC Supplemental Fund, and begin to deposit Treasury bills 
in an amount amortized to pay off the liability in 30 years 
(Secretary determines exact timing).
    The Secretary hires an agent to manage the assets and make 
the payments. The retirement benefits are paid out of the 
transferred assets until they are used up (approximately 8 
years). After the assets are used up, benefits will be paid out 
of the Supplemental Fund which will have accumulated more than 
$3 billion in Treasury bills by that time.
    Within 1 year of enactment, the DC government must adopt a 
replacement plan for currently active police and firefighters, 
and teachers. The legislation requires this new plan to meet 
ERISA standards and be fully funded. Current police and 
firefighters and teachers will then have retirement benefits 
under 2 pension plans--benefits earned up to the freeze date 
under the current plans; and benefits after the freeze date 
earned under the replacement plan.
    The Secretary is instructed to contract with a consultant 
to study alternative methods of financing the Federal 
obligation assumed in this chapter. The study must be completed 
within 1 year of enactment.
Subtitle B--Management Reform Plans
    The Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance 
Authority (Control Board) and the District of Columbia 
government shall develop management reform plans for nine 
listed District agencies and for four citywide functions. The 
Control Board is to contract with consultants to develop the 
management reform plans and the plans will have to be finished 
within 90 days. The department heads will be responsible for 
implementing the reform plans within their departments and will 
report to the Control Board and to no one else. The Control 
Board will direct the implementation of the citywide reform 
plans. The heads of the nine named departments may only be 
dismissed by the control board. Upon enactment there is deemed 
to exist a vacancy at the head of each of the agencies. The 
mayor may reappoint current department heads or nominate new 
persons, but the Control Board must confirm those positions and 
if the mayor does not make a nomination within 30 days, the 
Control Board shall appoint the head of the nine agencies. The 
heads of the nine named agencies will have control and 
discretion on personnel matters within their agencies.
Subtitle C--Criminal Justice
    Sentenced Felons.--The legislation takes over funding and 
operation of the District of Columbia sentenced felon 
population. A Trustee is set up to oversee the operation of the 
District Department of Corrections operations at the Lorton 
Corrections Complex until all inmates are removed from the 
District facilities at Lorton and then Lorton is closed (no 
later than 2001). The Federal Bureau of Prisons is responsible 
for housing all DC sentenced felons and is authorized to 
contract with other governments or private companies or to 
place them in Federal facilities. The Bureau of Prisons is 
ordered to privatize at least 2,000 DC inmates by 1999 and at 
least 50 percent of the DC inmate population by 2003. The 
Federal Government will pay for the sentenced felon portion of 
the DC Department of Corrections, but DC will be responsible 
for the rest of the corrections system (juveniles, 
misdemeanant, et cetera) both during the Trusteeship and after 
BOP assumes responsibility for sentenced felons.
    The ``Truth-in-Sentencing'' requirements of the 1994 crime 
bill must be met by the District for the takeover to occur. A 
Truth in Sentencing Commission, chaired by the Attorney 
General, is established and has 6 months to recommend 
amendments to the District of Columbia Code for sentencing 
certain felony crimes. If the District government has not 
enacted any recommended amendments or if the Commission fails 
to make any recommendation, the Attorney General is directed to 
promulgate amendments to the District Code as necessary under 
the provisions of this Subtitle.
    Courts.--The Federal Government will assume funding 
responsibility for the DC court system, including probation, 
public defender service, and pre-trial services, which will 
become a Federal agency. The courts will continue to be self-
managed. The District of Columbia parole, probation, and pre-
trial services will be operated by a Federal Trustee until 
those agencies meet Federal standards and then will become a 
Federal agency.
Subtitle D--Tax Administration
    The District of Columbia Chief Financial Officer is 
authorized to contract up to the entire processing and 
collection of the DC tax system. Such contracting must be done 
with the approval of the Control Board.
Subtitle E--Financing Accumulated Operating Deficit
    The District of Columbia will have accumulated an operating 
deficit of approximately $520 million between 1991 and 
September 30, 1997. Carrying this debt is severely impacting 
the District's cash position and holding down the ability of 
the District to access the private finance market. In other 
cities in financial crisis one of the first actions is to 
finance the operating deficit to get the city back on an even 
cash basis.
    This legislation authorizes the District to finance its 
accumulated operating deficit (it does not have the authority 
to sell bonds for deficit financing otherwise). The legislation 
also provides that if no other source is available, the 
Treasury is authorized to lend to the District for this purpose 
up $300 million on terms up to 10 years. Additionally, Treasury 
is authorized to continue to make cash advances to the District 
for seasonal cash flow purposes on a term of not more than 11 
months.
    All moneys borrowed from the Treasury have to be repaid at 
the relevant Treasury rate plus one-eighth of a percent 
interest. Treasury borrowing is more expensive that private 
market borrowing so it is anticipated that this authority would 
only be utilized as a last resort.
Subtitle F--District Government Borrowing Authority
    The District of Columbia's borrowing authority, including 
the use of revenue bonds for economic development purposes, was 
written in the 1973 Home Rule Act and has not been 
substantially revised or modernized since. The District 
authority was also severely restricted because of its 
inexperience with the public borrowing. Since 1973 the whole 
world has changed regarding the use and structure of municipal 
bonds, including revenue bonds. Because of the District's 
restricted authority, the District has never been able to 
utilize all of its annual allocation of revenue bonds and has 
suffered reduced economic development and a competitive 
disadvantage to States and other cities. In addition, the 
District government has been less able than other jurisdictions 
to borrow funds for public purposes and this has contributed to 
the serious deterioration of its capital assets.
    The legislation modernizes the District of Columbia's 
authority to issue both General Obligation and Revenue bonds 
and brings it into conformity with other jurisdictions. There 
is no effort to give the District more authority than other 
jurisdictions nor to continue to restrict or hinder the 
District in its ability to use this valuable economic 
development tool.
Subtitle G--District of Columbia Budget
    The legislation eliminates the existing Federal payment to 
the District of Columbia government. The District is required 
to balance its budget in fiscal year 1998 as opposed to the 
current requirement that this be done by 1999. The debt service 
limitation in the Home Rule Act is modified to account for the 
loss of the Federal payment. The legislation provides for a 
Federal contribution to the operation of the government of the 
Nation's Capital with a 1998 level of $190 million.
Subtitle H--Miscellaneous
    A number of miscellaneous provisions dealing with diverse 
aspects of the District of Columbia are contained in subtitle 
H. The Control Board is directed to implement 2 levels of 
regulatory reform in DC within 1 year: 1) Gives the Control 
Board 6 months to review and use its power to change 
regulations it finds to be anti-competitive, anti-business, or 
unnecessarily complicated. 2) Gives the Control Board 1 year to 
determine why DC's application, permit, and inspection programs 
are dysfunctional and take whatever action is needed 
(regulatory, personnel, privatization) for DC's processes to be 
performed at or above the national average with a further goal 
of making DC's permit and application processes the best in the 
Nation.
    Actions are taken concerning several Federal and DC 
statutes and Federal law enforcement agencies are allowed and 
encouraged to make agreements with the Metropolitan Police 
Department detailing how these Federal agencies will assist MPD 
in increasing public safety in the Nation's Capital.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2015 was introduced by 
Representative John Kasich on June 24, 1997. It was reported 
out of the Committee on Budget on June 24, 1997, House Report 
105-149. The House amended and passed the bill on June 25, 
1997, and was received and passed the Senate with an amendment 
on June 25, 1997. A conference was agreed to and Conference 
Report (105-217) filed in the House on July 30, 1997, and 
passed the same day. The Senate agreed to the report on July 
31, 1997, and the President signed the measure on August 1, 
1997, to become Public Law 105-33.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held the following hearings 
relating to this measure: on February 20, 1997, hearing on 
``White House Proposal for the District of Columbia;'' on March 
11, 1997, a joint hearing held with the Senate Subcommittee on 
Government, Management, Restructuring and the District of 
Columbia of the Committee on Governmental Affairs and the 
Senate Subcommittee on the District of Columbia of the 
Committee on Appropriations on ``Successes in Urban Problem 
Solving, Mayoral Perspectives;'' on March 13, 1997, joint 
hearing held with the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, 
Subcommittee on Government, Management, Restructuring, and 
District of Columbia on the ``White House Proposal for the 
District of Columbia;'' on March 25, 1997, hearing held on the 
``White House Proposal for the District of Columbia--Business 
and Community Leaders' Perspectives;''on April 25, 1997, 
hearing on the ``White House Proposal for the District of 
Columbia--Medicaid and Treasury Borrowing;'' on May 1, 1997, a 
hearing on ``Education At a Crossroads: What Works and What's 
Wasted in the D.C. School System?;'' and on May 22, 1997, 
hearing on the ``White House Proposal for the District of 
Columbia--Economic Development of the President's National 
Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Plan.''
3. H.R. 3025, To amend the Federal Charter for Group Hospitalization 
        and Medical Services, Inc., and for other purposes.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3025, amends the Federal 
charter of Group Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc., 
to: (1) permit the corporation to have one class of members 
consisting of at least one member and not more than 30; and (2) 
prohibit dissolution of the corporation without congressional 
approval.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--This legislation was 
introduced by Representative Thomas Davis (VA) on November 12, 
1997. It was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight and the bill was considered by the House on November 
13, 1997, under suspension of the rules. The legislation was 
agreed to and passed the House by voice vote. The Senate passed 
this measure on November 13, 1997, and it was signed by the 
President on December 16, 1997, Public Law 105-149.
    d. Hearings.--None.
4. H.R. 1963, Mark-up on the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
        Government Improvement Act of 1997. See H.R. 2015, Balanced 
        Budget bill.
    a. Report Number and Date.--See H.R. 2015, Balanced Budget 
bill.
    b. Summary of Measure.--Introduced by Congressman Tom 
Davis. This bill realigned functional responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and the government of the District of 
Columbia, addressed funding mechanisms and sources between the 
Federal Government and the government of the District of 
Columbia, addressed the financial condition of the District of 
Columbia government in both the short and long term, provided 
mechanisms for improving the economy of the District of 
Columbia, to improve the ability of the District of Columbia 
government to match its resources with its responsibilities, 
improved the efficiency of the District of Columbia government, 
and for other purposes. See H.R. 2015, Balanced Budget bill.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Voted out of subcommittee 
by unanimous voice vote, June 19, 1997. Became part of H.R. 
2015, Balanced Budget bill.
    d. Hearings.--See H.R. 2015, Balanced Budget bill.
5. Mark-up on H.R. 4523; H.R. 4566; and H.R. 4568.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4523 makes technical 
corrections to the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement act of 1997. The act may be cited as the 
``Lorton Technical Corrections Act of 1998.'' H.R. 4566 was to 
make technical and clarifying amendments to the National 
Capital Revitalization and Self government Improvement Act of 
1997. H.R. 4568 makes technical and clarifying amendments to 
the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 
Improvement Act of 1997 relating to the reform of certain 
District of Columbia retirement programs.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Mark-up September 9, 1998. 
H.R. 4523 and H.R. 4568 were captured in the 1999 Omnibus bill. 
H.R. 4566 was referred to the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight and in addition to the Committee on Ways and 
Means on September 15, 1998. Rules suspended and passed the 
House amended on October 10, 1998. Received in the Senate on 
October 12, 1998. Passed the Senate October 14, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--None.
6. H.R. 513.
    a. Report number and date.--N/A.
    b. Summary of measure.--To exempt certain contracts entered 
into by the government of the District of Columbia from review 
by the Council of the District of Columbia.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Referred to the Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight on February 4, 1997. Rules 
suspended. Passed House March 6, 1997. Roll No. 34: 390-7. 
Received in the Senate and referred to Governmental Affairs on 
March 6, 1997.
    d. Hearings.--None.
7. H.R. 4237.
    a. Report number and date.--N/A
    b. Summary of measure.--To amend the District of Columbia 
Convention Center and Sports Arena Authorization Act of 1995 to 
revise the revenues and activities covered under such act, and 
for other purposes.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Referred to the Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight and in addition to the 
Committee on Rules July 16, 1998. Committees discharged. Passed 
House July 30, 1998. Received in Senate July 30, 1998. Passed 
Senate July 31, 1998. Presented to the President August 4, 
1998. Approved August 12, 1998. Public Law 105-227.
    d. Hearings.--Hearing on the New Washington Convention 
Center Project, July 15, 1998.

   Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology

1. H.R. 173, Authorization To Donate Surplus Law Enforcement Canines to 
        Their Handlers.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 173 is a non-controversial 
measure designed to make Federal property disposal operations 
more efficient by allowing surplus Federal canines to be 
donated to their handlers. This promotes humane treatment of 
surplus canines by shortening the period of time a canine is 
away from its handler. It also avoids the lengthy screening 
period normally required, thereby reducing Federal costs.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 173 was introduced on 
January 7, 1997, and referred to the Subcommittee on Government 
Management, Information, and Technology on January 16, 1997. 
The subcommittee held a markup on March 11 and voted 
unanimously to forward the bill to the full committee. On March 
12, 1997, the Government Reform and Oversight Committee held 
its markup of H.R. 173, and ordered the bill to be reported to 
the House of Representatives. H.R. 173 was approved by the 
House under suspension of the rules on April 16, 1997, and sent 
to the Senate for consideration. The Senate Governmental 
Affairs Committee reported the bill favorably, without 
amendments, on June 17, 1997. H.R. 173 passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent on June 27, 1997, and was signed by the 
President on July 18, 1997; Public Law 105-27.
    d. Hearings.--Subcommittee markup March 11, 1997.
2. H.R. 680, Transfer of Surplus Personal Property For Donation To 
        Providers Of Necessaries To Impoverished Families and 
        Individuals.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 680 is a bill for ``the 
Transfer of Surplus Personal Property For Donation To Providers 
Of Necessaries To Impoverished Families and Individuals.'' This 
bill authorizes the transfer of surplus personal property to 
organizations that provide assistance to impoverished 
individuals. Currently, Federal agencies declare about $6 
billion per year in excess Federal personal property. The 
property is screened by other Federal agencies to determine 
whether the property is needed by another Federal user. The 
remaining property is declared surplus and donated to State 
governments, law enforcement agencies, and other eligible 
groups. Agencies then sell the remaining property--generally 
the oldest and most obsolete property--generating very little 
in proceeds (about $8 million annually).
    H.R. 680 authorizes the donation of surplus property to 
charities that provide services to poor families. Under this 
measure, these groups are eligible for the property on the same 
basis as State government agencies. Private charities such as 
food banks and Habitat for Humanity are a major source of 
support for the poor. H.R. 680 allows these organizations to 
receive surplus Federal personal property in support of their 
mission.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 680 was introduced on 
February 11, 1997 and referred to the Subcommittee on 
Government Management, Information, and Technology on February 
13, 1997. The subcommittee marked up the bill and forwarded it 
to the full committee by voice vote on March 11, 1997. On March 
12, 1997, the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
considered the measure and ordered it to be reported. H.R. 680 
was called up under suspension of the rules and passed by the 
House as amended by a roll call vote of 418-0 on April 29, 1997 
(Roll No. 93). The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee 
favorably reported the bill without amendment on May 22, 1997. 
The measure was amended on the floor of the Senate on July 9, 
1997. On September 18, 1997, on a motion that the House agree 
to the Senate amendments, the amended bill was cleared for the 
White House. It was signed by the President on October 6, 1997; 
Public Law No. 105-50.
    d. Hearings.--Subcommittee markup March 11, 1997.
3. H.R. 930, Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 930, the Travel and 
Transportation Reform Act of 1997, is designed to remedy poor 
management of the Federal Government's massive travel 
expenditures. H.R. 930 would clear away obstacles to better 
management and encourage a concerted effort by Federal managers 
to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of Federal 
travel.
    In fiscal year 1994 (the last year for which precise 
figures are available), the Government spent more than $7.6 
billion on travel, including transportation, lodging, rental 
cars and other related expenses. There are ample opportunities 
to save money from this sum without restricting necessary 
travel. Administrative costs, for example, should be 
significantly reduced. The cost of completing a travel voucher 
is about $15 in the private sector while it can run as high as 
$123 in the Federal Government. H.R. 930 would help the 
Government adopt successful techniques from the private sector. 
It has four major provisions.
    The first provision provides for universal use of the 
Federal travel charge card throughout the Government. 
Relatedly, H.R. 930 seeks to ensure that agencies are able to 
verify that charges on the travel card are business related. 
The Government's ability to access this information has been in 
question because the Right to Financial Privacy Act restricts 
the release of an individual's financial records, including 
accounts maintained by the credit card issuer. H.R. 930 
clarifies that the Government has the authority it needs to 
gather this information. This provision would make the Federal 
Government a better customer and simplify administration for 
Federal agencies. The result would be an increase in the size 
of the Federal Government's rebate.
    The second major provision concerns prepayment audits of 
travel charges. Currently, GSA's Office of Transportation 
Audits spends $11 million to recover $6 million in overpayments 
using post-payment audits. A GSA pilot program that uses audit 
contractors to perform prepayment audits on some transportation 
vouchers has identified overpayments worth four times the 
amount of the payments to contractors, proving that this is a 
cost-effective tool. All other invoices submitted to the 
Federal Government are reviewed by the procuring agency for 
accuracy prior to payment. The bill authorizes prepayment 
audits by contractors to verify that charges are correct prior 
to disbursement of transportation expenses. According to the 
General Services Administration, this change would save $50 
million per year in reduced transportation expenses.
    The third major provision corrects an unjust tax liability. 
The bill authorizes reimbursement to employees who were 
subjected to a tax liability in tax years 1993 and 1994 due to 
their service with the Federal Government. This tax liability 
was established by the 1992 Energy Act. The Energy Act limited 
the income tax deduction for business related travel to 
expenses incurred on trips of 1 year or less in duration. Most 
Federal agencies were unaware of this requirement because the 
IRS did not notify them until December 1993 and did not 
withhold tax payments from the employees' salaries. Many of the 
affected Federal employees were liable for a lump-sum payment 
plus penalty and interest charges.
    The fourth major provision encourages innovation in Federal 
travel. The sections of the U.S. Code relating to travel are 
extremely proscriptive and limit agency flexibility in 
developing improved benefit systems. H.R. 930 would allow 
Federal agencies to participate in travel pilot tests that 
would, it is hoped, save taxpayer dollars.
    The Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 1997 should 
save the taxpayers at least $80 million per year by reducing 
expenditures by $50 million or more each year while also 
increasing receipts (through the travel card rebate program) by 
$30 million annually.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 930 was introduced on 
March 5, 1997. The bill was marked up by the Subcommittee on 
Government Management, Information, and Technology on March 11, 
1997, and by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
on March 12, 1997. It was then considered by the House under 
suspension of the rules and passed by voice vote on April 16, 
1997. It has been referred to the Senate Governmental Affairs 
Committee. H.R. 930 was then referred to the Senate 
Governmental Affairs Committee, where it was reported favorably 
with amendments on June 17, 1998, along with Senate Report 105-
295 (printed August 25, 1998.) The Senate passed H.R. 2977 with 
amendments by unanimous consent on September 1, 1998. The House 
agreed to the Senate amendments by voice vote on October 5, 
1998. The bill was signed by the President on October 19, 1998, 
becoming Public Law 105-264.
    d. Hearings.--Subcommittee markup March 11, 1997.
4. H.R. 404, Authorizing the transfer to State and local governments of 
        certain surplus property for use for law enforcement or public 
        safety purposes.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 404 is a bill that would make 
it easier for State and local governments to receive excess 
Federal property to benefit law enforcement, fire and rescue 
purposes. Under current law, surplus Federal property can be 
donated to State or local governments through a public benefit 
discount for public health, education, recreation, national 
service activities, historic monuments, correctional facilities 
and shipping ports. H.R. 404 would expand the public benefit 
discount for correctional facilities to cover other law 
enforcement and fire and rescue activities.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 404 was introduced on 
January 9, 1997, and referred to the Subcommittee on Government 
Management, Information, and Technology on January 22, 1997. 
The subcommittee held a markup of the bill on June 3, 1997, and 
voted unanimously to forward the bill to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. On September 30, 1997, the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight considered the 
measure and voted by voice vote to forward it to the House. 
H.R. 404 passed the House under suspension of the rules on 
November 4, 1997. On November 13, 1997, it was referred to the 
Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.
    d. Hearings.--On June 3, 1997, the subcommittee held a 
hearing on H.R. 404. Officials from Riverside County, CA, 
testified that they wanted to place a coroner's office and a 
law enforcement and fire training academy on surplus Federal 
property at the March Air Force Base. That surplus property 
became available through the actions of the Defense Base 
Realignment and Closure Commission. The county officials stated 
that they wanted the land and buildings for these functions to 
be made available through one, not two, Federal agencies. 
Witnesses at the June 3rd hearing included Senator Dianne 
Feinstein (D-CA), who has introduced a companion bill to H.R. 
404 in the Senate, Representative Ken Calvert (R-CA), who 
authored H.R. 404, and Representative Sonny Bono (R-CA).
    On June 26, 1997, the subcommittee marked up H.R. 404. The 
subcommittee considered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute that made technical corrections to the bill as 
introduced. The subcommittee then voted unanimously to forward 
the substitute version to the full Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight.
5. H.R. 52, The Fair Health Information Practices Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 52 addresses the challenge of 
protecting confidentiality and privacy between doctor and 
patient in a rapidly changing health care environment. Managed 
health care systems must be able to exchange information 
between doctors, insurers, and others. The increasing use of 
information technology and the increasing complexity in 
provider arrangements are inevitable. The exchange of patient 
health care information is an integral part of the existing 
health care system. Payments for claims require diagnostic 
information. Communications between primary care providers and 
other providers such as specialists or hospitals require 
patient information to be shared. Pharmacies maintain databases 
of past prescriptions.
    Despite this highly fluid environment for exchanging health 
care information, no uniform national standard currently exists 
to protect the confidentiality of this information. Moreover, 
there is little uniformity among State statutes regarding the 
confidentiality of health care information. Most of these State 
laws lack penalties for misuse or misappropriation. Protections 
vary according to both the holder and the type of information.
    Under the Kassebaum-Kennedy Act of 1996, the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services is required to recommend privacy 
standards for health care information to Congress by September 
1997. If Congress does not enact health care privacy 
legislation by August 1999, the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services is required to promulgate such privacy regulations.
    Under H.R. 52, medical records created or used during the 
process of treatment become protected health information. 
Furthermore, health care providers are required to maintain 
appropriate administrative, technical and physical safeguards 
to protect the integrity and privacy of health care 
information. H.R. 52 would allow patients to review their 
medical records and correct inaccurate information. It would 
also place restrictions on the release of information relating 
to the treatment of patients and on the payment for health care 
services.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 52 was introduced on 
January 7, 1997. It was referred to the Subcommittee on 
Government Management, Information, and Technology on February 
28, 1997, and the subcommittee held a hearing on the measure on 
June 5, 1997. H.R. 52 has also been referred to the Commerce 
Committee, Subcommittee on Health, and Environment and the 
Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime.
    d. Hearings.--On June 5, 1997, the subcommittee held a 
hearing on H.R. 52 and the medical privacy issue. Four Members 
of Congress who have taken the lead on medical records privacy 
issues testified: Representatives Condit, Slaughter, Stearns, 
and Green. The subcommittee also heard testimony from privacy 
advocates, health care providers, records management 
organizations, and medical researchers.
6. H.R. 1962, Presidential and Executive Office Financial 
        Accountability Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-331, 
October 21, 1997.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1962 brings the agencies of 
the Executive Office of the President [EOP] within the 
framework and under the requirements of the Chief Financial 
Officers [CFO] Act. H.R. 1962 authorizes the President to 
appoint a Chief Financial Officer in a unit or office within 
the Executive Office of the President and, to the fullest 
extent practicable, mandates adherence to most provisions of 
the CFO Act. In recognition of the decentralized structure of 
the EOP and the unique functions its agencies perform in 
support of the President, H.R. 1962 anticipates that some 
exemptions may be necessary. The bill provides considerable 
discretion for the President to exempt the new CFO from any of 
a number of responsibilities otherwise stipulated by the CFO 
Act as authority and functions to be performed by an agency's 
Chief Financial Officer.
    The intent of this legislation is to foster improved 
systems of accounting, financial management and internal 
controls throughout the component entities of the Executive 
Office of the President. This should facilitate prevention, or 
at least early detection, of waste, fraud and abuse within the 
Executive Office of the President, as well as in the other 
executive branch agencies already covered by the CFO Act. 
Implementation of these provisions will promote not only 
accountability and proper fiscal management but also efficiency 
and cost reductions.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--On June 19, 1997, 
Subcommittee Chairman Horn introduced H.R. 1962. The 
subcommittee marked up the bill on September 4, 1997. One 
amendment was offered and adopted at the subcommittee mark-up, 
and the bill as amended was approved by voice vote. The 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight marked up the bill 
on September 30, 1997, approving the amendment in the nature of 
a substitute, and reporting the measure favorably, as amended, 
on a voice vote, for consideration by the House of 
Representatives. H.R. 1962 passed the House by a vote of 413 to 
3 on October 21, 1997. The bill has been referred to the Senate 
Governmental Affairs Committee.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on the 
proposed measure on May 1, and marked up the bill on September 
4. The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight held its 
markup of H.R. 1962 on September 30, 1997.
7. H.R. 716, Freedom from Government Competition Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 716 seeks to take the 
Government out of the business of doing things that the private 
sector can do better. It prohibits Federal agencies from 
producing goods or services available from the private sector 
unless there is either a national security reason or an 
inherently governmental reason for doing so. The bill allows 
for agencies to retain functions when the Federal agency is the 
best value provider of those functions. According to the 
Congressional Budget Office, many government organizations 
report a savings of approximately 20 to 35 percent when a 
Federal Government function is subject to competition. At the 
same time, this efficiency may come at a cost, especially to 
Government employees.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 716 was introduced by 
Representative Duncan on February 12, 1997, and referred to the 
Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
Technology on February 20, 1997. The subcommittee held a 
hearing on the measure on September 19, 1997. H.R. 716 was also 
referred to the House Budget Committee. A companion bill, S. 
314, was introduced by Senator Thomas (R-WY). S. 314 was 
reported favorably by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee 
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute on July 28, 
1998 (accompanied by Senate Report 105-269). S. 314 passed the 
Senate with an amendment by unanimous consent on July 30, 1998. 
S. 314 was passed by voice vote under suspension of the rules 
in the House on October 5, 1998. It was signed by the President 
on October 19, 1998, becoming Public Law 105-270.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee hearing was held September 
29, 1997. Numerous issues were addressed, including whether the 
Federal Government should maintain expertise in critical areas 
and whether the Federal Government has the capacity to manage a 
number of new Federal contracts. Witnesses at the hearing 
included Senator Craig Thomas, (R-WY), who introduced the 
companion measure in the Senate; Representative James Duncan, 
(R-TN, who authored H.R. 716; Steve Goldsmith, mayor, city of 
Indianapolis; Ms. Shirley Ybarra, deputy secretary for 
transportation, State of Virginia; Ed DeSeve, Office of 
Management and Budget; Mr. Nye Stevens, Director, Federal 
Management and Workforce Issues, General Accounting Office; and 
Mr. Bobby L. Harnage, Sr., national secretary-treasurer, 
American Federation of Government Employees. Another hearing 
was held on March 24, 1998, entitled, ``A Free Market Approach 
to Federal Contracting: The Fair Competition Act of 1998 and 
the Competition in Commercial Activities of 1998.''
8. H.R. 2508, ``A bill to provide for the conveyance of Federal land in 
        San Joaquin County, California, to the City of Tracy, 
        California''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--This bill directs the Administrator 
of General Services to convey to the city of Tracy, CA, all 
U.S. rights and interest to a specified parcel of real property 
in San Joaquin County, CA, currently administered by the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons of the Department of Justice. It 
requires specified portions of such parcel to be used for: (1) 
a secondary school and other educational purposes; (2) a public 
park and other recreational purposes; and (3) economic 
development. It provides a reversionary interest to the United 
States if such parcels are not used for such purposes.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The subcommittee marked up 
the bill on June 16, 1998. It was marked up by the Government 
Reform and Oversight Committee on July 23, 1998. On September 
14, 1998, the bill passed the House by voice vote. It was then 
referred to the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. The 
provisions of H.R. 2508 were added to the Omnibus Consolidated 
and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1999, becoming part of Public Law 
105-277.
    d. Hearings.--Subcommittee markup on June 16, 1998.
9. H.R. 2635, the Human Rights Information Act
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2635, the Human Rights 
Information Act requires U.S. agencies to identify, review, 
organize, and publicly release all records regarding gross 
human rights violations in Guatemala and Honduras after 1944, 
no later than 150 days after enactment of the bill. The bill 
also requires Federal agencies to review, declassify and 
disclose human rights records upon an official request of 
another nation or an entity created by the United Nations or 
the Organization of American States or a similar entity. The 
act also requires the President to report on each agencies' 
compliance with the act no later than 150 days after enactment 
of the bill. H.R. 2635 allows postponement of release of the 
records if the threat to the national security, military 
defense, or intelligence operations of the United States 
outweighs the public's interest in disclosure. The act also 
prescribes guidelines under which the Interagency Security 
Classification Appeals Panel (see below) shall review agency 
determinations to postpone public disclosure of any human 
rights record. Finally, the act creates two additional 
positions on the Interagency Security Classification Appeals 
Panel to carry out the provisions of the act and provides that 
these positions shall be filled by non-governmental employees.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2635 was introduced by 
Representative Tom Lantos (D-CA) on October 8, 1997. An 
identical version, S. 1220, was introduced by Senator Chris 
Dodd (D-CT) on September 25, 1998 and was referred to the 
Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. No further Senate 
action has been taken. In the House, H.R. 2635 was forwarded by 
the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and 
Technology to the full committee (amended) by voice vote. No 
further action has been taken.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a legislative hearing 
on May 11, 1998, entitled H.R. 2635, the ``Human Rights 
Information Act.''
10. H.R. 2883, the ``Government Performance and Results Act Technical 
        Amendments of 1998''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2883 was designed to amend 
provisions of law enacted by the Government Performance and 
Results Act of 1993. The purpose was to improve Federal agency 
strategic plans and performance reports.
    The Government Performance and Results Act has enormous 
potential to improve agency performance. It will help to align 
agency objectives with legislative intent, to eliminate 
ineffective and overlapping programs, and to improve measurable 
program results. It will help the agencies to better manage 
themselves. It will help the administration in policy, 
programs, and budgeting. And it will help Congress in both 
authorization and appropriations.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2883 was introduced by 
Representative Burton (R-IN) on November 7, 1997, as the 
Government Performance and Results Act Amendments of 1997. The 
subcommittee held a markup of H.R. 2883 on March 4, 1998. It 
was then passed, in amended form, by the Government Reform and 
Oversight Committee on March 5. The House passed H.R. 2883 by a 
vote of 242 to 168 on March 12, 1998. It was then referred to 
the Committee on Governmental Affairs in the Senate, where no 
action has been taken.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 2883 
on February 12, 1998. Witnesses included J. Christopher Mihm, 
Assistant Director, Federal Management and Workforce Issues, 
General Government Division, U.S. General Accounting Office; 
Professor Robert M. Grant, School of Business Administration, 
Georgetown University; and Maurice P. McTigue, distinguished 
visiting scholar, Center for Market Processes, George Mason 
University.
11. H.R. 2958, ``Quality Child Care for Federal Employees Act''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2958 requires a Federal agency 
that either operates, or contracts for operation of, a child 
care center in a facility owned or leased by an Executive 
agency to obtain the appropriate State and local licenses and 
to comply with child care licensing requirements.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2958, the ``Quality 
Child Care for Federal Employees Act,'' was introduced by 
Representative Benjamin Gilman (R-NY). The subcommittee marked 
up the bill on February 12, 1998, favorably reporting the bill 
to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, where no 
action has been taken.
    d. Hearings.--Subcommittee markup February 12, 1998.
12. H.R. 2977, the Federal Advisory Committee Act Amendments of 1997
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The Federal Advisory Committee Act 
Amendments of 1997 provide that the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act [FACA] applies to neither the National Academy of Sciences 
nor the National Academy of Public Administration.
    When it passed FACA in 1972, Congress was explicit in its 
intention that the law not apply to the National Academy of 
Sciences and similar organizations. For the last 25 years, FACA 
did not apply to these organizations. A recent court case 
changed this when a U.S. Court of Appeals interpreted FACA to 
apply to the National Academy of Sciences.
    Both Houses of Congress were in favor of clarifying through 
legislation that FACA does not apply to these Academies. Then 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget Franklin Raines 
also expressed support for a legislative remedy. The 1997 
amendments also provided for several openness measures that 
will apply to the Academies. Under the new law, they are 
required to post to the Internet for public comment the 
committee members' names, biographies, and brief conflict of 
interest disclosures when nominated. They are also required to 
invite public attendance at all data gathering committee 
meetings by posting notice to the Internet.
    The benefits of this particular amendment to FACA are 
twofold. First, the Federal Government and the American people 
will continue to benefit from the independent high-quality 
studies of the National Academy of Sciences and the National 
Academy of Public Administration without undue restrictions. 
Second, the processes used by the Academies will be more open 
to scrutiny by all interested parties. The American people can 
be assured that studies by these Academies will be conducted in 
a balanced and objective manner.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--On November 9, 1997, the 
bill, H.R. 2977, was introduced by Representative Stephen Horn 
(R-CA), who was joined by Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking 
member of the full committee. It passed the House under 
suspension of the rules on November 10 by voice vote. The bill 
was then considered by the Senate and passed without amendment 
by unanimous consent on November 13. It was signed by the 
President on December 17, 1997, becoming Public Law 105-153.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on this issue 
on November 5, 1997.
13. H.R. 3900, the Consumer Health and Research Technology [CHART] 
        Protection Act; and H.R. 52, The Fair Health Information 
        Practices Act of 1997
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--Both H.R. 3900 and H.R. 52 
addresses the challenge of protecting confidentiality and 
privacy between doctor and patient in a rapidly changing health 
care environment. Managed health care systems must be able to 
exchange information between doctors, insurers, and others. The 
increasing use of information technology and the increasing 
complexity in provider arrangements are inevitable. The 
exchange of patient health care information is an integral part 
of the existing health care system. Claims payments require 
diagnostic information. Communications between primary care 
providers and other providers such as specialists or hospitals 
require patient information to be shared. Pharmacies maintain 
databases of past prescriptions.
    Despite this highly fluid environment for exchanging health 
care information, no uniform national standard currently exists 
to protect the confidentiality of this information. Moreover, 
there is little uniformity among State statutes regarding the 
confidentiality of health care information. Most of these State 
laws lack penalties for misuse or misappropriation. Protections 
vary according to both the holder and the type of information.
    Under the Kassebaum-Kennedy Act of 1996, the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services is required to recommend privacy 
standards for health care information to Congress by September 
1997. If Congress does not enact health care privacy 
legislation by August 1999, the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services is required to promulgate such privacy regulations.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 52 was introduced by 
Representative Gary Condit (D-CA) on January 7, 1997. H.R. 3900 
was introduced by Representative Chris Shays (R-CT) on May 19, 
1998.
    d. Hearings.--On June 5, 1997, the subcommittee held a 
hearing on H.R. 52 and the medical privacy issue. On May 19, 
1998, the subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 3900 and other 
medical privacy proposals. At each hearing the subcommittee 
heard from Members of Congress who have taken the lead on 
medical records privacy issues as well as from privacy 
advocates, health care providers, records management 
organizations, and medical researchers.
14. H.R. 4007 and S. 1379, the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act
    a. Report Number and Date.--None
    b. Summary of Measure.--The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act 
provides for the disclosure and release of Nazi war criminal 
records in the possession of the U.S. Government. It 
establishes the Nazi War Criminal Records Interagency Working 
Group to locate, identify, declassify, and make available to 
the public all Nazi war records held by the United States. This 
law also provides for expedited processing of Freedom of 
Information Act [FOIA] requests by Holocaust survivors.
    Over half a century after the Nazi era, the U.S. Government 
continues to keep secret much of the information it has on Nazi 
war criminals. It is imperative that this information receive 
full scrutiny by as many people as possible. Only through an 
informed understanding of the Nazi era and its aftermath can we 
guard against a repeat of this tragic episode in history. Much 
remains to be learned from the Nazi war crimes files in the 
possession of U.S. Government agencies.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4007 was introduced by 
Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) on June 5, 1998. An 
identical version, S. 1379, was introduced by Senator Mike 
DeWine (R-OH) in November 1997 and passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent on June 19, 1998. It was signed by the 
President on October 8, 1998, becoming Public Law 105-246.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on the ``Nazi 
War Crimes Disclosure Act'' on Tuesday July 14, 1998.
15. H.R. 4243, ``Government Waste, Fraud, and Error Reduction Act of 
        1998''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4243 would reduce waste, 
fraud, and error in Government programs by making improvements 
with respect to Federal management and debt collection 
practices, Federal payment systems, and Federal benefit 
programs.
    The Debt Collection Improvement Act [DCIA] was signed into 
law on April 26, 1996, as Title 3, Chapter 10, of Public Law 
104-134 (the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and 
Appropriations Act of 1996). The DCIA established new tools to 
assist agencies in collecting debts owed to the United States. 
It provides agencies incentives to increase collections of 
delinquent debts while protecting the rights of debtors. It 
also allows agencies to rely on the expertise of private-sector 
debt collectors.
    The role of the Federal Government in the credit markets is 
enormous. The Federal Government dominates the markets for 
student loans and housing loans, and has a strong impact on 
other sectors as well. Effective Federal debt collection 
practices would protect the interests of the taxpayers. Strong 
congressional oversight is essential to effective debt 
collection practices. At this point, the Government is still in 
the process of implementing the DCIA. There are a variety of 
steps in the process of implementation that warrant heightened 
congressional attention.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4243 was introduced by 
Representative Stephen Horn (R-CA) on July 16, 1998. The 
Government Reform and Oversight Committee marked up H.R. 4243 
on July 23, 1998. The bill was then considered by the House 
under suspension of the rules and passed on October 13, 1998. 
Following further discussion with the Senate and Administration 
officials, a new version of the bill was introduced by 
Representative Horn as H.R. 4857. This bill passed the House by 
unanimous consent on October 20, 1998. It was then referred to 
the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, where no action 
has been taken.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a legislative hearing 
on several debt collection improvement proposals, including 
``Government Waste, Fraud, and Error Reduction Act of 1998,'' 
on March 2, 1998.
16. H.R. 4244, ``Federal Procurement System Performance Measurement and 
        Acquisition Workforce Training Act of 1998''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4244 would amend the Office of 
Federal Procurement Policy Act to direct the Administrator of 
the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to establish a system 
for measuring the performance and effectiveness of the Federal 
procurement system and each of its elements. This measure would 
require the performance standards to be structured as follows: 
(1) to enable the Congress, the Office of Federal Procurement 
Policy, and the heads of executive branch agencies to track 
progress of achievement of acquisition reform objectives on a 
Governmentwide basis and to gauge the effectiveness of the 
procurement system in supporting the accomplishment of the 
mission of such agencies; and (2) to benchmark the performance 
of such agencies against the performance of private and public 
sector procurement operations.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4244 was introduced by 
Representative Stephen Horn (R-CA) on July 16, 1998. H.R. 4244 
was marked up by the Government Reform and Oversight Committee 
on July 23, 1998, and reported to the House of Representatives. 
No further action has been taken.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a legislative hearing 
entitled, ``Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act,'' on 
August 6, 1998.
17. H.R. 4620, the Statistical Consolidation Act of 1998
    a. Report Number and Date.--None
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4620 is designed to improve 
the quality and reliability of Federal statistical data and 
statistical analysis through organizational consolidation and 
data sharing for statistical purposes.
    The economic statistics gathered and analyzed by the 
Federal Government are integral to public and private 
decisionmaking. The financial markets rise and fall, Federal 
aid is determined and distributed, and businesses make a wide 
variety of decisions all based on the data provided by the 
Government. Although sound statistics and analysis do not by 
themselves produce sound public policy, they do provide a 
necessary foundation from which to identify problems, to 
evaluate options, and to monitor results. There is widespread 
concern that Federal statistical agencies could be working more 
efficiently. The solution may be to consolidate the three main 
statistical agencies into a single entity. This proposal 
directly addresses the need for better coordination and 
planning among economic statistical agencies. The goal of this 
and other proposals is to improve the Federal statistical 
system by reducing the organizational and legal barriers to 
greater coordination.
    Title I of the bill establishes a bipartisan Federal 
Commission on Statistical Policy to study the reorganization of 
the Federal statistical system. Specifically, the Commission is 
charged with studying whether and how Federal statistical 
agencies, including the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bureau 
of Economic Analysis, and the Bureau of the Census, should be 
merged into a centralized Federal Statistical Service by the 
year 2001. If the commission recommends consolidation of these 
bureaus, it will provide Congress with draft legislation 
outlining implementation of this reorganization. The commission 
would also make recommendations to Congress on other ways to 
improve the quality of Federal statistics.
    Title II of the bill promotes the sharing of statistical 
data and information among statistical agencies under uniform 
confidentiality protections. This legislation would yield many 
benefits. Data sharing along with the establishment of a 
Federal Statistical Service would eliminate duplication in the 
collection of statistical data, save valuable resources, and 
improve the quality of statistical data while protecting the 
privacy of individuals.
    On September 25, 1998, the Senate Governmental Affairs 
Committee considered S. 1404 the ``Statistical Consolidation 
Act of 1998.'' Senator Thompson offered an amendment in the 
nature of a substitute that omitted the ``fast-track'' 
provision. The new version was favorably reported by the 
committee. No further action was taken in the Senate.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4620, the Statistical 
Consolidation Act of 1998 was introduced by Representative 
Stephen Horn (R-CA). On September 28, 1998, the Subcommittee on 
Government Management, Information, and Technology marked up 
H.R. 4620. The bill was favorably reported to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. No further action was taken.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held two hearings during the 
105th Congress on improving the quality of Federal statistics. 
The first entitled, ``Oversight of Metropolitan Statistical 
Proposals'' was held on July 29, 1997. The second was a 
legislative hearing on the ``Statistical Consolidation Act of 
1998,'' and S. 1404 the ``Federal Statistical System Act of 
1997,'' held on March 26, 1998.
18. S.J. Res. 58, Recognizing the Accomplishments of the Offices of 
        Inspectors General
    a. Report Number and Date.--None
    b. Summary of Measure.--S.J. Res. 58 salutes the Inspectors 
General and their staffs for the extremely important work they 
do on behalf of the American taxpayers. Twenty years ago this 
month, in an effort to more effectively combat waste and 
mismanagement in Federal programs, the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight, then known as the Committee on Government 
Operations, worked to establish Inspectors General in the 
largest executive agencies.
    Inspectors General serve to protect the integrity of 
Federal programs and resources. Through their audits and 
investigations, Inspectors General seek to determine whether 
program officers, contractors, Federal workers, grantees, and 
others are conforming with regulations and laws. Congress has 
come to rely heavily on the critical work of the Inspectors 
General. Their audits and inspections help root out serious 
problems in Federal programs and bring them into the light of 
day.
    In April 1998, the subcommittee conducted a series of 
hearings looking at financial management in the Federal 
Government. One of these hearings focused on the status of 
financial management practices at the Health Care Financing 
Administration. At that hearing, the Inspector General of the 
Department of Health and Human Services exposed a stunning 
$20.3 billion in waste in the Medicare program.
    With the exposure of problems such as this, agencies and 
Congress can work to improve Federal programs, make them more 
efficient, more effective, and less costly. American taxpayers 
deserve no less from the Federal Government than the utmost 
accountability for their hard-earned money.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--S.J. Res. 58 was introduced 
by Senator John Glenn on October 1, 1998 and it was passed by 
the Senate that day. It was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight, Subcommittee on Government 
Management, Information, and Technology in the House. It was 
passed by the House under suspension of the rules on October 
10, 1998, and was signed by the President on November 2, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held two hearings on issues 
concerning Inspectors General: ``Oversight of Investigative 
Practices of Inspectors General,'' was held on June 24, 1997; 
``The Inspector General Act of 1978: Twenty Years After 
Passage, Are the Inspectors General Fulfilling Their Mission?'' 
was held on Tuesday, April 21, 1998.

                    Subcommittee on Human Resources

1. H.R. 399, the Subsidy Termination for Overdue Payments [STOP] Act.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 399 prohibits the payment of 
Federal financial assistance to parents who are more than 60 
late or delinquent in meeting their child support obligations 
unless there is deemed to be ``good cause'' due to factors 
beyond their control.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 399 was introduced in 
the House on January 9, 1997, by Congressman Michael Bilirakis 
(R-FL).
    d. Hearings and Committee Actions.--On November 4, 1997, 
the Human Resources Subcommittee held a hearing on 
privatization of child support enforcement services and H.R. 
399. Testimony was received from: Congressman Michael Bilirakis 
(R-FL) and representatives from the GAO, Policy Studies Inc., 
Lockheed Martin IMS, Maximus Inc., G.C. Services, the Ventura 
County District Attorney's Office, and the Association for 
Children for Enforcement of Support.

Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal 
                                Justice

1. H.R. 956, Drug-Free Communities Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-105, May 
20, 1997.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 956, amends the National 
Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988, to direct the Director of the 
Office of National Drug Control Policy to establish a program 
to support communities in the development and implementation of 
comprehensive, long-term plans and programs to prevent and 
treat substance abuse among youth. The bill represents a major, 
new commitment to novel, well-coordinated anti-drug prevention 
coalitions on the local level. The bill is also designed to 
bring national and State leadership to local communities in a 
systematic manner throughout the United States.
    The bill requires the Director, in carrying out the 
program, to: (1) make and track grants to grant recipients; (2) 
provide for technical assistance and training, data collection 
and dissemination of information on state-of-the-art practices 
that the Director determines to be effective in reducing 
substance abuse; and (3) provide for the general administration 
of the program. The bill also allows the Director to enter into 
contracts with national drug control agencies, including 
interagency agreements to delegate authority for the execution 
of grants and to carry out this act. H.R. 956 authorizes 
appropriations for fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
    In addition, H.R. 956 sets forth specified criteria a 
coalition shall meet to be eligible to receive an initial or a 
renewal grant. It prescribes limitations concerning: (1) grant 
amounts; (2) coalition awards; and (3) rural coalition grants. 
The legislation grants the Program Administrator general 
auditing and data collection authority and requires the 
minimization of reporting requirements by grant recipients.
    The measure authorizes the Administrator, with respect to 
any grant recipient or other organization, to: (1) offer 
technical assistance and training and enter into contracts and 
cooperative agreements; and (2) facilitate the coordination of 
programs between a grant recipient and other organizations, and 
entities. Authorizes the Administrator to provide training to 
any representative designated by a grant recipient in: (1) 
coalition building; (2) task force development; (3) mediation 
and facilitation, direct service, assessment and evaluation; or 
(4) any other activity related to the purposes of the program.
    Finally, H.R. 956 establishes the Advisory Commission on 
Drug-Free Communities to advise, consult with, and make 
recommendations to the Director concerning activities carried 
out under the program. Within the legislation, the duties of 
the Advisory Commission are set forth and terminates the 
Advisory Commission at the end of fiscal year 2002.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 956 was introduced on 
March 5, 1997, by Congressman Rob Portman, and referred to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. On March 12, 
1997, H.R. 956 was referred to the Subcommittee on National 
Security, International Affairs, and Criminal Justice and the 
subcommittee held a markup and favorably reported H.R. 956, as 
amended, to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. 
On May 16, 1997, the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight favorably reported H.R. 956, as amended, House Report 
No. 105-105, Part I. The Drug-Free Communities Act of 1997 
passed the House of Representatives under suspension of the 
rules by Roll Call vote of 420-1 on May 22, 1997. On June 2, 
1997, the bill was referred to the Senate. On June 18, 1997, 
the Senate passed H.R. 956 by unanimous consent. The Drug-Free 
Communities Act of 1997 was signed by the President on June 27, 
1997, Public Law 105-20.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held a hearing on March 12, 
1997, at which Congressmen Rob Portman and Sander Levin 
testified as sponsors of the bill. James E. Copple, president 
and CEO of Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America [CADCA], 
and Robert Francis, executive director of Regional Youth Adult 
Substance Abuse Project [RYASAP] based in Bridgeport, CT, also 
testified in support of the bill. Congressman Charles B. Rangel 
submitted a statement for the record.
    Subcommittee Chairman J. Dennis Hastert began the hearing 
with a statement on the problems facing communities as they 
address the crisis of rising drug abuse and expressed his 
support for H.R. 956, a bill on which he worked vigorously and 
of which he was, with Congressman Portman, original co-sponsor. 
Ranking minority member, Thomas M. Barrett, attributed the rise 
in teen drug use to the lack of a strong community position and 
expressed his support.
    Congressman Portman outlined the provisions in the bill. 
Essentially, H.R. 956 rechannels existing resources to 
effective community efforts aimed at stemming the increase in 
teen drug abuse, and reversing the drug tolerance. 
Representative Portman labeled the mounting teen drug epidemic 
``a call to action.'' At its core, H.R. 956 provides incentives 
for communities to address this problem cost-effectively.
    Congressman Sander Levin described the bills enormous 
potential contribution to anti-drug efforts and said it would 
give way to a renewed national commitment, helping communities 
learn from each others activities. Mr. Copple stressed that 
``anti-drug'' coalitions are necessary and noted that this bill 
would unify whole communities and provide essential resources. 
Through an emphasis on outcome evaluation and increased 
participation by elected officials and citizens, this 
legislation will significantly aid ONDCP in coordinating 
domestic anti-drug efforts. Mr. Francis added that young people 
must be offered meaningful alternatives, and encouraged to find 
long term solutions to their drug problem.
2. H.R. 2610/H.R. 4328, Reauthorization of the Office of National Drug 
        Control Policy.
    a. Report Number and Date.--No report filed.
    b. Summary of Measure.--``Reauthorization'' provides 
Congress with the opportunity to evaluate the success of an 
agency's structure and powers in accomplishing the goals set 
out by the legislative branch. It also offers a chance to 
revisit those goals and change the structure and power of 
relationships among agencies to accomplish new and existing 
goals.
    The Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP] was 
originally authorized by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, 
Public Law 100-690. The most recent authorization of ONDCP 
expired on September 30, 1997. The purpose of H.R. 2610/H.R. 
4328 is to not only reauthorize, reorganize and redirect the 
manner in which the drug war is being fought by ONDCP, but to 
assure accountability in this effort by insisting that agencies 
justify their resource allocations. By augmenting the authority 
of the Drug Czar to oversee the National Drug Control Program 
agencies, as well as setting performance measures for measuring 
the success of National Drug Control programs and agencies, 
this committee is insisting anew on accountability in our $17 
billion drug war. The American people must know specifically 
where each tax dollar is being spent.
    The major provisions of H.R. 2610/H.R. 4328 include 
supplementary reporting requirements; redefining existing 
positions as well as creating additional ones; expanding the 
powers and responsibilities of the Director; and a 5-year 
reauthorization set to expire September 30, 2003.
    Reporting Requirements.--The fundamental tools of 
accountability in this bill are ``hard targets'' for anti-drug 
performance and reporting requirements for all the National 
Drug Control Program agencies and ONDCP. Each requirement is 
intended to ensure that the Drug Czar, as well as Congress, is 
continuously apprised of each agency's contribution to the drug 
war.
    The first of the five additional reporting requirements is 
a one-time requirement that ONDCP submit a plan to Congress to 
return the United States to what would be considered a 1960's 
level of drug use--namely, a return to use by no more than 3 
percent of the population, approximately half the rate we are 
experiencing today--by December 31, 2003. The second is an 
annual evaluation of each National Drug Control Program 
agencys' progress toward reaching the aforementioned goal, 
submitted to Congress by the Director of ONDCP. Third, the bill 
requires that each National Drug Control Program agency submit 
annually to ONDCP a detailed accounting of all money scored as 
drug money. To ensure the validity of these numbers, this 
provision mandates that the report be authenticated by the 
Inspector General of each agency. Fourth, this bill requires 
the Director to submit to Congress an annual evaluation of each 
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area [HIDTA] including a 
justification for continuing resource allocations. Finally, the 
bill requires the Director of ONDCP to report to Congress any 
need for future inter-agency reprogramming, and any which 
occurred in the previous quarter.
    Additional Positions.--H.R. 2610/H.R. 4328 creates three 
additional positions within ONDCP and reorganizes the office to 
provide better leadership in the four areas of coordination: 
supply reduction, demand reduction, and State and local 
affairs. All of the positions created shall be congressionally 
approved and nominations must be submitted to the Senate no 
later than 90 days after the enactment of this bill.
    Expansion of Powers and Responsibilities of the Director.--
This Congress has established a realistic end goal that has 
long been missing---specifically, ONDCP must achieve 3 percent 
drug use (or a lower figure) across the United States within 5 
years. In order to effectively coordinate this goal, this bill 
augments the Director's authority over the National Drug 
Control Program agencies and increases the responsibility he 
holds as the Nations Drug Czar.
    One of the fundamental powers imbued in any Director is a 
degree of influence over the funding of all anti-drug agencies. 
With this in mind, the bill allows the Director of ONDCP, with 
the consent of the authorizing and appropriating committees of 
Congress, to reprogram 3 percent of the effected National Drug 
Control Program agencies budgets. This allows the Director to 
increase funding for programs which prove to be affective and 
cut funding for those that do not.
    As coordinator of the U.S. national drug control effort, it 
is also imperative that the Director be apprised of all 
relevant appointments to anti-drug positions. This bill assures 
that the Director is consulted prior to any formal nomination 
relating to drug control.
    This bill tasks the Director with establishing Federal 
policies, goals, and performance measures (including specific, 
precise, annual targets) for each of the National Drug Control 
Program agencies. These targets and goals must specify 
``milestone dates'' by which a portion of the ultimate goal is 
achieved, in order to track the progress (or lack of progress) 
of each agency. This bill lays the foundation for a system that 
will allow Congress to foresee and address any deviation from 
the designated timeframe.
    Finally, with the dangerous escalation of teen drug use and 
medicinal marijuana initiatives across the United States, it is 
essential that the Nation's Drug Czar deliver a clear, strong 
no-use message to America's teenagers. Over the years, illicit 
narcotics have been growing in purity; so much so that drugs 
now ``on the street'' will often kill a first-time user. For 
this reason, the bill mandates that the Director take all 
actions necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize any 
Schedule I substance not otherwise approved by the Food and 
Drug Administration.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2610 was introduced by 
Congressman J. Dennis Hastert on October 6, 1997, and referred 
to the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight the 
same day. On October 7, 1997, the committee approved H.R. 2610, 
as amended, favorably by voice vote and forwarded it to the 
House. On October 21, 1997, H.R. 2610 was called up by the 
House and passed by voice vote under the suspension of the 
rules.
    The Senate received the bill and referred it to the 
Committee on the Judiciary on October 22, 1997. On November 6, 
1997, the Committee on the Judiciary ordered the bill to be 
favorably reported with an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute. Also on November 6, 1997, the bill was placed on 
the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, Calendar 
No. 273.
    Due to the fact that the bill was not passed by the Senate, 
it was included in the Omnibus Appropriations Act (H.R. 4328) 
which became Public Law 105-825. The final vote on the bill was 
333-95.
    d. Hearings.--The subcommittee held two hearings relating 
to the ONDCP Reauthorization bill. The first hearing was held 
on May 1, 1997, entitled, ``Reauthorization of the Office of 
National Drug Control Policy.'' Testimony was received from 
General Barry R. McCaffrey, Director of the Office of National 
Drug Control Policy, and Norman J. Rabkin, Director of 
Administration of Justice Issues of the General Accounting 
Office [GAO]. General McCaffrey outlined his responsibility to 
coordinate the National Drug Control Program agencies and their 
involvement in the war on drugs. He discussed the 32 objectives 
and 5 goals of ONDCP in 1997, and progress made toward them 
since his ascension to office in February 1996. ONDCP stated 
goals are: to reduce the availability of drugs; reduce drug-
related crime; reduce health and social problems associated 
with drug use; shield U.S. borders from drug transshipment; and 
focus on educating young people about the dangers of drug 
abuse. Mr. Rabkin briefed Members on the numerous reports that 
the GAO had completed over the recent years on the Nation's 
drug control efforts. He reiterated the need for centralized 
coordination and accountability for the Nation's efforts.
    On June 25, 1997, the subcommittee held a hearing entitled, 
``Effectiveness of Counterdrug Technology Coordination at 
ONDCP.'' Testimony was received from Mr. Albert Brandenstein, 
chief scientist, Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center 
[CTAC] at the Office of National Drug Control Policy; Mr. Ray 
Mintz, Director, Applied Technology Division, U.S. Customs 
Service; Mr. Leonard Wolfson, Director, Demand Reduction 
Systems, Department of Defense Drug Enforcement Policy and 
Support, Office of the Secretary of Defense; and Mr. David 
Cooper, Associate Director, National Security and International 
Affairs Division, General Accounting Office. Mr. Brandenstein 
reiterated the mission of CTAC, which is to ``. . . identify, 
define, and prioritize short-, medium-, and long-term 
scientific and technological needs of Federal, State, and local 
drug enforcement agencies to oversee and coordinate drug 
technology initiatives with Federal, civilian, and military 
departments . . .'' Both Mr. Mintz and Mr. Wolfson testified of 
their cooperation with CTAC and the successful and unsuccessful 
missions that they have embarked upon to assist in the 
counterdrug effort. Mr. Cooper discussed the differing views 
that ONDCP and Customs have had on the direction of long-range 
technology. Mr. Cooper noted the need for ONDCP to be able to 
exert authority as a coordinating agency over the Nation's 
counterdrug efforts.
3. H.R. 3310, The Small Business Paperwork Reduction Act Amendments of 
        1998.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-462 Part 1, 
March 24, 1998, Together with Dissenting Views.
    b. Summary of measure.--Paperwork counts for one-third of 
total regulatory costs or $225 billion. It took 6.7 billion man 
hours to complete government paperwork in 1996. The time and 
money required to keep up with government paperwork prevents 
many small businesses from growing and creating new jobs. 
Clearly, small businesses are in desperate need of relief. The 
purpose of the ``Small Business Paperwork Reduction Act 
Amendments of 1998'' is to reduce the burden of Federal 
paperwork on small businesses.
    The measure would (1) require the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs [OIRA] at the Office of Management and 
Budget [OMB] to publish a list annually on the Internet and in 
the Federal Register of all the Federal paperwork requirements 
for small business; (2) require each agency to establish one 
point of contact to act as a liaison between small businesses 
and the agency regarding paperwork requirements and the control 
of paperwork; (3) suspend civil fines on small businesses for 
first-time paperwork violations so that the small businesses 
may correct the violations; (4) require each agency to make 
further efforts to reduce paperwork for small businesses with 
fewer than 25 employees, in addition to meeting the current 
paperwork reduction requirements of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act; and (5) establish a task force, convened by OIRA, to study 
the feasibility of streamlining reporting requirements for 
small businesses.
    The suspension of fines section of the measure includes 
exceptions to ensure that small businesses which do not make a 
good faith effort to comply with paperwork requirements are not 
relieved of the penalties for their violations. This section 
provides that civil fines may be suspended for 6 months unless 
the agency head determines that the violation caused actual 
serious harm; that waiving the fine would impede the detection 
of criminal activity; that the violation is a violation of the 
internal revenue laws or any law concerning the assessment or 
collection of a tax, debt, revenue or receipt; or that the 
violation presents an imminent and substantial danger to the 
public health and safety.
    If the agency head determines that the violation presents 
an imminent and substantial danger to the public health and 
safety, the agency head may impose a fine or suspend the fine 
for 24 hours to allow the small business to correct the 
violation. In making this determination, the agency head shall 
take into account all the facts and circumstances of the 
violation, including the following factors: (1) the nature and 
seriousness of the violation, including whether it is willful 
or criminal; (2) whether the small business has made a good 
faith effort to comply and correct the violation; (3) the 
previous compliance history of the small business, including 
any past enforcement actions against its owners or principals; 
and (4) whether the small business has obtained a significant 
economic benefit from the violation. Only civil fines may be 
suspended, not criminal. Only fines assessed for violations of 
collection of information (paperwork) requirements may be 
suspended, not fines for violations of other regulatory 
requirements. This provision also applies to civil fines levied 
by State governments, acting pursuant to delegated authority, 
for violations of any Federal paperwork requirement 
administered by such State governments.
    c. Legislative status.--H.R. 3310 was approved by the House 
on March 26, 1998 by a vote of 267 to 140.
    d. Hearings.--``H.R. 3310, Small Business Paperwork 
Reduction Act Amendments of 1998'' hearings were held on March 
5, 1998, and March 17, 1998.
4. H.R. 1704, The Congressional Office of Regulatory Analysis Creation 
        Act.
    a. Report number and date.--House Report 105-441 Part 2, 
June 3, 1998, Together with Minority Views.
    b. Summary of measure.--The purpose of the ``Congressional 
Office of Regulatory Analysis Creation Act'' is to establish a 
Congressional Office of Regulatory Analysis [CORA] to aid 
Congress in analyzing Federal regulations. CORA would 
consolidate Congress's regulatory analysis functions, which are 
now performed by the Congressional Budget Office [CBO] and the 
General Accounting Office [GAO]. CORA's responsibilities would 
include: (1) analyzing all major rules and reporting to 
Congress on their potential costs, benefits, and alternate 
approaches that could achieve the same regulatory goals at 
lower costs; (2) analyzing non-major rules, which currently are 
not analyzed by GAO and Office of Management and Budget, at the 
request of committees or Members of Congress; and (3) issuing 
an annual report on the total costs and benefits of Federal 
regulations on the economy.
    This measure would transfer GAO's responsibilities under 
the Congressional Review Act [CRA] (5 U.S.C. Sec. 801) to CORA. 
Specifically, CORA would submit a report to Congress for each 
``major'' rule (as defined in the CRA) on the issuing agency's 
compliance with all applicable regulatory procedures. In 
addition to this procedural review, this measure requires CORA 
to conduct its own analysis of the costs and benefits of each 
major rule. This analysis shall not duplicate the regulatory 
impact analysis conducted by the agency. Rather, CORA shall use 
data and analyses generated by the agency in developing the 
rule, as well as any data otherwise acquired by CORA. In 
addition to its review and analysis of major rules, CORA is 
required to provide a review and analysis of any non-major 
rule, upon the request of any committee or individual Member of 
Congress. CORA is required to give major rules first priority.
    This measure would also transfer to the Director of CORA 
some of CBO's functions under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
[UMRA]. The UMRA requires the Director of CBO to compare the 
agency's estimates of costs that a new regulation is expected 
to impose on State and local governments with cost estimates 
previously produced by CBO at the time the relevant authorizing 
legislation was introduced. The bill would transfer the 
comparison function to CORA (but CBO would retain the function 
of producing cost estimates at the time the legislation is 
enacted).
    The bill requires the Director of CORA to provide 
information to the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on matters pertinent to the committee's jurisdiction, 
including the committee's authorization and oversight of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the OMB.
    The bill authorizes appropriations of $5.2 million for CORA 
for each fiscal year from 1998 through 2006, except that no 
funds shall be authorized for the Office in the event that 
total legislative branch funding exceeds the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998. This section insures that 
the Office's funding is drawn from existing legislative branch 
funding and does not increase the total budget of the 
legislative branch.
    c. Legislative status.--On May 21, 1998, the committee 
favorably reported the bill by a voice vote.
    d. Hearings.--``H.R. 1704, Congressional Office of 
Regulatory Analysis Creation Act'' hearing was held on March 
17, 1998.

                   Subcommittee on the Postal Service

1. H.R. 22, The Postal Reform Act of 1997.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The subcommittee held extensive 
hearings on Postal Reform during the 104th Congress and a broad 
range of postal stakeholders testified at that time. 
(Activities of the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight, Report 104-874, January 1997.) The current bill, 
H.R. 22, was introduced at the beginning of this session and 
reflected the previous legislation which had been enacted in 
the 104th Congress, including increased salaries for the 
Governors of the Postal Service and the establishment of the 
Office of the Inspector General. A major focus of the 
legislation is reform of the current ratemaking process. The 
current structure as enacted by the Postal Reorganization Act 
of 1970, removed Congress from the ratemaking process by 
implementing a cost-based ratemaking system whereby rates are 
based on the cost of providing a specific service. The 
legislation divides postal products into competitive and 
noncompetitive categories. For noncompetitive postal products, 
H.R. 22 updates this rate cap pricing system.
    The purpose of this hearing was to determine what, if any, 
inflation index should be used as the benchmark and whether a 
factor representing productivity gains in the economy should be 
applied against this inflation marker. The legislation gives 
new authorities to the Postal Rate Commission for ensuring 
against service and delivery degradation. It is imperative to 
achieve a rate-setting procedure which protects captive 
customers from undue bias in rates while recognizing demand 
factor in pricing postal products. Expectations for postal 
service have changed over the past 27 years and conflicting 
demands have been placed on the Postal Service due to 
technological and competitive changes. H.R. 22 addresses these 
concerns. Six nationally renowned economists testified and 
responded to oral and written questions for the record. John 
Kwoka of George Washington University testified that over the 
past 10 to 15 years price caps have rapidly replaced cost-based 
ratemaking as the plan for monopolies and companies. Most State 
public utility commissions have adopted price caps or similar 
performance-based plans. The example of AT&T's success with 
price caps was touted. However, not all price cap regimes work 
equally well, depending on the circumstances of the company 
utilizing the method. A good price cap plan should work to the 
benefit of both the consumer and the provider. The consumer 
looks for lower prices which the company must provide by 
instituting efficiencies without eroding service quality, while 
motivating managers and employees to attain these efficiencies 
through compensation and rewards.
    Kenneth Rose, senior economist at the National Regulatory 
Research Institute, testified that price caps are seen as a 
superior way to regulate as opposed to traditional cost of 
service methods. In the field of electricity regulation, price 
caps have held down costs and prices and increased 
productivity; though possibility for degradation of service 
quality exists it is not regarded as an insurmountable problem.
    There are differences between electric utilities and the 
Postal Service which may cause different results in utilizing 
price caps. However, generally, price caps create better 
incentives for cost reduction and control by severing the link 
between the rate which can be charged and the costs. Price caps 
are simple to administer compared with cost-based regulation; 
it allows for more price flexibility to arrange terms with 
customers and protects customers with few or no practical 
alternatives; and price caps can be used as a transition tool 
to a competitive market. Price caps work best in a competitive 
market. However, if there was significant competition, price 
caps would not be necessary and the market could be deregulated 
but, depending on the product, it may not be feasible to have a 
completely deregulated market. An additional impediment in 
implementing a price cap regime to the Postal Service is the 
fact that the Service has no stockholders to whom dividends are 
paid when the company gains profit and are penalized when 
profits are lower.
    Joel Popkin, president of Joel Popkin and Co. testified 
that the performance of the Postal Service since its 
reorganization in 1971 has been a bit better than the U.S. 
private business. The wage earnings of a typical postal worker 
(at level 5) lags behind private sector wages. He said that 
postal market shares have been growing, labor productivity has 
risen, postal rates have risen below the Consumer Price Index, 
but less than CPI for services. Mr. Popkin suggested that since 
the Postal Service is a service industry, should a price cap 
regime be instituted, the index selected should be CPI for 
consumer services. However, he concluded that price caps in an 
industry which is labor intensive is equivalent to wage caps 
and there is no need to alter the regulatory environment since 
the Postal Service is doing well.
    Gregory Sidak, resident scholar, American Enterprise 
Institute for Public Policy Research, stated that because the 
Postal Service is a not-for-profit enterprise, it is difficult 
to relate how a for-profit, shareholder price-cap experience 
would work for a not-for-profit business. Though H.R. 22 
replicates some private-sector incentives, it does not go far 
enough to maximize profits and minimize costs. He asked why not 
privatize the Postal Service. Mr. Sidak discussed the two 
monopolies enjoyed by the Postal Service: Private Express 
Statutes (enacted in the 1840's) and the mailbox monopoly 
(enacted in 1934). In defining ``letters'' and ``packets'' the 
Postal Service has the power to define the scope of its own 
monopoly. He raised the issue that both these monopolies appear 
in the U.S. Criminal Code because they are criminal 
prohibitions. Because the definitions are vague, as a matter of 
due process the statute may be void and unenforceable. 
Furthermore, he asserted, the mailbox monopoly makes it 
possible for the Postal Service to raise the costs of its 
rivals in making deliveries to their customers. He testified in 
favor of repealing the Private Express Statutes, the mailbox 
monopoly and other statutory privileges. He also recommended 
that the burden of universal service be removed and all 
services of the Postal Service be subject to antitrust 
oversight, pointing to commercialization of the Postal Service. 
However, if that was not expedient he recommended that there 
should be an increase of regulatory oversight of the Service, 
including enhancing the powers of the Postal Rate Commission, 
and the ability for the Service to initiate and offer postal 
products.
    Professor Michael Crew of Rutgers University and Professor 
Paul Kleindorfer of the University of Pennsylvania presented 
joint testimony. Changes to the Postal Service are due because 
of exogenous factors such as technological change which are 
revolutionizing traditional communications systems. To remain 
viable, postal administrations worldwide are undergoing reform 
and becoming more businesslike. Mr. Crew suggested 
privatization of the Postal Service with a labor force subject 
to the right to strike and lock out provisions--not binding 
arbitration. He reported that price cap regulations have worked 
in Great Britain because the industries are now privatized. For 
price cap regulations to succeed, there must be residual 
claimants. Absent these residual claimants, management lacks 
proper incentives to make profits and increase the value of 
shareholders' investments. Therefore, price caps for a publicly 
held enterprise whose employees are subject to binding 
arbitration may prove to be problematic.
    Mr. Kleindorfer referred to concerns he had with the 
product baskets and the uniform applicability of adjustment 
factors within these baskets. He proposed a more flexible 
definition which would be used only for monopoly products and 
price regulation would be applicable only to monopoly services. 
The more flexible definition and the use of indexing within the 
regulated basket would give the Postal Service an opportunity 
to compete and innovate. Products would be divided into 
regulated and nonregulated groups.
    c. Benefits.--Improvements in ratemaking, with assurance of 
nondiscrimination in rates to users of monopoly products of the 
Postal Service, will enhance mail service to all users. 
Instituting a flexible ratemaking structure should make postal 
products more competitive, which benefits all Americans. 
Witnesses further testified that a properly constructed price 
cap regime initiates incentives to control costs, thereby 
helping attract and retain postal customers. It is important 
that all stakeholders come together to preserve the one 
institution charged with providing universal mail service to 
all 50 States and territories.
    d. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 22, was introduced by 
Subcommittee Chairman John M. McHugh, (R-NY), on January 7, 
1997. The legislation was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on January 22, 1997, and 
referred to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service. A 
legislative hearing was held on April 16, 1997.
    e. Hearings.--Hearing entitled, ``H.R. 22, The Postal 
Reform Act of 1997'' was held on April 16, 1997.
2. H.R. 282, To Designate the United States Post Office building 
        located at 153 East 110th Street, New York, New York, as the 
        ``Oscar Garcia Rivera Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The bill designates the U.S. Post 
Office building located at 153 East 110th Street, New York, NY, 
as the ``Oscar Garcia Rivera Post Office Building.'' This 
legislation honors the first Puerto Rican elected to public 
office in the continental United States. After graduating from 
high school, Mr. Rivera came to New York and worked at the post 
office in City Hall while attending college. He was 
instrumental in organizing and establishing the Association of 
Puerto Rican and Hispanic Employees within the Post Office 
Department. He was elected assemblyman in the State of New York 
in 1937, and served until 1940. Mr. Rivera returned to Puerto 
Rico where he continued to be known for his commitment to 
protect the rights of manual laborers and remained a role model 
and a community leader.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The legislation was 
introduced January 7, 1997, by Representative Serrano of New 
York and was cosponsored by the entire New York House 
Delegation, as required by the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight. The subcommittee forwarded the measure to the 
committee. On October 7, 1997, H.R. 282 was considered by the 
committee and ordered reported by voice vote. On October 21, 
1997, the bill was called up by the House under suspension of 
the rules and it passed by voice vote. The Senate received the 
bill on October 22, 1997, and the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs ordered the bill to be reported favorably on November 
5. H.R. 282 passed the Senate by unanimous consent on November 
9, 1997, and became Public Law No. 105-87.
    d. Hearings.--None were held on this legislation.
3. H.R. 499, To designate the facility of the United States Postal 
        Service under construction at 7411 Barlite Boulevard in San 
        Antonio, Texas, as the ``Frank M. Tejeda Post Office 
        Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 499 designates the facility of 
the U.S. Postal Service under construction at 7411 Barlite 
Boulevard in San Antonio, TX, as the ``Frank M. Tejeda Post 
Office Building''. The measure honors the late Representative 
Frank Tejeda who died in office while serving his 2nd term as 
the first elected Representative from the 28th District of 
Texas. Representative Tejeda was awarded the Purple Heart, the 
Bronze Star, the Commandant's Trophy, the Marine Corps 
Association Award, among others, for his service with the 
Marine Corps during the Vietnam conflict. Although he was a 
high school drop out, Representative Tejeda earned the highest 
academic average in Marine Corps history when he attended 
officer candidate school. He later received a J.D. from the 
University of California, Berkeley, a master's degree in public 
administration from Harvard and a master of law from Yale. He 
served in the Texas' State Legislature in both the House and 
Senate from 1977 until 1992, when he came to Congress.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 499 was introduced by 
Representative Bonilla on February 4, 1997, and supported by 
all members of the House delegation of the State of Texas. The 
bill was referred to the House Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight on February 4, 1997, and then referred to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on February 5, 1997. The 
House called up the legislation under suspension of the rules 
on February 5th, and the measure was passed by a recorded vote 
of 400-0 (Roll No. 9). The Senate received the bill on February 
6, 1997, and was referred to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs. The committee discharged the bill, and the Senate 
passed H.R. 499 by unanimous consent and the bill was cleared 
for the White House. The President signed the measure on March 
3, 1997, to become Public Law No. 105-4.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
4. H.R. 681, To designate the United States Post Office building 
        located at 313 East Broadway in Glendale, California, as the 
        ``Carlos J. Moorhead Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 681 designates the U.S. Post 
Office building located at 313 East Broadway in Glendale, CA as 
the ``Carlos J. Moorhead Post Office Building''. The 
legislation honors Representative Moorhead who served in the 
U.S. House of Representatives from 1972 until he retired in 
1997. While a member of the Committee on the Judiciary, Mr. 
Moorhead became chairman of the Subcommittee on Courts and 
Intellectual Property. He is a veteran of World War II and a 
retired Judge Advocate Lieutenant Colonel.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--This legislation was 
introduced by Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois on February 
11, 1997, and was cosponsored by all Members of the California 
House delegation, (the State in which the post office will be 
located). H.R. 681 was referred to the House Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight and subsequently referred to 
the Subcommittee on the Postal Service. On October 7, 1997, the 
committee considered and favorably order the bill to be 
reported to the House by voice vote. The measure was called up 
by the House on October 21, 1997, under suspension of the 
rules, and was passed on voice vote. H.R. 681 was received by 
the Senate on October 22, 1997, and referred to the Committee 
on Governmental Affairs, which reported the bill favorably on 
November 5. The Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent on 
November 9, and the President signed the legislation on 
November 19, 1997, to become Public Law No. 105-88.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this measure.
5. H.R. 1057, To designate the building in Indianapolis, Indiana, which 
        houses operations of the Indianapolis Main Post Office as the 
        ``Andrew Jacobs, Jr. Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1057 designates the building 
in Indianapolis, IN, which houses the operations of the Circle 
City Station Post Office as the ``Andrew Jacobs, Jr. Post 
Office Building''. The legislation honors Representative Andrew 
Jacobs who served in the House for 30 years. After serving in 
the Marine Corps during the Korean conflict, he received his 
undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Indiana. 
He served in the Indiana State House and was elected to 
represent his district in the 89th Congress through the 104th 
Congress, with a break during the 93rd Congress. During his 
tenure in Congress, he chaired the Social Security Subcommittee 
of the Committee on Ways and Means.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 1057 was introduced by 
Chairman Burton on March 13, 1997, and was cosponsored by the 
House delegation of the State of Indiana. It was referred to 
the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and 
subsequently to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service. The 
subcommittee considered and marked up the bill on April 8, 
1997. H.R. 1057 was amended by the subcommittee to reflect the 
name of the facility, from ``Circle City Station Post Office'' 
to ``Indianapolis Main Post Office''. The legislation, as 
amended, was passed favorably by voice vote by the subcommittee 
and ordered forwarded to the committee for consideration. The 
committee considered and marked up the bill on May 16, 1997, 
and ordered it reported to the House. H.R. 1057 was called up 
by the House under suspension of the rules, and the bill as 
amended was adopted by the House on a Yea-Nay Vote (413-0). The 
bill was received in the Senate and referred to the Committee 
on Governmental Affairs. On October 9, the committee discharged 
the bill and was passed by the Senate on November 9, 1997, by 
unanimous consent. The President signed the legislation on 
November 19, 1997, and it became Public Law No. 105-90.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on the legislation.
6. H.R. 1058, To designate the facility of the United States Postal 
        Service under construction at 150 West Margaret Drive in Terre 
        Haute, Indiana, as the ``John T. Myers Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1058 designates the facility 
of the U.S. Postal Service under construction at 150 West 
Margaret Drive in Terre Haute, IN, as the ``John T. Myers Post 
Office Building''. The legislation honors Representative John 
T. Myers, who was elected by the 7th District of Indiana to 
serve in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 90th Congress 
and served until his retirement following the 104th Congress. 
He served on the Committee on Appropriations, and was chairman 
of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development for 2 
years. He was ranking member of the House Ethics Committee in 
the 1980's, and served as ranking member of the Committee on 
Post Office and Civil Service in 1993 and 1994.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The bill was introduced by 
Chairman Burton on March 13, 1997. It was referred to the House 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on March 13 and 
subsequential to the Subcommittee on Postal Service on March 
14, 1997. The subcommittee considered and marked-up the 
legislation on April 8, 1997, and forwarded it to the full 
committee by voice vote. On May 16, 1997, the committee 
considered and marked-up the legislation and ordered it 
favorably reported by voice vote to the House. The House called 
up the legislation under suspension of the rules on June 17, 
1997, and H.R. 1508 passed the House by Yea-Nay Vote: 416-0 
(Roll No. 205). The legislation was received by the Senate on 
June 18, 1997, and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs. On October 9, 1997, the Senate Committee on 
Governmental Affairs discharged the bill and the Senate passed 
the bill by unanimous consent on November 9, 1997. The 
President signed the legislation on November 19, 1997, and it 
became Public Law No. 105-91.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were on the legislation.
7. H.R. 1231, the ``Post Office Relocation Act of 1997.''
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--This legislation amends title 39, 
United States Code, to establish guidelines for the renovation, 
relocation, closing, or consolidation of post offices, and for 
other purposes. Generally, this legislation addresses the issue 
of emergency closings of post offices. The GAO submitted 
comments on this issue on April 23, 1997.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 1231 was introduced by 
Representative Blumenauer on April 8, 1997. The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
and subsequential referred to the Subcommittee on the Postal 
Service.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were conducted on this 
legislation.
8. H.R. 1254, A bill to designate the United States Post Office 
        building located at Bennett and Kansas Avenue in Springfield, 
        Missouri, as the ``John N. Griesemer Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1254 designated the U.S. Post 
Office building located at Bennett and Kansas Avenue in 
Springfield, MO, as the ``John N. Griesemer Post Office 
Building''. The measure honors John N. Griesemer, a native of 
Missouri who served as an engineering officer in the U.S. Air 
Force from 1954 until 1956. After his discharge from the Air 
Force, he joined his family's business where he served as 
president and as director until his death in 1993. Mr. 
Griesemer also founded and served as director and president of 
several companies in Missouri and was an active participant in 
his community. In 1984, President Reagan named John Griesemer 
to serve on the U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors. He was 
elected chairman of the Board in 1987 and 1988, and served for 
3 years as the Board's vice chairman.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 1254 was introduced by 
Representative Blunt on April 9, 1997, and was supported by all 
members of the House delegation of the State of Missouri. The 
bill was referred to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on 
April 14, 1997, of the committee. The subcommittee considered 
the legislation on June 5, 1997, and amended the legislation to 
reflect the accurate address of the facility, 1919 West Bennett 
Street, which was designated by the city after the legislation 
was introduced. The subcommittee voted on the legislation as 
amended by voice vote and forwarded it to the full committee. 
The House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
discharged the bill and H.R. 1254 was called up by the House 
under suspension of the rules. It was considered by the House 
and the measure passed the House as amended by voice vote on 
September 16, 1997. H.R. 1254 was received in the Senate on 
September 17, 1997, and referred to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs. On November 13, the Senate Committee on 
Governmental Affairs discharged the bill and it passed the 
Senate by unanimous consent the same day and cleared for the 
White House. The President signed the bill on December 2, 1997, 
to become Public Law No. 105-131.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
9. H.R. 1585, A bill to allow postal patrons to contribute to funding 
        for breast cancer research through the voluntary purchase of 
        certain specially issued United States postage stamps.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 1585, the Stamp Out Breast 
Cancer Act, as amended permits postal patrons to contribute to 
funding for breast cancer research through the voluntary 
purchase of specially issued U.S. postal stamps. The rate will 
be determined by the Governors of the Postal Service and 
offered as an alternative to the regular First-Class rate of 
postage. Such rates will be equal to regular First-Class rate 
of postage, plus a differential not to exceed 26 percent of the 
First Class rate. After the sale of specially designated 
stamps, 70 percent of the funds are designated to be available 
for breast cancer research at the National Institutes of Health 
and the remainder to the Department of Defense, payments to be 
made at least twice a year. The Postmaster General is required 
to include information regarding the operation of the act in 
each annual report to the Board of Governors. The act is 
terminated at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the 
date on which the postage stamps are first made available to 
the public. The Comptroller General is required to report to 
Congress regarding the act, no later than 3 months, but not 
earlier than 6 months, before the end of the period covered by 
the act.
    b. Legislative History/Status.--This legislation was 
introduced by Representative Susan Molinari (R-NY) on May 13, 
1997. It was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight, in addition to the Committees on Commerce, and 
National Security, for a period to be determined by the Speaker 
for consideration of the provisions as fall within the 
jurisdiction of the respective committees. On May 19, 1997, the 
legislation was referred to the Subcommittee on the Postal 
Service and on May 21, it was referred to the Committee on 
Commerce, Subcommittee on Health and Environment. H.R. 1585 was 
also referred to the Committee on National Security, 
Subcommittee on Military Readiness on June 5, 1997. The House 
called up the bill under suspension of the rules on July 22, 
1997, and passed the Houses as amended by Subcommittee Chairman 
McHugh by a record vote of 422-3 (Roll No. 299). The Senate 
received the legislation on July 23, 1997, and the measure 
passed the Senate by unanimous consent and it was cleared for 
the White House. The President signed the legislature on August 
13, 1997, to become Public Law No. 105-41.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on the measure.
10. H.R. 2013, To designate the facility of the United States Postal 
        Service located at 551 Kingstown Road in South Kingstown, Rhode 
        Island, as the ``David B. Champagne Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2013 designates the facility 
of the U.S. Postal Service located at 551 Kingstown Road in 
South Kingstown, RI, as the ``David B. Champagne Post Office 
Building''. The bill recognizes the valiant efforts of David B. 
Champagne, a 19 year old Marine, born in Wakefield, RI, and 
after completing high school, joined the Marine Corps and lost 
his life in the Korean conflict after saving the lives of his 
fellow Marines. Corporal Champagne was posthumously awarded the 
Medal of Honor by President Eisenhower for his gallantry above 
the call of duty in action against the enemy.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2013 was introduced by 
Representative Weygand on June 23, 1997, and cosponsored by the 
House delegation from the State of Rhode Island. The bill was 
referred to the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on June 23, 1997, and referred to the Subcommittee on 
the Postal Service on June 26, 1997. The committee considered 
the bill on October 7, 1997, and was favorably ordered reported 
to the House by voice vote. The House called up the bill under 
suspension of the rules on October 21, 1997, and it passed by 
voice vote. H.R. 2013 was received in the Senate on October 22, 
1997, and was passed by the Senate by unanimous consent on 
October 24, 1997. The President signed the bill on November 10, 
1997, becoming Public Law No. 105-70.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
11. H.R. 2015, Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (also known as the Budget 
        Reconciliation bill).
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-149, June 
24, 1997.
    b. Summary of Measure.--This bill provides for 
reconciliation pursuant to subsections (b)(1) and (c) of 
section 105 of the House Concurrent Resolution 84 on the budget 
for fiscal year 1998. The Subcommittee on the Postal Service 
considered legislation repealing the authorization of 
appropriations for transitional expenses to the U.S. Postal 
Service pursuant to 39 U.S.C. Sec. 2004. This section provides 
reimbursement for payments to the employee compensation fund 
based on obligations incurred when the U.S. Postal Service was 
the Post Office Department. Until enactment of H.R. 2015, the 
Postal Service received an annual appropriation of 
approximately $35 million to cover expenses associated with 
workers' compensation liabilities incurred prior to Postal 
Reorganization in 1970.
    This portion of the Budget Reconciliation bill, Section 
6001, does not relieve the Postal Service from having to 
reimburse the Employee Compensation Fund. Under this measure, 
the financial obligations of the former Post Office Department 
pertaining to the Employee Compensation Fund becomes those of 
the U.S. Postal Service and the Postal Service Fund. This 
provision mandates that the Postal Service be required to make 
payments for employees of the former Post Office Department to 
the Department of Labor from its own revenues, without Federal 
reimbursement. Enactment of the legislation will not affect the 
payment made to individuals receiving benefits from the 
Employee Compensation Fund. The measure stipulated that if the 
appropriation for funding the transitional appropriations is 
enacted prior to the enactment of this measure, then the Postal 
Service Fund will reimburse the U.S. Treasury an amount equal 
to the appropriation it has received. In addition, technical 
changes were made in this legislation.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The subcommittee considered 
the proposal and held a markup of the legislation on June 5, 
1997, and favorably ordering it reported to the House Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight, where the measure was 
approved the same day. The committee forwarded the provision to 
the House Committee on the Budget and it was included as 
Section 6001 of H.R. 2015. The Committee on the Budget reported 
the legislation to the House, as report No. 105-149, on June 
24, 1997, and it was called up by special rule and considered 
by the House on June 25, 1997. The measure passed the House as 
amended by a vote of 270-162 (Roll Call Vote No. 240). After 
passing the Senate, the House and Senate agreed to the 
Conference Report and the measure was presented to the 
President who signed H.R. 2015. The legislation became Public 
Law 105-33 on August 5, 1997.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this provision.
12. H.R. 2129, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        150 North 3rd Street in Steubenville, Ohio, as the ``Douglas 
        Applegate Post Office''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2129 designates the U.S. Post 
Office located at 150 North 3rd Street in Steubenville, OH as 
the ``Douglas Applegate Post Office''. Mr. Applegate was 
elected to the 95th Congress by Ohio's 18th Congressional 
District and re-elected each term until his retirement after 
the 103d Congress. Representative Applegate was known as an 
advocate of America's veterans and was the chairman of the 
Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Compensation, Pensions, and 
Insurance.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2129 was introduced by 
Representative Traficant on July 9, 1997, and the bill was 
referred to the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight. On July 15, the legislation was referred to the 
subcommittee on the Postal Service. The committee considered 
the legislation on October 7, 1997, and was ordered to be 
reported by voice vote to the House. The House considered the 
legislation under suspension of the rules on October 21, 1997, 
and it was passed by voice vote. The Senate received the bill 
on October 22, 1997, and referred to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs. The committee ordered the legislation to 
be reported favorably to the Senate on November 5, 1997. On 
November 9, 1997, H.R. 2129 was passed by the Senate by 
unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House. The 
President signed the legislation on November 19, 1997, and it 
became Public Law No. 105-97.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
13. H.R. 2378, Making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
        United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the 
        President, and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal 
        year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.
    a. Report Number and Date.--House Report No. 105-240, 
August 5, 1997. Supplemental report filed September 3, 1997; 
Pt. II. Supplemental report filed September 11, 1997; Pt. III. 
Conference Report filed September 29, 1997; 105-284.
    b. Summary of Measure.--Title II of H.R. 2378, the 
Treasury, Postal Service and General Government Appropriations 
bill relates to payments to the Postal Service Fund for revenue 
foregone on free and reduced rate mail for non-funded 
liabilities. The Postal Service operates on funds generated 
through the sale of its goods and services and has not received 
an appropriation for operating expenses since 1982. The current 
appropriation is directed for specific programs and not 
intended for general postal operation and programs.
    Section 519 of the bill provided that no funds appropriated 
for the U.S. Postal Service under this or any other act may be 
expended by the Postal Service to expand the Global Package 
Link Service [GPL]. This language applied to the current 
appropriations and incorporated by reference the permanent 
appropriation authority contained in title 39 of the United 
States Code section 2401(a), thus violating the Rules of the 
House of Representatives clause 2 of rule XXI, which prohibits 
reporting a provision which changes existing law. Subcommittee 
Chairman McHugh raised a point of order on the House floor, 
which was conceded by Mr. Kolbe, chairman, Subcommittee on 
Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government, Committee on 
Appropriations.
    The subject of the amendment, Global Package Link Service, 
is a specialized bulk shipping service for mail order goods 
which provides international air export parcel delivery service 
for postal customers. These companies rely on the U.S. Postal 
Service to provide timely services to worldwide customers. The 
program is funded solely through ratepayer revenues. GPL's 
enhanced technology is utilized by American companies in 
conducting their business in international markets. These 
companies rely on the U.S. Postal Service to provide timely 
services to worldwide customers. Affected companies, and those 
who do not as yet utilize the service, claim that curtailing 
the program would adversely impact their ability to compete and 
expand in lucrative international markets.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2378 was introduced by 
Mr. Kolbe, chairman, Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, 
and General Government, Committee on Appropriations on August 
5, 1997. The measure was called up as a privileged matter in 
the House on September 17, 1997, and was passed as amended by 
Roll Call Vote No. 403 of 231-192. The measure was passed the 
same day in the Senate, as amended, in lieu of S. 1023. 
Conferences were held and both the Senate and House agreed to 
the conference report and signed the enrolled measure. The 
measure was presented to the President, and became Public Law 
105-61.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were conducted by the 
subcommittee on this legislation.
14. H.R. 2564, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        450 North Centre Street in Pottsville, Pennsylvania, as the 
        ``Peter J. McCloskey Postal Facility''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2564 designates the U.S. Post 
Office located at 450 North Centre Street in Pottsville, PA, as 
the ``Peter J. McCloskey Postal Facility''. The naming of the 
Post Office honors Peter McCloskey, a Pennsylvania native who 
joined the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War II. In 1967, he 
was selected to join the Post Office Department as Acting 
Postmaster of the city of Pottsville and then was appointed 
Postmaster. Mr. McCloskey has been active in the Pottsville 
community for more than 60 years.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2564 was introduced on 
September 26, 1997, by Representative Holden and cosponsored by 
the entire Pennsylvania House delegation. It was referred to 
the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and then 
referred to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on September 
30, 1997. On October 7, 1997, the legislation considered and 
favorably reported to the House by voice vote. The measure was 
called up by the House under suspension of the rules on October 
21, 1997, and it passed the House by voice vote. The Senate 
received the bill on October 22, 1997, and referred it to the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs. The bill was ordered 
reported favorably to the Senate without a report. The 
legislation was passed by the Senate on November 9, 1997, by 
unanimous consent and presented to the President who signed the 
measure into law on November 19, 1997, to become Public Law 
105-99.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this measure.
15. S. 1378, A bill to extend the authorization of use of official mail 
        in the location and recovery of missing children, and for other 
        purposes.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--S. 1378 extends the authorization 
for use of official mail in the location and recovery of 
missing children through December 31, 2002. Authorization was 
initially approved on August 9, 1985, and extended in October 
1992. The present authorization is due to expire at the end of 
1997. The legislation enables Members of Congress to mail a 
photo and description of missing children, as provided by the 
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, in their 
franked mail in efforts to raise public awareness to locate 
these children. Currently, 20 Members use this authority.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--S. 1378 was introduced by 
Senator Warner in the Senate on November 5, 1997, and passed 
the Senate by unanimous consent. On November 6, the House 
received the measure and referred same to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight, and to the Committee on House 
Oversight, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. The 
House called up the legislation under suspension of the rules 
on November 12, 1997, and it passed the House by voice vote. 
The measure was presented to the President on November 19, 
1997, and signed by the President on December 1, 1997, to 
become Public Law 105-126.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
16. H.R. 2348, To redesignate the Federal building located at 701 South 
        Santa Fe Avenue in Compton, California, and known as the 
        Compton Main Post Office, as the ``Mervyn Dymally Post Office 
        Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The bill designates the Federal 
building located at 701 South Santa Fe Avenue in Compton, CA, 
and known as the Compton Main Post Office, as the ``Mervyn 
Dymally Post Office Building''. The legislation honors Mervyn 
Dymally, a former Member of Congress who was born in Cedros, 
Trinidad, British West Indies. He came to the United States of 
America to study at Lincoln University in Jefferson City, MO. 
In 1954, he received his B.A. from California State University, 
Los Angeles, his M.A. from California State University, 
Sacramento, in 1969, and his Ph.D. from the U.S. International 
University in San Diego in 1978. He was a California State 
assemblyman from 1963 to 1966, California State senator from 
1967 to 1975, and lieutenant governor of California from 1975 
to 1979. He chaired the California State Commission for 
Economic Development, and the Commission of the California. Dr. 
Dymally was elected to the 97th Congress and served for five 
succeeding terms. He was not a candidate for reelection in 
1992. He was a member of the Committee on Post Office and Civil 
Service.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The legislation was 
introduced by Representative Millender-McDonald of California 
on July 31, 1997, and was cosponsored by the entire California 
House Delegation, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on 
Government Reform ad Oversight. The bill was referred to the 
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on July 31, 
1997 and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on August 6, 
1997. The measure was called up by the House under suspension 
of the rules on October 7, 1998, and considered as unfinished 
business. H.R. 2348 passed the House by a roll call vote of 
421-1 (Roll No. 492). The bill was received in the Senate on 
October 8, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on the legislation.
17. H.R. 2349, A bill to redesignate the Federal building located at 
        10301 South Compton Avenue, in Los Angeles, California, and 
        known as the Watts Finance Office, as the ``Augustus F. Hawkins 
        Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2349 designates the Federal 
building located at 10301 South Compton Avenue, in Los Angeles, 
CA, and known as the Watts Finance Office, as the ``Augustus F. 
Hawkins Post Office Building''. The legislation honors former 
Member of Congress, Augustus Hawkins who was born in 
Shreveport, LA in 1907. His family moved to Los Angeles in 1918 
to escape racial discrimination and to find better educational 
opportunities. Mr. Hawkins served in the California Legislature 
for 28 years, often as the only African-American member. He 
authored more than 100 laws including those improving child 
care, housing and fair employment. He was elected to the U.S. 
House of Representatives in 1962 and served in each succeeding 
Congress through the 101st. Gus Hawkins served at the chairman 
of the Committee on Education and Labor for four terms. He also 
served as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Elementary, 
Secondary and Vocational Education, as a member of the Joint 
Economic Committee. Mr. Hawkins was chairman of the Committee 
on House Administration from 1981 to 1984. His major 
legislative efforts during his tenure in the U.S. House of 
Representatives and during his public service in California 
were focused on children and education.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The bill was introduced by 
Representative Millender-McDonald on July 31, 1997. It was 
referred to the House Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure on July 31, 1997, and to the Subcommittee on 
Public Buildings and Economic Development on August 14, 1997. 
The House Committee on Transportation discharged the measure on 
October 1, 1998, and it was rereferred to the House Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight. The measure was called up 
by the House under suspension of the rules and passed the House 
by voice vote. It was received in the Senate on October 13, 
1998.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
18. H.R. 2623, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        1625 Highway 603, Kiln, Mississippi as the ``Ray J. Favre Post 
        Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The legislation designates the U.S. 
Post Office located at 16250 Highway 603, in Kiln, MS, as the 
``Ray J. Favre Post Office Building''. Mr. Favre was appointed 
Postmaster of Kiln, in 1940 and served in that position until 
his retirement in 1976. He was known for his prompt, courteous 
and efficient service to all who used the postal facility, and 
was particularly known for providing assistance to those who 
were indigent. The Hancock County Board of Supervisors honored 
Mr. Favre on his retirement by proclaiming it as, ``Ray Favre 
Day''. The Veterans of Foreign Wars [VFW] also honored Mr. 
Favre. He was a member of several civic associations until his 
death in April 1996.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2623 was introduced by 
Representative Taylor of Mississippi on October 7, 1997, and 
was cosponsored by the entire Mississippi House Delegation, 
pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight. The measure was referred to the House Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight on October 7, 1997, and to 
the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on October 10, 1997. The 
subcommittee considered the bill and held a mark-up session on 
July 21, 1998. By voice vote, the subcommittee forwarded the 
measure to the full committee. Committee consideration of the 
bill and mark-up took place on July 23, 1998, and it was 
ordered to be reported by voice vote. H.R. 2623 was called up 
by the House under suspension of the rules on September 9, 1998 
and passed by voice vote. The bill was received in the Senate 
and read twice the next day and referred to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs. On September 24, 1998, the committee 
ordered the bill to be reported favorably without amendment. On 
September 25, 1998, H.R. 2623 was reported to the Senate by 
Senator Thompson without amendment or written report. It was 
placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar No. 649 under general 
orders. The measure was included in the Omnibus Appropriations 
bill which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--None were held on this legislation.
19. H.R. 2766, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        215 East Jackson Street in Painesville, Ohio, as the ``Karl 
        Bernal Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--This bill, designating the U.S. 
Post Office located at 215 East Jackson Street in Painesville, 
OH, as the ``Karl Bernal Post Office Building'', honors Karl 
Bernal, a civic and community leader in Painesville, OH. Mr. 
Bernal was a life member of the National Association for the 
Advancement of Colored People [NAACP] and was president of the 
Lake County Branch for two terms. He was founder of the Lake 
County NAACP Scholarship Program and was a fund-raiser for 
numerous other organizations. Mr. Bernal was a member of the 
Painesville Area Chamber of Commerce and received its 
Outstanding Citizen of the Year award in 1989. He also received 
the distinguished service award of the Lake County Mental 
Health Board, distinguished service award of Lakeland Community 
College, the United Way of Lake County's Good Neighbor Award, 
the United Way of Lake County's Good Neighbor Award, among 
numerous other awards. The Ohio House of Representatives and 
the Ohio Senate recognized his volunteer work and his work in 
mental health services. Mr. Bernal died at the age of 76 after 
a life of service to his community.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2766 was introduced by 
Representative LaTourette on October 29, 1997, and was 
supported by all members of the House delegation of the State 
of Ohio, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the House 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on October 29, 
1997, and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on November 
5, 1997. The committee considered and marked up the bill on 
February 12, 1998, and it was ordered to be reported by voice 
vote. The House called up the bill on February 24, 1998 under 
suspension of the rules and it passed by voice vote. The bill 
was received in the Senate on February 25, 1998, read twice and 
referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On April 1, 
1998, the committee ordered the measure to be reported 
favorably without amendment. Senator Thompson reported the bill 
to the Senate on April 21, 1998, without written report and it 
was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar (No. 338) under 
general orders. The legislation was included in the Omnibus 
Appropriations bill which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on the legislation.
20. H.R. 2773, To designate the facility of the United States Postal 
        Service located at 3750 North Kedzie Avenue in Chicago, 
        Illinois, as the ``Daniel J. Doffyn Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2773 designates the facility 
of the U.S. Postal Service located at 3750 North Kedzie Avenue 
in Chicago, IL, as the ``Daniel J. Doffyn Post Office 
Building''. The legislation honors Daniel J. Doffyn, a 40-year-
old Chicago police officer who was shot to death by gang 
members while he was investigating a routine burglary call. 
Officer Doffyn's long time dream was to be a police officer. 
That opportunity came just 8 months before he was killed.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2773 was introduced on 
October 30, 1997, by Representative Blagojevich and cosponsored 
by all members of the House delegation of the State of Illinois 
pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight. The bill was referred to the House Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight and referred to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on November 5, 1997. The 
committee considered the bill and a mark-up session was held on 
February 12, 1998. The bill was ordered to be reported by voice 
vote. The House called up the legislation under suspension of 
the rules on February 24, 1998. The Senate received H.R. 2773 
on February 25, 1998; it was read twice and referred to the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs. On April 1, 1998, the 
committee ordered it to be reported favorably without 
amendment. On April 21, 1998, Senator Thompson reported the 
bill to the Senate without amendment and without written 
report. It was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar (No. 
337) under general orders. The measure was included in the 
Omnibus Appropriations bill which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this bill.
21. H.R. 2798, To redesignate the building of the United States Postal 
        Service located at 2419 West Monroe Street, in Chicago, 
        Illinois, as the ``Nancy B. Jefferson Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2798 redesignates the building 
of the U.S. Postal Service located at 2419 West Monroe Street, 
in Chicago, IL, as the ``Nancy B. Jefferson Post Office 
Building''. The honoree, Nancy Jefferson, was a community 
organizer who led the fight to ensure equal rights and 
opportunity for all persons, the disabled, welfare recipients, 
single parents, the widowed and the poor. The oldest of 13 
children born to sharecroppers in Paris, TN, she earned degrees 
in library science and social work at Philander Smith College 
in Little Rock, AR. She later moved to Chicago and studied at 
the University of Chicago. Mrs. Jefferson was the president and 
Chief Executive Officer of the Midwest Community Council for 
more than 25 years. She instituted a network of block clubs 
that helped to develop social service programs. The former 
mayor of Chicago, Jane Byrne, appointed Mrs. Jefferson to the 
Chicago Police Board and Governor Jim Edgar appointed her to 
the Illinois Human Rights Commission. Mrs. Jefferson died in 
October 1992 and Governor Edgar set up a scholarship fund for 
minority students in the name of Nancy B. Jefferson.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--This legislation was 
introduced by Representative Davis of Illinois on November 4, 
1997. All the members of the House delegation of the State of 
Illinois cosponsored the bill pursuant to the policy of the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. The bill was 
referred to the committee on November 4, 1997, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on November 12, 1997. The 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight considered the 
bill and held a mark-up session on May 21, 1998; it was ordered 
to be reported by voice vote. The House called up H.R. 2798 on 
June 3, 1998, under suspension of the rules. The measure was 
passed by the House by voice vote. On June 4, 1998, the bill 
was received in the Senate, read twice and referred to the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs. On June 30, 1998, the bill 
was referred to the Subcommittee on International Security. On 
September 24, 1998, the Committee on Governmental Affairs 
ordered the bill to be reported favorably without amendment. On 
September 25, 1998, Senator Thompson reported the bill to the 
Senate without amendment or written report. The bill was placed 
on the Senate Legislative Calendar No. 650 under general 
orders. The measure was included in the Omnibus Appropriations 
bill which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
22. H.R. 2799, To redesignate the building of the United States Postal 
        Service located at 324 South Laramie Street, in Chicago, 
        Illinois, as the ``Reverend Milton R. Brunson Post Office 
        Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2799 redesignates the building 
of the U.S. Postal Service located at 324 South Laramie Street 
in Chicago, IL, as the ``Reverend Milton R. Brunson Post Office 
Building''. The legislation honors Milton R. Brunson, the 
founder of the Thompson Community Singers; he guided group for 
48 years and the singers became known around the world for 
their gospel music. In 1995, Mr. Brunson and the choir won a 
Grammy Award for ``Through God's Eyes.'' Mr. Brunson demanded 
that all members of his choir, in addition to being singers, 
must be productive citizens and positive role models for 
others--many of whom have become lawyers, judges, teachers and 
doctors. Reverend Brunson also served as Pastor and music 
director of the 22,500 member Christ Tabernacle Baptist Church 
until his death on April 1, 1997.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2799 was introduced by 
Representative Davis of Illinois on November 4, 1997, and 
cosponsored by all members of the House delegation from the 
State of Illinois, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the 
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on November 
4, 1997, and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on 
November 12, 1997. The committee considered the bill and held a 
mark-up session on May 21, 1998, and the bill was ordered to be 
reported by voice vote. The House called up H.R. 2799 under 
suspension of the rules on June 3, 1998, and it passed by voice 
vote. The Senate received the bill on June 4, 1998; it was read 
twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On 
June 30, 1998, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on 
International Security. The Committee on Governmental Affairs 
ordered the bill to be reported favorably without amendment on 
September 24, 1998, and it was reported to the Senate by 
Senator Thompson without amendment and without written report. 
The bill was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar (No. 
657) under general orders. The legislation was included in the 
Omnibus Appropriations bill which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--None were held on this legislation.
23. H.R. 2836, To designate the building of the United States Postal 
        Service located at 180 East Kellogg Boulevard in Saint Paul, 
        Minnesota, as the ``Eugene J. McCarthy Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 2836 designates the building 
of the U.S. Postal Service located at 180 East Kellogg 
Boulevard in Saint Paul, MN, as the ``Eugene J. McCarthy Post 
Office Building''. Eugene J. McCarthy served as both a U.S. 
Representative and as a Senator from Minnesota for more than 
two decades. He was elected to Congress by Minnesota's 4th 
District in 1948 and served his district in the House for 10 
years. He was then elected to the U.S. Senate, where he served 
until 1970. He declared his candidacy for the Democrat 
nomination for President of the United States in 1968 while he 
was still in the Senate. He called for an immediate withdrawal 
of all U.S. troops in Vietnam, the first anti-war candidate.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 2836 was introduced by 
Representative Vento on November 6, 1997, and cosponsored by 
all the members of the Minnesota House delegation, pursuant to 
the policy of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. 
The bill was referred to the House Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight on November 6, 1998, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on November 14, 1998. On 
February 12, 1998, the committee considered the bill and held a 
mark-up session. The legislation was ordered to be reported by 
voice vote. The House called up the bill on February 24, 1998, 
under suspension of the rules and the bill passed by voice 
vote. The Senate received the bill on February 25, 1998; it was 
read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs. On April 1, 1998, the committee ordered the bill to be 
reported favorably without amendment. On April 21, Senator 
Thompson reported H.R. 2836 to the Senate without amendment and 
without written report. The bill was placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar (No. 339) under general orders.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
24. H.R. 3120, To designate the United States Post Office located at 95 
        West 100 South Street in Provo, Utah, as the ``Howard C. 
        Nielson Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3120 designates the U.S. Post 
Office located at 95 West 100 South Street in Provo, UT, as the 
Howard C. Nielson Post Office Building''. The naming of the 
post office honors Howard C. Nielson who was elected by the 
newly created Third Congressional District of Utah in 1982. He 
served in Congress until 1991 when he voluntarily resigned. Mr. 
Nielson also served in the U.S. Air Force from 1943 until 1946. 
He earned his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of 
Utah in 1947, his Master of Science at the University of Oregon 
in 1949, and his MBA and Ph.D. from Stanford in 1956 and 1958, 
respectively. He worked as an economist at Stanford Research 
Institute and then became a professor at Brigham Young 
University. Mr. Nielson started his political career in 1960 
when he was elected to the Utah State House. He became majority 
leader in 1971 and speaker in 1973. As a statistician and an 
economist, Mr. Nielson was a valuable member of the House 
Committee on Energy and Commerce and served on the 
Subcommittees on Health and the Environment; Energy and Power; 
and Commerce, Consumer Protection and Competitiveness. He was 
well known for his work on the problem of waste dumping by 
Amtrak and he urged the railroad to take corrective measures. 
In the 99th Congress, Representative Nielson also served on the 
Government Operations Committee and was ranking member of the 
Government Activities and Transportation Subcommittee. He was 
active on issues regarding trade, natural resources, 
deregulation of the broadcast, telephone and natural gas 
industries, commercial interests of the motion picture industry 
and Wall Street financing practices. Representative Nielson 
decided not to run for Congressional office after his fourth 
term. He and Mrs. Nielson went, instead, to Australia for a 
year where they served as missionaries for the Church of the 
Latter-day Saints.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 3120 was introduced by 
Representative Cannon on January 28, 1998, and was cosponsored 
by all members of the Utah House delegation, pursuant to 
committee policy. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on January 28, 1998, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on February 2, 1998. The 
committee considered and marked up the legislation on February 
12. The bill was amended to reflect the correct address and was 
reported by voice vote. The House called up H.R. 3120 under 
suspension of the rules and passed it by voice vote, as 
amended. The bill was received in the Senate on February 25, 
1998, read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs. On April 1, 1998, the committee ordered the bill 
reported favorably without amendment. Senator Thompson reported 
the bill to the Senate on April 21, 1998, without amendment and 
without written report. It was placed on the the Senate 
Legislative Calendar (No. 340) under general orders. The 
measure was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill which 
became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
25. H.R. 3167, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        297 Larkfield Road in East Northport, New York, as the ``Jerome 
        Anthony Ambro, Jr. Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3167 designates the U.S. Post 
Office located at 297 Larkfield Road in East Northport, NY, as 
the ``Jerome Anthony Ambro, Jr., Post Office Building''. The 
bill honors Jerome Anthony Ambro, Jr., a life-long New Yorker 
who was elected to Congress in 1974 and served three terms 
representing the Third District of New York after serving four 
terms as Huntington Town Supervisor and as a member of the 
Suffolk County Board of Supervisors. Representative Ambro was 
elected leader of the 82 freshman members who were elected 
after Watergate. He served as chairman of the House 
Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Environment and was known 
for his work for senior citizens, strengthening Social Security 
and for his role in passing the clean air and clean water 
legislation. Mr. Ambro died at the age of 64 in 1993.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 3167 was introduced by 
Representative Ackerman on February 5, 1998, and supported by 
all members of the House delegation from the State of New York, 
pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight. The measure was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on February 5, 1998, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on February 9, 1998. The 
subcommittee considered and marked-up the bill on July 21, 
1998, and forwarded to the full committee by voice vote. 
Committee consideration and mark-up session was held on July 
23, 1998, and H.R. 3167 was ordered to be reported by voice 
vote. The House called up the bill under suspension of the 
rules on September 9, 1998, and it passed by voice vote. The 
Senate received H.R. 3167 on September 10, 1998; it was read 
twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. 
The legislation was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill 
which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
26. H.R. 3630, To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal 
        Service located at 9719 Candelaria Road NE. in Albuquerque, New 
        Mexico, as the ``Steven Schiff Post Office''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3630 was introduced by 
Chairman Burton on April 1, 1998. The legislation designates 
the facility of the U.S. Postal Service located at 9719 
Candelaria Road NE. in Albuquerque, NM, as the ``Steven Schiff 
Post Office''. (The subcommittee amended the bill to read 
``Steve Schiff'' as he was known by his colleagues, friends and 
constituents.) Steven Harvey Schiff was born in Chicago and he 
earned his undergraduate degree from the University of 
Illinois. He earned his law degree from the University of New 
Mexico Law School. He was admitted to the bar and stayed in New 
Mexico to become the assistant district attorney of Bernalillo 
County for 2 years. He then became a trial attorney but 
returned to public service as an assistant city attorney, 
counsel for the Albuquerque police department and district 
attorney of Bernalillo County for 8 years. He earned the 
reputation of being tough on crime and going by the book. He 
served in the New Mexico Air National Guard and was an Air 
Force Reserves colonel. During the Persian Gulf crisis in 1991, 
he performed legal duties for military reservists. In 1996, he 
served for several days in the Bosnia theater as a judge 
advocate general involved in international legal matters. Mr. 
Schiff was elected by the First District of New Mexico to the 
101st Congress and to three succeeding Congresses. 
Representative Schiff was a member of several committees: 
Ethics, Judiciary (on which he served as vice chair, 
Subcommittee on Crime), Science (serving as chair of the 
Subcommittee on Basic Research), and Government Reform and 
Oversight. Representative Steve Schiff died of skin cancer at 
the age of 51 in March 1998.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The bill was introduced by 
Chairman Burton on April 1, 1998. Pursuant to the policy of the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, the legislation 
is cosponsored by all the members of the New Mexico delegation, 
though the sponsor of the bill is from Indiana. The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on 
April 1, 1998, and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on 
April 7, 1998. The committee considered and marked-up the bill 
on May 21, 1998 and ordered it to be reported as amended by 
voice vote. H.R. 3630 was called up by the House under 
suspension of the rules and considered as unfinished business. 
The bill as amended passed by a vote of 391-0 (Roll No. 195). 
H.R. 3630 was received in the Senate on June 4, 1998, read 
twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On 
June 30, 1998, it was referred to the Subcommittee on 
International Security. The Committee on Governmental Affairs 
ordered the measure to be reported favorably without amendment 
on September 24, 1998. The following day, Senator Thompson 
reported H.R. 3630 to the Senate without amendment and without 
written report. It was placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar No. 651. The measure was included in the Omnibus 
Appropriations bill which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
27. H.R. 3725, To make the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 
        applicable to the United States Postal Service in the same 
        manner as any other employer.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3725, the Postal Service 
Health and Safety Promotion Act, amends the Occupational Safety 
and Health Act [OSHA] of 1970 to apply it to the U.S. Postal 
Service in the same manner as any other employer. When OSHA was 
enacted in 1970, the Postal Service was still a Federal agency 
and, as such, was not subject to OSHA enforcement in the same 
manner as private employers. The Postal Service is now a quasi-
public agency, but it still enjoys Federal agency status under 
section 19 of OSHA, despite the fact that it competes with 
private sector companies. OSHA conducted about 237 inspections 
on the 40,000 Postal Service facilities from February 1996 to 
February 1997. However, neither the Department of Labor nor the 
OSHA have the legal authority to require the Postal Service to 
comply with OSHA requirements and is incapable of penalizing 
the Postal Service in the same manner as penalizing private 
employers. H.R. 3725 permits OSHA to use its enforcement 
tools--citations and penalties--to ensure safety and health in 
the postal environment.
    The issue of improving the health and safety of postal 
workers is not new to Congress. Bipartisan legislation, known 
as the Federal and Postal Service Employees Occupational Safety 
and Health Act of 1994, passed the Committee on Post Office and 
Civil Service in 1994 and was placed on the Union Calendar but 
did not come to a vote before the end of the term.
    The statistics from the Department of Labor's Office of 
Workers' Compensation Programs show that the U.S. Postal 
Service with 858,392 employees had a total of 78,671 cases of 
illness or injury (a 9.16 percent total injury rate), resulting 
in a 3.78 percent lost time rate representing 42 percent of the 
Government's lost time cases. The Postal Service has among the 
highest workers compensation costs under the Federal Employees 
Compensation Act [FECA]; the chargeback cost was $547 million, 
or 48 percent of the entire Government's claim. Postal employee 
unions have often blamed the lack of OSHA enforcement for the 
high costs. There is room for improvement in the Postal 
Service's accident and injury prevention efforts. The U.S. 
Department of Labor expressed concern about the situation and 
welcomed the additional tools that H.R. 3725 would provide to 
improve occupational safety and health in the Postal Service. 
This legislation would allow OSHA to enforce its regulations in 
all Postal Service facilities.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 3725 was introduced by 
Representative Greenwood on April 23, 1998. The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and 
in addition to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. The 
bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections 
of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. Subcommittee 
hearings were held on April 29, 1998, and the subcommittee held 
a mark-up session on May 14, 1998. The subcommittee amended the 
bill and forwarded it to the full committee by voice vote. The 
Committee on Education and the Workforce considered the bill 
and held a mark-up session on June 10, 1998. H.R. 3725 was 
referred to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on April 28, 
1998. The subcommittee considered the bill and marked it up on 
July 21, 1998, and forwarded it as amended to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. The committee ordered the bill 
to be reported as amended by voice vote on July 23, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
28. H.R. 3808, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        47526 Clipper Drive in Plymouth, Michigan as the ``Carl D. 
        Pursell Post Office''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The bill designates the U.S. Post 
Office located at 47526 Clipper Drive in Plymouth, MI, at the 
``Carl D. Pursell Post Office''. This legislation honors former 
Representative Carl D. Pursell who was elected to the 95th 
Congress and was reelected to represent the Second 
Congressional District of Michigan for seven succeeding terms, 
from 1977 to 1992. Carl Pursell was born in Imlay City, MI. 
After receiving his bachelor's degree from Eastern Michigan 
University, he served in the U.S. Army for 2 years and then 
earned his master's degree. He served on the Wayne County, MI, 
Board of Commissioners and then in the Michigan Senate from 
1971 to 1976. Mr. Pursell also had experience as a teacher, a 
publisher and owned a real estate firm. During his terms as a 
Member of Congress, Mr. Pursell served on the Appropriations 
Committee and the Committee on Official Conduct. Mr. Pursell 
lives in Plymouth, MI where he has lived all his life.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--The bill was introduced on 
May 7, 1998, by Representative Upton. Each member of the House 
delegation from the State of Michigan cosponsored H.R. 3808. 
The legislation was referred to the House Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on May 7, 1998, and referred to 
the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on May 12, 1998. 
Committee mark-up was held on the bill on May 21 1998, and it 
was ordered to be reported as amended. The amendment simply 
corrected the address from ``Clipper Drive'' to ``Clipper''. 
The House called up the bill under suspension of the rules on 
June 3, 1998. It was considered by the House as unfinished 
business and then passed the House as amended by the committee 
by a 389-0 (Roll No. 194). The bill was received in the Senate 
on June 4, 1998, and read twice and referred to the Committee 
on Governmental Affairs. On June 30, 1998, it was referred to 
the Subcommittee on International Security. The Committee on 
Governmental Affairs ordered the bill to be reported favorably 
without amendment on September 24, 1998. On September 25, 1998, 
the Committee on Governmental Affairs reported the measure 
without amendment and without a written report. It was placed 
on the Senate Legislative Calender (No. 652) under general 
orders.
    c. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
29. H.R. 3810, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        202 Center Street in Garwood, New Jersey, as the ``James T. 
        Leonard, Sr. Post Office''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The bill designates the U.S. Post 
Office located at 202 Center Street in Garwood, NJ, as the 
``James T. Leonard, Sr. Post Office''. This legislation honors 
Mr. Leonard who was born in 1911. He joined the U.S. Navy 
during World War II. He was among the founding members of the 
Garwood First Aid Squad, serving as its president for 38 years 
and serving as a member of the Garwood Fire Department for 38 
years. Mr. Leonard had extensive association with Garwood 
including as a Special Police Officer of the Borough of Garwood 
for 4 years, recorder, Magistrate and judge of Garwood 
Municipal Court. He was the last non-lawyer municipal court 
judge in the State of New Jersey and one of the longest serving 
municipal court judges in the State. Mr. Leonard died on August 
15, 1991.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 3810 was introduced by 
Representative Bob Franks of New Jersey on May 7, 1998. This 
legislation was cosponsored by all members of the delegation 
from the State of New Jersey, pursuant to the policy of the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. On May 7, 1998, 
the bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight and on May 12, 1998 it was referred to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service. The subcommittee held a 
mark-up session on July 21, 1998 and the bill was forwarded to 
full committee by voice vote. The committee marked up the bill 
on July 23, 1998 and ordered it to be reported by voice vote. 
The House called up the bill under suspension of the rules and 
the measure passed by voice vote on September 9, 1998. The 
Senate received H.R. 3810 on September 10, 1998; it was read 
twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On 
September 24, 1998, the committee ordered the bill to be 
reported favorably without amendment. It was reported to the 
Senate on September 25, 1998, by Senator Thompson without 
amendment and without written report and placed on the Senate 
Legislative Calendar (No. 653) under general orders. The 
legislation was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill 
which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
30. H.R. 3846, To designate the post office located at 203 West Paige 
        Street, in Tompkinsville, Kentucky, as the ``Tim Lee Carter 
        Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--The bill designates the post office 
located at 203 West Paige Street, in Tompkinsville, KY, as the 
``Tim Lee Carter Post Office Building''. The legislation honors 
the late Representative Tim Lee Carter who was elected to serve 
his district as a Republican Member in the 89th Congress and to 
seven succeeding terms, from 1965 to 1981. He was not a 
candidate for the 97th Congress. Mr. Carter was born in 
Tompkinsville, Monroe County, KY in 1910. After completing his 
undergraduate education in Kentucky, he earned his medical 
degree from the University of Tennessee. Dr. Carter volunteered 
for military service and was a combat medic for 3\1/2\ years 
during World War II, serving as a Captain in the 38th Infantry 
Division. He returned to practice medicine in Monroe County 
from 1940 to 1964. Representative Carter, upon his election to 
Congress, was the first Republican Member to seek withdrawal of 
our troops from Vietnam, but never wavered in his support for 
American troops. He was well-known in Kentucky for his efforts 
to improve one of the poorest districts in the Nation, working 
tirelessly for better schools, water systems, libraries, 
airports, roads and recreation. He was the only practicing 
physician in Congress for much of his tenure in the House. Most 
of the legislation he worked on affected health and hospitals. 
He considered his major legislative achievement the law that 
provided preventive medical care for poor children. He was one 
of the earliest advocates of national insurance for 
catastrophic illness. Representative Carter died in Kentucky in 
1987 and is interred in Tompkinsville.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Whitfield 
introduced H.R. 3864 on May 13, 1998. All members of the House 
delegation from the State of Kentucky, pursuant to the policy 
of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, 
cosponsored the bill. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on May 13, 1998, and referred 
to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on May 20, 1998. The 
measure was called up by the House under suspension of the 
rules and passed by voice vote on October 5, 1998. H.R. 3864 
was received in the Senate on October 6, 1998. This legislation 
was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill which became 
Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--None were held on this legislation.
31. H.R. 3939, To designate the United States Postal Service building 
        located at 658 63rd Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the 
        ``Edgar C. Campbell, Sr., Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3939, sponsored by 
Representative Fattah, designates the U.S. Postal Service 
building located at 658 63rd Street, Philadelphia, PA, as the 
``Edgar C. Campbell, Sr., Post Office Building''. Mr. Campbell 
Sr., was elected to five terms of city-wide office in 
Philadelphia beginning in 1967 as Councilman-At-Large, and 
continuing in 1975 as Clerk of Quarter Sessions Court for three 
terms. Mr. Campbell was the recipient of numerous honors and 
recognitions.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 3939 was introduced by 
Representative Fattah on May 21, 1998, and cosponsored by the 
entire House delegation from the State of Pennsylvania, 
pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on May 21, 1998, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on May 29, 1998. The 
subcommittee held a mark-up session on the legislation on July 
21, 1998, and forwarded it to the committee by voice vote. On 
July 23, 1998, the committee held a mark-up session and ordered 
the measure to be reported by voice vote. On September 9, 1998, 
the House called up the bill under suspension of the rules and 
it passed the House by voice vote. The Senate received the bill 
on September 10, 1998; it was read twice and referred to the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs. On September 24, 1998, the 
committee ordered the bill to be reported favorably without 
amendment. Senator Thompson, on September 25, 1998, reported 
the bill to the Senate without written report. The bill was 
placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar (No. 654) under 
general orders. The legislation was included in the Omnibus 
Appropriations bill which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this measure.
32. H.R. 3999, To designate the United States Postal Service building 
        located at 5209 Greene Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as 
        the ``David P. Richardson, Jr., Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 3999 designates the U.S. 
Postal Service building located at 5209 Greene Street, 
Philadelphia, PA, as the ``David P. Richardson, Jr., Post 
Office Building''. David Richardson was an 11th term member of 
the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, representing the 
201st District, when he died in 1995. He served on numerous 
community and professional organization during his lifetime, 
including the Urban League of Philadelphia, National 
Association of State Legislators, and the Greater Germantown 
Youth Corp., and he was the recipient of numerous awards and 
honors.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Mr. Fattah introduced H.R. 
3999 on June 5, 1998. The entire House delegation of the State 
of Pennsylvania cosponsored the measure, pursuant to the policy 
of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. The bill 
was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on June 5, 1998, and to the Subcommittee on the 
Postal Service on June 11, 1998. The subcommittee marked-up the 
legislation on July 21, 1998, and forwarded it to the committee 
by voice vote. The committee held a mark-up session on July 23, 
1998, and ordered it to be reported by voice vote. On September 
9, 1998, the House called up the legislation under suspension 
of the rules and it passed the House by voice vote. The bill 
was received in the Senate on September 10, 1998, read twice 
and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On 
September 24, 1998, the committee ordered H.R. 3999 to be 
reported favorably without amendment. Senator Thompson reported 
the measure to the Senate on September 25, 1998, without 
amendment and without written report. It was placed on the 
Senate Legislative Calendar (No. 655) under general orders. The 
legislation was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill 
which became Public Law 105-277.
33. H.R. 4000, To designate the United States Postal Service building 
        located at 400 Edgmont Avenue, Chester, Pennsylvania, as the 
        ``Thomas P. Foglietta Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4000 designates the U.S. 
Postal Service Building located at 4000 Edgmont Avenue, 
Chester, PA, as the ``Thomas P. Foglietta Post Office 
Building''. Mr. Foglietta commenced his career as a public 
servant by serving in the Philadelphia City Council. He then 
represented Pennsylvania's First Congressional District for 
almost nine terms. Representative Foglietta developed an 
expertise in foreign affairs, serving on the House Foreign 
Affairs Committee. He was also a member on the House 
Appropriation's Transportation Subcommittee and ranking member 
on the Subcommittee on Military Construction. Representative 
Foglietta was nominated and unanimously approved as Ambassador 
to Italy in 1997 where he is currently posted.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4000 was introduced by 
Representative Fattah on June 5, 1998. The legislation was 
cosponsored by each member of the House delegation of the State 
of Pennsylvania, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on June 5, 1998, 
and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on June 11, 1998. 
The subcommittee marked-up the legislation on July 21, 1998. 
The bill was amended to correct the middle initial of Thomas 
Foglietta's name from ``P'' to ``M''. The bill was forwarded as 
amended by the subcommittee to the committee by voice vote. The 
committee considered and marked up H.R. 4000, on July 23, 1998, 
ordering it to be reported as amended by voice vote. The House 
called up the legislation under suspension of the rules on 
October 5, 1998, passing as amended by voice vote. H.R. 4000 
was received in the Senate on October 6, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
34. H.R. 4001, To designate the United States Postal Service building 
        located at 2601 North 16th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 
        as the ``Roxanne H. Jones Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4002 designates the U.S. 
Postal Service building located at 2601 North 16th Street, 
Philadelphia, PA, as the ``Roxanne H. Jones Post Office 
Building''. In 1984, Roxanne H. Jones was the first African-
American woman elected to the State Senate in Pennsylvania. She 
was reelected to two more terms before her untimely death in 
1997. Since 1950, Ms. Jones was a leader in the struggle to 
improve the lives of people. She was involved in numerous 
community and professional organizations, including the 
founding of the Philadelphia Citizens in Action, National 
Welfare Rights Organization and the Philadelphia Commission on 
Human Relations. Senator Jones was committed to improving the 
conditions of those citizens who were on welfare. As a former 
welfare recipient, Senator Jones was an example of personal 
achievement through hard work, high goals and a strong 
commitment. During her tenure in the State Senate, she helped 
pass legislation that helped people break the cycle of welfare 
dependency by supporting legislation that provided job training 
opportunities, introducing and passing legislation to expand 
affordable housing and obtaining State funding for drug 
treatment centers for addicted mothers and their children. The 
post office is located in her former Senatorial district.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Fattah 
introduced the bill on June 5, 1998. It was cosponsored by the 
entire House delegation from the State of Pennsylvania, 
pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on June 5, 1998, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on June 11, 1998. The 
subcommittee marked-up H.R. 4001 on July 21, 1998 and forwarded 
it to the committee by voice vote. The committee considered and 
marked-up the legislation on July 23, 1998, and ordered it to 
be reported. On October 5, 1998, the House called up the 
legislation under suspension of the rules, and it passed by 
voice vote. The bill was received by the Senate on October 6, 
1998.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this bill.
35. H.R. 4002, To designate the United States Postal Service building 
        located at 5300 West Jefferson Street, Philadelphia, 
        Pennsylvania, as the ``Freeman Hankins Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4002 designates the U.S. 
Postal Service building located at 5300 West Jefferson Street, 
Philadelphia, PA, as the ``Freeman Hankins Post Office 
Building''. Freeman Hankins was first elected to the 
Pennsylvania House of Representatives in 1961. He was then 
elected to the Pennsylvania Senate in 1967 and served with 
distinction until his retirement in 1989. Senator Hankins was 
the sponsor of legislation that made Dr. Martin Luther King's 
birthday a State holiday. Additionally, Senator Hawkins served 
on the boards of the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance 
Agency, the Pennsylvania Minority Business Development Agency, 
Lincoln University and was a board member of the Mercy Douglas 
Corp. He was also the recipient of many awards and honors.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4002 was introduced by 
Representative Fattah on June 5, 1998, and cosponsored by all 
members of the House delegation of the State of Pennsylvania, 
pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government Reform 
and Oversight. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on June 5, 1998, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on June 11, 1998. The 
subcommittee held a mark-up session on the legislation on July 
21, 1998, and forwarded it to the committee by voice vote. The 
committee marked-up the bill on July 23, 1998, and ordered it 
to be reported. The bill was called up by the House under 
suspension of the rules on September 15, 1998, and H.R. 4002 
passed the House by voice vote. On September 16, 1998, the bill 
was received in the Senate, read twice and referred to the 
Committee on Governmental Affairs.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were conducted on this 
legislation.
36. H.R. 4003, To designate the United States Postal Service building 
        located at 2037 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as 
        the ``Max Weiner Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4003 designates the U.S. 
Postal Service building located at 2037 Chestnut Street, 
Philadelphia, PA, as the ``Max Weiner Post Office Building''. 
Max Weiner was the founder of the Consumers Education and 
Protective Association and the Independent Consumer Party. As a 
tireless advocate for consumer rights and protections, Mr. 
Weiner fought and won many battles that helped Pennsylvanians 
keep their homes, heat their homes, protect their privacy and 
have greater access to mass transportation.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Fattah 
introduced H.R. 4003 on June 5, 1998, and the legislation was 
cosponsored by all members of the House delegation of the State 
of Pennsylvania, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on June 5, 1998, 
and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on June 11, 1998. 
The subcommittee marked-up the bill on July 21, 1998, and 
forwarded it to the committee by voice vote. The committee 
marked-up H.R. 4003 on July 23, 1998, and ordered it to be 
reported. The House called up the bill on September 15, 1998, 
under suspension of the rules and the measure passed by voice 
vote. The Senate received the bill on September 16, 1998. It 
was read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
37. H.R. 4052, To establish designations for United States Postal 
        Service buildings located in Coconut Grove, Opa Locka, Carol 
        City, and Miami, Florida.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4052 introduced by 
Representative Meek of Florida establishes designations for 
U.S. Postal Service buildings located in Coconut Grove, Opa 
Locka, Carol City, and Miami, FL.
    Section 1 of the legislation designates the U.S. Postal 
Service building located at 3191 Grand Avenue in Coconut Grove, 
FL, be known and designated as the ``William R. `Billy' Rolle 
Post Office Building'' honoring William Rolle who dedicated his 
life to teaching and coaching in-school and out-of-school 
youth. He served as teacher, football and track coach, band 
instructor, assistant principal and superintendent for 
community education.
    Section 2 of the bill designates the U.S. Postal Service 
building located at 550 Fisherman Street in Opa Locka, FL, be 
known as the Helen Miller Post Office Building''. This section 
honors the first African-American woman to be elected to the 
Opa Locka City Commission in 1981 and, in 1982, she was the 
first African-American woman elected to become mayor of Dade 
County. Helen Miller was motivated by fair play and justice. 
She served on about 40 different non-profit community boards. 
The many years of political activism made her the elder 
statesperson of Opa Locka and Miami-Dade County's political 
community.
    Section 3 of the bill designates the U.S. Postal Service 
building located at 18690 N.W. 37th Avenue in Carol City, FL, 
be known as the ``Esse Silva Post Office Building''. Esse Silva 
chaired the Governmental Affairs Committee for the Miami-Dade 
Chamber for many years. She was a pioneer and matriarch of 
American business development for south Florida. Her legacy 
lives on through scholarships, contests and awards established 
in her honor.
    Section 4 of H.R. 4052 designates the U.S. Postal Service 
building located at 500 North West 2d Avenue in Miami, FL, as 
the ``Athalie Range Post Office Building''. Ms. Range started 
her career in public service as the P.T.A. President of Liberty 
City Elementary School for 16 years. She also served as the 
president of the County P.T.A. Athalie Range was the first 
African-American and the second woman to be elected city 
commissioner for the Miami City Commission; she served for 5\1/
2\ years. Ms. Range was the first African-American appointed as 
a Department Head in the State of Florida. She received more 
than 160 honors and awards for her dedication to the 
improvement of society.
    Section 5 of the bill designates the U.S. Postal Service 
building located at 995 North West 119th Street, Miami, FL, be 
known as the ``Garth Reeves, Sr. Post Office Building''. Garth 
Reeves, Sr., served south Florida for more than 50 years. He 
received his B.S. degree in printing at Florida A&M University 
and has been a reporter, editor, publisher, banker, 
entrepreneur, community activist and humanitarian since 1940. 
He has earned service awards from many institutions of higher 
education, having served as vice chairman of the Miami-Dade 
Community College board of trustees, trustee of Barry 
University, Bethune-Cookman College, and Florida Memorial 
College. Florida A&M University has a scholarship in his name 
that provides support for the education of aspiring 
journalists. Currently, Mr. Reeves is owner and publisher 
emeritus of the Miami Times, a newspaper founded in 1923 by his 
father.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Representative Meek of 
Florida introduced H.R. 4052 on June 11, 1998. The legislation 
was cosponsored by all members of the House delegation of the 
State of Florida, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on June 11, 1998, 
and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on June 17, 1998. 
The subcommittee marked-up the bill on July 21, 1998, and it 
was forwarded to the committee by voice vote. The committee 
held a mark-up session on July 23 and the bill was ordered to 
be reported by voice vote. The House called up the measure 
under suspension of the rules on October 9, 1998. It was 
considered by the House as unfinished business. The House 
passed the bill, as amended, by voice vote. The amendment 
simply reflects the correct spelling of ``Esse Silva'' to 
``Essie Silva'' in each instance it appears in the bill. The 
bill was received in the Senate on October 9, 1998. The 
legislation was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill 
which became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--None were held on this bill.
38. H.R. 4516, To designate the United States Postal Service building 
        located at 11550 Livingston Road, in Oxon Hill, Maryland, as 
        the ``Jacob Joseph Chestnut Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4516 designates the U.S. 
Postal Service building located at 1150 Livingston Road, in 
Oxon Hill, MD, as the ``Jacob Joseph Chestnut Post Office 
Building''. The bill honors Officer Jacob Joseph ``J.J.'' 
Chestnut who was assassinated on Capitol Hill on July 24, 1998, 
in the line of duty in the U.S. Capitol. Officer Chestnut was a 
veteran of the U.S. Air Force and was just a few years away 
from retirement from the U.S. Capitol Police. The post office 
being named in his honor is located in the area where his 
friends and family reside.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4516 was introduced by 
Representative Wynn on August 6, 1998. The legislation is 
cosponsored by the entire House delegation from the State of 
Maryland, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight on August 6, 1998, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on August 17, 1998. The 
legislation was called up by the House under suspension of the 
rules on October 9, 1998, and was passed by the House by voice 
vote. The bill was received in the Senate on October 10, 1998. 
This bill was included in the Omnibus Appropriations bill which 
became Public Law 105-277.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
39. H.R. 4616, To designate the United States Post Office located at 
        3813 Main Street in East Chicago, Indiana, as the ``Corporal 
        Harold Gomez Post Office''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--H.R. 4616 designates the U.S. Post 
Office located at 3813 Main Street in East Chicago, IN, as the 
``Corporal Harold Gomez Post Office''. The bill honors Harold 
Gomez, who enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps soon after 
graduating from high school. Corporal Gomez was a fire team 
leader in a rifle company of the Third Marine Division when, in 
1967, he was killed by a land mine explosion in South Vietnam. 
He received numerous awards, including the Purple Heart Medal, 
Combat Action Ribbon, Residential Unit Citation, National 
Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, RVN Military 
Merit Medal, RVN Gallantry Cross Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal, 
and the Rifle Sharpshooters Badge. Corporal Gomez was 
posthumously awarded the Silver Star Medal for his courageous 
leadership and heroism. Harold Gomez was the first citizen from 
Northwest Indiana to die in the Vietnam War.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--H.R. 4616 was introduced by 
Representative Visclosky on September 23, 1998, and was 
supported by all members of the House delegation of the State 
of Indiana, pursuant to the policy of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight. The bill was referred to the 
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on September 
23, 1998, and to the Subcommittee on the Postal Service on 
October 13, 1998. The legislation was called up by the House 
under suspension of the rules on October 7, 1998; the House 
passed it by a Yea-Nay vote: 425-0 (Roll No. 491). H.R. 4616 
was received in the Senate on October 8, 1998.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this measure.
40. S. 916, To designate the United States Post Office building located 
        at 750 Highway 28 East in Taylorsville, Mississippi, be known 
        as the ``Blaine H. Eaton Post Office Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--S. 916 designates the U.S. Post 
Office building located at 750 Highway 28 East in Taylorsville, 
MS, as the ``Blaine H. Eaton Post Office Building''. The 
legislation honors Blaine Eaton, a native of Smith County, MS. 
He was named Alumni of the Year of Jones Junior College which 
he attended in 1930; he also attended the University of 
Mississippi and George Washington Law School. Mr. Eaton started 
his professional career as a farmer and cotton buyer. He was 
executive secretary to U.S. Senator James O. Eastland before 
joining the U.S. Navy from 1944 to 1946. After returning from 
World War II, he was elected to the Mississippi State House of 
Representatives where he served for 12 years. He was 
instrumental in passing Farm-to-Market legislation which is 
still benefiting the State. Mr. Eaton left public office in 
1958 and went to work in the private sector where he was 
recognized for his outstanding service. He retired from his 
professional career in 1982 but remained active in community 
service. Mr. Eaton taught Sunday School classes for 25 years at 
the first Baptist Church of Taylorsville where he was a member 
until his death in 1995.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--S. 916 was introduced by 
Senator Cochran on June 17, 1997, read twice and referred to 
the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On October 9, 1997, the 
committee discharged the bill by unanimous consent and it 
passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent. A 
message on the Senate action was sent to the House on October 
21, 1997. On the same date, S. 916 was referred to the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on October 22, 1997. The 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight held a mark-up 
session on February 12, 1998, and it was ordered to be reported 
by voice vote. The House called up the legislation under 
suspension of the rules and S. 916 passed the House by voice 
vote on February 24, 1998. The bill was cleared for the White 
House on February 24, 1998, presented to the President on 
February 26, 1998, and signed by the President on March 9, 
1998. It became Public Law No. 105-161.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were conducted on this bill.
41. S. 985, To designate the United States Post Office located at 194 
        Ward Street in Paterson, New Jersey, as the ``Larry Doby Post 
        Office''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--S. 985 designates the post office 
located at 194 Ward Street in Paterson, NJ, as the ``Larry Doby 
Post Office''. This legislation honors the first African-
American to play in the American League. Larry Doby was born in 
Camden, SC, but moved to Paterson, NJ, with his mother when he 
was 8 years old. Excelling in sports, he attended Long Island 
University briefly on a basketball scholarship before enlisting 
for service in the U.S. Navy. After World War II ended, he 
returned to play for the Negro League Newark Eagles. In 1948, 
he batted an impressive .301 with 14 home runs and 65 runs 
batted in during the regular season. He helped the Indians win 
the American League pennant and the World Series in six games 
over the Boston Braves. Larry Doby was the first African-
American to play on a World Series Champion team. He played 13 
seasons in the majors with the Cleveland Indians, the Chicago 
White Sox and the Detroit Tigers, hitting a career average of 
.283 with 253 home runs. He served as manager of the Indians in 
1978 and was the second African-American manager in the major 
leagues.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--S. 985 was introduced by 
Senator Torricelli on June 27, 1997, read twice and referred to 
the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On October 9, 1997, the 
committee discharged the measure by unanimous consent. It was 
laid before the Senate by unanimous consent. Senator Stevens 
proposed amendment SP 1322 for Senator Thompson which was 
agreed to in the Senate by unanimous consent. The legislation 
passed the Senate with an amendment by unanimous consent. On 
October 21, the Senate sent a message on its action to the 
House. S. 985 was referred to the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight on October 21, 1997, and to the 
Subcommittee on the Postal Service on October 23, 1997. The 
committee mark-up was held on February 12, 1998, and the bill 
was ordered to be reported by voice vote. On February 24, 1998, 
the House called up the bill under suspension of the rules and 
it passed by voice vote. On February 24, 1998, was cleared for 
the White House and was presented to the President on February 
26, 1998. On March 9, 1998, the legislation was signed by the 
President and it became Public Law No. 105-162.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
42. S. 1298, To designate a Federal Building located in Florence, 
        Alabama, as the ``Justice John McKinley Federal Building''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--S. 1298 designates a Federal 
building located at 210 North Seminary Street in Florence, AL, 
as the ``Justice John McKinley Federal Building''. This 
legislation honors John McKinley who was a U.S. Senator, and 
the first U.S. Supreme Court Justice from the State of Alabama. 
Mr. Justice McKinley was born in Virginia. He was a self-taught 
lawyer and practiced law in Kentucky. He moved to Alabama in 
1818, becoming a member of the Cypress Land Co., the largest 
single purchaser of land in north Alabama. Andrew Jackson was 
also a member of this company. In 1820, Mr. McKinley was 
elected to the Alabama State Legislature. He proceeded to have 
a long, historic and distinguished public career. The State 
legislature elected Mr. McKinley to the U.S. Senate in 1826 and 
he served until 1831. He was appointed to the Supreme Court by 
voice vote of the Senate in September 1837. This bill would 
designate the first Federal building honoring Justice McKinley.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--S. 1298 was introduced by 
Senator Shelby on October 10, 1997; it was read twice and 
referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. The 
committee ordered the measure to be reported favorably without 
amendment on May 21, 1998. Senator Chafee reported the bill to 
the Senate without amendment and without a written report on 
May 21, 1998 and it was placed on the Senate Legislative 
Calendar (No. 375) under general orders. On June 2, 1998, the 
Senate passed the bill without amendment by unanimous consent. 
The Senate sent a message to the House on June 3, 1998, 
reporting the action of that body. On October 9, 1998, the 
House called up S. 1298 under suspension of the rules and it 
passed the House by voice vote. The measure was cleared for the 
White House on October 9, 1998, and presented to the President 
on October 20, 1998. The legislation was signed by the 
President on October 27 and it became Public Law No. 105-299.
    d. Hearings.--No hearings were held on this legislation.
43. S. 2370, Designates the facility of the United States Postal 
        Service located at Tall Timbers Village Square, United States 
        Highway 19 South, in Thomasville, Georgia, shall be known and 
        designated as the ``Lieutenant Henry O. Flipper Station''.
    a. Report Number and Date.--None.
    b. Summary of Measure.--S. 2370 designates the facility of 
the U.S. Postal Service located at Tall Timbers Village Square, 
U.S. Highway 19 South, in Thomasville, GA, as the ``Lieutenant 
Henry O. Flipper Station''. This measure honors Lieutenant 
Henry O. Flipper, the first African-American to graduate from 
the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in 1877. Lieutenant 
Flipper was born in 1856 in Thomasville, GA, and had a 
distinguished career as an Army officer. His first assignment 
to frontier duty was with the 10th Cavalry at Fort Sill 
Oklahoma. The 10th Cavalry unit, along with the 9th Cavalry 
unit, were responsible for facilitating the movement of 
pioneers wishing to settle in the Western frontier. The 
African-American members of these two units became known as 
``Buffalo Soldiers.'' While serving at Fort Sill, Lieutenant 
Flipper engineered a drainage system to eliminate stagnant 
malarial ponds and swamps created during the rainy season. 
Significant improvements were made to the health of the Post. 
The ditch, known as ``Flipper's Ditch,'' is now a historic 
landmark. Lieutenant Flipper was instrumental in the successful 
1880 campaign against Mescalero Apache Chief Victorio, an 
escapee from New Mexico, facing judicial sentence for murder in 
1879. After the end of his military service in 1882, Lieutenant 
Flipper continued a distinguished career in surveying and 
engineering and using his skills as a mining engineer on the 
Southwest and Mexico. He was the first African-American to gain 
prominence in engineering. His continuing list of firsts for an 
African-American include: Military Academy graduate, cavalry 
officer, surveyor, cartographer, civil and mining engineer, 
translator, interpreter, inventor, editor, author, special 
agent to the Justice Department, personal confident and advisor 
to a Senator, and pioneer in the oil industry. In spite of a 
successful civilian life, Lieutenant Flipper always considered 
himself first and foremost an Army officer.
    c. Legislative History/Status.--Senator Cleland introduced 
S. 2370 on July 29, 1998. The legislation was read twice and 
referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. On September 
25, 1998, the committee ordered the bill to be reported 
favorably without amendment. Senator Thompson reported the bill 
to the Senate without amendment and without written report. The 
measure was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar (No. 647) 
under general orders. Provisions of this bill were included in 
the Omnibus Appropriations bill which became Public Law 105-
277.
    d. Hearings.--None held on this legislation.

           B. REVIEW OF LAWS WITHIN COMMITTEE'S JURISDICTION

              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

    The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight has 
primary jurisdiction over a series of important accountability 
laws. Primary among them include the Government Performance and 
Results Act of 1993, the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, 
the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, and the Inspector General Act of 
1980. These laws require Federal agencies to provide the 
Congress with performance information regarding their 
programmatic, financial, and information systems. With this 
information, the quality of Federal agency decisionmaking is 
enhanced and Congress is better able to hold government 
accountable to taxpayers.

1. Review of the Implementation of the Government Performance and 
        Results Act of 1993, Public Law 103-62.

    Prior to enactment of the Government Performance and 
Results Act [Results Act], congressional policymaking, spending 
decisions, and oversight had been severely handicapped by a 
lack of clear program goals and inadequate program performance 
and cost information. The goal of the Results Act was to remedy 
that situation by requiring agencies to clarify their missions, 
set clear goals, measure performance toward those goals, and 
report on their progress.
    During the first session of the 105th Congress, the 
committee continued its review of the implementation of the 
Results Act. The first phase of the act requires Federal 
agencies to submit 5 year strategic plans to Congress, the 
first of which were received by Congress in September 1997. 
(Most agencies have posted their Results Act plans on their 
websites.) The strategic plan is to articulate the agency's 
mission, goals, and strategies and serve as the benchmark for 
evaluating its future success or failure. Agencies were 
required by the act to consult with Congress in developing 
their strategic plans. However, a majority of agencies did not 
comply with this requirement, and in cases where they did, the 
consultation did not necessarily achieve agreement between 
Congress and the agency on the substance of the plan.
    The Republican leadership of the 105th Congress encouraged 
each congressional committee to make Results Act implementation 
a priority in its day to day oversight, authorizing, and 
appropriating activities. In an effort spearheaded by Majority 
Leader Dick Armey, House leadership took additional steps 
throughout the 105th Congress to educate and coordinate 
congressional oversight of Federal agency implementation of the 
act. Congressional teams--made up of staff from across various 
committees--were formed to consult with agencies and 
systematically review and assess Results Act agency plans. The 
Government Reform and Oversight Committee played a crucial role 
in this process, working with the majority leader's office to 
develop and coordinate the House-wide effort.
    This unprecedented level of cross-committee coordination 
has been successful in allowing the act to be taken seriously 
by executive agencies and in educating Congress about the 
potential of the Results Act as a useful accountability tool.
    As a member of the Results Act coordinating team, the 
Government Reform and Oversight Committee helped author two bi-
cameral congressional reports on the Results Act. The first was 
issued in September after congressional teams conducted a 
comprehensive examination of draft agency strategic plans. The 
September report (``The Results Act: It Matters Now, an Interim 
Report'') found that a number of the draft plans lacked basic 
components required by the law, and that the substance of the 
plans were highly inadequate.
    The Government Reform and Oversight Committee also helped 
author a second congressional report which was issued in 
November after congressional staff teams reviewed agencies' 
final strategic plans. That report (``Results Act: It's the 
Law'') revealed that, in general, agencies final plans had 
improved somewhat over their draft efforts, but still had a 
long way to go to be fully compliant with the act. Chairman Dan 
Burton went on to introduce legislation (H.R. 2883) that 
required agencies to re-submit more compliant plans by the end 
of September 1998. This legislation passed the committee on 
March 5, 1998 by a vote of 21 to 12, and passed the full House 
on March 12, 1998 by a bi-partisan vote of 242 to 168. The bill 
was not taken up in the Senate.
    In addition to the coordinating efforts with the 
leadership, the Committee held two full committee hearings on 
the Results Act in 1997, one on February 12 and the other on 
October 30. These are described in more detail in the section 
above.

2. Review of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, Public Law 101-
        576, as amended by the Government Management Reform Act of 
        1994, Public Law 103-356.

    One of the underlying historical impediments to better 
management of Government programs has been the lack of reliable 
financial information. Agencies--many larger than the Nation's 
largest private corporations--have typically not been able to 
perform even the most rudimentary bookkeeping functions. Agency 
financial management systems are badly deteriorated. OMB 
reports that most do not meet standards and almost all agencies 
have been unable to pass the test of an independent financial 
statement audit. With passage of the Chief Financial Officers 
[CFO] Act, the Congress said that this must change and change 
quickly.
    The CFO Act, with strong bipartisan support, was signed 
into law on November 15, 1990. The legislation, with an 
objective of greatly improving and strengthening financial 
management and accountability in the Federal Government, 
represented the most comprehensive financial management reform 
initiative in 40 years.
    The Government Management Reform Act [GMRA] of 1994 
expanded the CFO Act by establishing requirements for the 
preparation and audit by agency Inspectors General [IGs] of 24 
agency-wide financial statements beginning with fiscal year 
1996. It also requires the preparation and audit by GAO of 
consolidated financial statements for the Federal Government 
beginning with fiscal year 1997.
    Enactment of these provisions resulted in the first time 
ever that the financial status of the entire Federal Government 
was subjected to the same professional scrutiny to which many 
who interact with the Federal Government are subject. However, 
for the fiscal year 1997 governmentwide consolidated financial 
statements prepared by Treasury, GAO was unable to render an 
opinion on the Government's financial statements. Only 2 of 24 
major Federal agencies required to submit reports had reliable 
financial information, effective internal controls, and 
complied with applicable laws and regulations. For example, in 
the Department of Defense, it was found that 220 more tanks, 10 
fewer helicopters, 25 fewer aircraft, and 8 fewer cruise 
missiles existed than those reported in the system. Also, DOD 
could not account for 2 utility boats valued at $174,000 each, 
2 large harbor tug boats valued at $875,000 each, 1 floating 
crane valued at $468,000, 15 aircraft engines (including 2 F-18 
engines valued at $4,000,000 each), and 1 Avenger Missile 
Launcher valued at $1,000,000.
    The committee will continue to monitor full compliance with 
the CFO Act and the GMRA, which are, for the first time, 
exposing these problems to the public.

3. Review of the Clinger Cohen Act of 1996, Public Law 104-208.

    The purpose of the Clinger-Cohen Act [CCA] is to improve 
the productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness of Federal 
programs through the improved acquisition, use and disposal of 
information technology [IT] resources. Among other provisions, 
the law (1) encourages Federal agencies to evaluate and adopt 
best management and acquisition practices used by both private 
and public sector organizations; (2) requires agencies to base 
decisions about IT investments on quantitative and qualitative 
factors associated with the costs, benefits, and risks of those 
investments and to use performance data to demonstrate how well 
the IT expenditures support improvements to agency programs, 
through measurements such as reduced costs, improved employee 
productivity, and higher customer satisfaction; and (3) 
requires executive agencies to appoint executive-level chief 
information officers [CIOs]. CCA also streamlines the IT 
acquisition process by eliminating the General Services 
Administration's central acquisition authority, placing 
procurement responsibility directly with Federal agencies, and 
encouraging the adoption of smaller, modular IT acquisition 
projects.

4. Review of the Inspector General Act, as amended, Public Law 95-452.

    With the Inspector General Act, Inspector General offices 
were established in all major Federal agencies and departments 
in order to create independent and objective units responsible 
for auditing and investigating fraud and abuse, and generally 
keeping the agency head and Congress fully informed about 
program problems and deficiencies. The act also allows the 
certain designated Federal agency heads to appoint IGs for 
their agencies.
    Inspectors General are responsible for uncovering and 
reporting fraud, waste, and abuse, and promoting effectiveness 
and efficiency in the Federal Government. Since passage of the 
Inspector General Act, much has changed in the way the Federal 
Government managed its programs and operation. Legislation such 
as the Government Performance and Results Act, the Chief 
Financial Officers Act, and the Government Management Reform 
Act [GMRA], for example have dramatically changed the 
management and accountability of the Federal Government, and in 
turn, have required the IGs to shift their focus and 
contributions.
    The Government Reform and Oversight Committee, which has 
jurisdiction over the IG Act, is committed to ensuring that the 
IGs keep pace with such changes, and that the IGs continue to 
provide meaningful insight for evaluating and measuring the 
government effectiveness. To that end, Congressman Dan Burton, 
chairman of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, 
along with Congressman Horn, chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Government Management, Information, and Technology, and Senator 
Charles Grassley, chairman of the Special Committee on Aging, 
have requested that the GAO obtain information on the IG 
organizational structure, workload, staffing, and operational 
issues. Two surveys were sent out to the IGs: the first was for 
attribution and requested data on organization, staffing, 
workload, policy views and other issues. The second was 
anonymous and requested views on current policy issues.
    In addition, the committee has requested that GAO undertake 
a comprehensive review of the IGs semi-annual reporting, in 
particular to identify ways in which the report can become a 
more useful management tool for Congress as well as agency 
management. Staff of the committee met with GAO several times 
over the year to discuss GAO's approach, methodology, and 
findings.
    Throughout the second session of the 105th Congress, 
numerous meetings were held with various IGs to discuss various 
issues such as semi-annual reports, problems with management, 
proposed legislation, and proposed reforms to the IG Act.

5. The Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, Public Law 103-
        355, October 13, 1994

    The Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act [FASA] of 1994 was 
developed to provide the foundation for establishing 
``commercial-like'' procedures within the Federal procurement 
system. FASA established a preference for commercial items and 
simplified procedures for contracts under $100,000 as well as 
addressing a wide spectrum of issues regarding the 
administrative burden--on all sides--associated with the 
Government's specialized requirements.
    H.R. 1670, reported by the committee on August 1, 1995, as 
House Report 104-222, Part I, would amend section 5061 of FASA 
(41 U.S.C. 413 note) to permit the OFPP Administrator to 
exercise the authority granted in FASA to test ``innovative'' 
procurement procedures without having to wait for the 
implementation of other FASA provisions.
    Public Law 104-106 authorizes OFPP to test alternative 
procurement procedures and removes a requirement that the 
testing of these procedures be contingent upon the full 
implementation of the Federal Acquisition Computer Network 
Electronic Commerce [FACNET] procedures. It also would limit 
the linkage between the use of the simplified acquisition 
procedures and the full implementation of FACNET.

6. Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. Section 401 et 
        seq., 88 Stat. 796, Public Law 93-400)

    The Office of Federal Procurement Policy [OFPP] Act 
established OFPP within the Office of Management and Budget to 
promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the 
procurement of property and services by and for the executive 
branch of the Federal Government and to provide government-wide 
procurement policies, regulations, procedures, and forms.
    H.R. 1760, reported by the committee on August 1, 1995, as 
House Report 104-222, Part I, would revise the current OFPP Act 
to provide for improved definitions of competition 
requirements; to establish an alternative quality-based pre-
qualification system for meeting the Government's recurring 
needs; to exempt commercial items from the Truth in 
Negotiations Act and the Cost Accounting Standards; to add a 
new section to encourage the Government's reliance on the 
private sector sources for goods and services; to revise and 
simplify Procurement Integrity provisions; to remove certain 
certification requirements currently in statute and other 
regulatory certifications (unless justified); to add a new 
section providing that each executive agency establish and 
maintain effective value engineering processes and procedures; 
and to establish a series of policies and procedures for the 
management of the acquisition workforce in civilian agencies.
    Division D of Public Law 104-106 contains many of the 
provisions of House Report 104-222 in addition to other changes 
to the OFPP Act. The provisions of Public Law 104-106 include: 
exempting commercial item purchases from the Truth in 
Negotiations Act and cost accounting standards; removing 
certain unnecessary certification requirements; providing for 
the inapplicability of certain procurement laws to commercially 
available off-the-shelf items; extending authority for 
executive agencies to establish and maintain cost-effective, 
value engineering procedures and processes; establishing a 
series of policies and procedures for the management of the 
acquisition workforce in the civilian agencies. It also repeals 
the current procurement integrity provisions and their 
certification requirements. New language provides for the 
protection of confidential procurement information by 
prohibiting both the disclosure and receipt of such information 
and imposing criminal and civil penalties for violations. There 
also is a limited ban on contacts between Government officials 
and industry contractors, as well as government-wide 
``revolving door'' restrictions.

7. Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as 
        amended--June 30, 1949, 63 Stat. 377 (the Act) (40 U.S.C. 
        Section 471 et seq.; Public Law 152, 81st Congress)

    This law provides the Federal Government with a system for 
procurement of personal property and non-personal services, for 
storage and issues of such property, for transportation and 
traffic management; for further utilization and disposal of 
surplus property, and for management authority was modified in 
1985. GSA's original responsibilities were enacted as part of 
Title 44, U.S. Code. The committee has amended certain sections 
of the 1949 Act.
    With respect to Title III (Procurement Procedure), H.R. 
1670, reported by the committee on August 1, 1995, as House 
Report 104-222, Part I, would amend contract solicitation 
provisions, provide for preaward debriefings, amend preaward 
qualification requirements and replace these provisions with a 
contractor performance system; amend all commercial items from 
the Truth in Negotiations Act; and apply simplified acquisition 
procedures to all commercial items regardless of their dollar 
value.
    Division D of Public Law 104-106, the Federal Acquisition 
Reform Act of 1996, retains the provisions regarding commercial 
item purchasing in modified form. The law also maintains the 
original language authorizing preaward debriefings for excluded 
offerors where appropriate.
    Division E of Public Law 104-106, the Information 
Technology and Reform Act of 1996, includes a Senate provision 
that would require agencies to inventory all agency computer 
equipment and to identify excess or surplus property in 
accordance with Title II of the act. The statement of the 
committee of conference on S. 1124, which became Public Law 
104-106, contains a direction of the conferees that GSA, 
exercising current authority under Title II of the act, should 
issue regulations that would provide for donation of such 
equipment under Title II on the basis of this priority: (1) 
elementary and secondary schools and schools funded by the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs; (2) public libraries; (3) public 
colleges and universities; and (4) other entities eligible for 
donation under the act.

8. The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 (41 U.S.C. 253, 98 Stat. 
        1175, Public Law 98-369, July 18, 1984)

    The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 amended Title 
III of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 
1949 to establish a statutory preference for the use of 
competitive procedures in awarding Federal contracts for 
property or services; to require the use of competitive 
procedures by Federal agencies when purchasing goods or 
services--sealed or competitive bids; and to direct the head of 
each agency to appoint an advocate for competition who will 
challenge barriers to competition in the procurement of 
property and services by the agency and who will review the 
procurement activities of the agency.
    Division D of Public Law 104-106 contains language which 
retains the current statutory competition standard, but adds a 
requirement that the standard is to be implemented in a manner 
which is consistent with the government's need to 
``efficiently'' fulfill its requirements. Further provisions 
are added to allow contracting officials more discretion in 
determining the number of proposals in the ``competitive 
range,'' to provide for preaward debriefings of unsuccessful 
offerors, and to authorize the use of special two-phase 
procedures for design and construction of public buildings.

9. Brooks Automatic Data Processing Act (40 U.S.C. 759)

    This provision of law is found at section 111 of the 
Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (the Act). It 
provides the authority to coordinate and provide for the 
purchase, lease, and maintenance of automatic data processing 
equipment for all Federal agencies through the Administrator of 
General Services. It also provides authority for the General 
Services Board of Contract Appeals to review any decision by a 
contracting officer that is alleged to violate a statute, a 
regulation, or the conditions of a delegation of procurement 
authority.
    Division E of Public Law 104-106 repeals section 111 of the 
Act. It provides authority for the acquisition of information 
technology within each of the Federal agencies and gives the 
Office of Management and Budget the responsibility for 
coordinating government-wide information technology management 
and purchasing. It also establishes the General Accounting 
Office as the sole independent administrative forum for bid 
protests.

10. President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 
        1992 (Public Law 102-526) and an act to amend the President 
        John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 to 
        extend the authorization of Assassination Records Review Board 
        until September 30, 1998 (Public Law 105-25)

    The House Report (House Report 105-138, Part 1) directed 
the Assassination Records Review Board to report to the 
committee, on a monthly basis, on the status of its progress 
toward completing its work by its September 30, 1998, 
termination date under Public Law 105-25. Committee staff 
reviewed these reports and communicated with the Review Board 
staff on ways that the chairman could best assist the Review 
Board in completing its work. Chairman Burton wrote to the 
following agencies, which the Review Board had identified as 
having not been fully cooperative in reviewing their records on 
the Kennedy assassination and transferring these records to the 
Review Board: the CIA, IRS, Library of Congress, Senate Select 
Committee on Assassinations, and Clerk of the House. The 
chairman urged each of them to cooperate fully with the Review 
Board and in a timely manner. Committee staff also met with FBI 
officials regarding the FBI's delay in reviewing records and 
releasing them to the Review Board.
    On June 4, 1998, Chairman Burton met with members of the 
Review Board regarding the negotiations between the Justice 
Department and the Zapruder family for compensation for Abraham 
Zapruder's film of President Kennedy's assassination. On June 
5, 1998, the chairman wrote to Assistant Attorney General Frank 
W. Hunger, expressing his strong support for the government's 
efforts to reach an agreement on compensating the Zapruder 
family so that the government may secure the camera-original 
Zapruder film.
    Chairman Burton drafted a resolution that would order the 
public release of copies of records of the former House Un-
American Activities Committee that relate to the assassination 
of President John F. Kennedy. Under this draft resolution, 
redacted copies of these assassination records would be 
transferred to the President John F. Kennedy Assassination 
Records Collection at the National Archives and Records 
Administration. The records listed in the draft resolution were 
identified by the Assassination Records Review Board as being 
related to President Kennedy's assassination, and Chairman 
Burton believes that they should be made public under the 
President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act. 
This resolution was not introduced before the House adjourned 
sine die. Chairman Burton plans to address this issue when the 
106th Congress convenes.

                       Subcommittee on the Census

1. Two recent Federal district courts have held that section 195 of 
        Title 13 prohibits the use of statistical sampling in the 
        determination of population for purposes of apportionment of 
        Representatives in Congress among the several States.

    Section 195 of Title 13 states: ``Except for the 
determination of population for purposes of apportionment of 
Representatives in Congress among the several States, the 
Secretary shall, if he considers it feasible, authorize the use 
of the statistical method known as `sampling' in carrying out 
the provisions of this title.'' Throughout the 105th Congress, 
there has been much controversy over whether this statute 
prohibits statistical sampling for determining the population 
for purposes of apportionment, or whether the use of such 
sampling is discretionary with the Secretary of Commerce. As a 
result of this controversy, in the Departments of Commerce, 
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, fiscal year 1998, Congress passed section 
209 of Public Law No. 105-119, 111 Stat. 2440 (1997), which 
created a civil action through which any aggrieved person 
(including either House of Congress) could challenge the use of 
sampling in the census for apportionment before a three judge 
panel of a Federal district court. The panel's decision could 
be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.
    Two suits have since been initiated: United States House of 
Representatives v. Department of Commerce, et al., filed in the 
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and Glavin, 
et al. v. Clinton, et al., filed in the U.S. District Court for 
the Eastern District of Virginia. Both lawsuits have sought the 
courts to declare that the use of sampling to determine the 
population for the purpose of apportionment is unlawful because 
the Constitution and the Census Act, 13 U.S.C. section 195, 
forbid it, and to enjoin the Department of Commerce and the 
Bureau of the Census from using such sampling. While not ruling 
on the constitutional questions presented, both district courts 
held that the Census Act prohibits statistical sampling in the 
apportionment census. Further, both courts ordered that 
defendants were permanently enjoined from using any form of 
statistical sampling, including their program for nonresponse 
follow-up and Integrated Coverage Measurement, to determine the 
population for purposes of apportionment. The U.S. Supreme 
Court will hear oral arguments for both cases on November 30, 
1998.
            a. United States House of Representatives v. Department of 
                    Commerce, et al.
    The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia began 
its analysis by finding that sections 141(a) and 195 of Title 
13 are determinative as to whether statistical sampling is 
permissible to determine the population for purposes of 
apportionment. Both of these provisions were last amended in 
1976. The court concluded that the legislative history 
established that prior to the 1976 amendments, section 195 was 
clear on the prohibition regarding statistical sampling for 
congressional apportionment, and section 141 was silent on the 
use of statistical sampling. United States House of 
Representatives v. United States Department of Commerce, et 
al., 11 F. Supp. 2d 76, 98 (D.D.C. 1998). Therefore, the court 
had to determine what effect, if any, the 1976 amendments had 
on the use of statistical sampling.
    Prior to the 1976 amendments, section 195 read as follows: 
``Except for the determination of population for apportionment 
purposes, the Secretary may, where he deems it appropriate, 
authorize the use of the statistical method known as `sampling' 
in carrying out the provisions of this title.'' Defendants 
argued that the 1976 amendments to section 195 altered the use 
of statistical sampling for non-apportionment purposes from 
``may'', which is an authorization, to ``shall'', which is a 
mandate. Defendants furthered argued that an exception from a 
mandate is discretionary for the area covered by the exception. 
Id. at 99. The court disagreed with defendants' interpretation, 
finding that the ``except'' clause must be read as prohibitory. 
Id. at 100. ``We have a prior understanding that demands the 
conclusion that whether to use statistical sampling is not to 
be left to the discretion of the Secretary of Commerce absent a 
more direct congressional pronouncement.'' Id. ``[T]he most 
logical reading of the effect of the amendments to section 195 
is that while they strengthen the call for sampling in non-
apportionment information gathering, they do not have the 
implicit collateral effect of transforming what was formerly an 
absolute proscription into a matter of pure agency 
discretion.'' Id.
    Additionally, the court did not find any intent by Congress 
to change settled law and permit the use of sampling to 
determine the population for apportionment. ``[I]n an instance 
such as this, where the discretion afforded the executive on a 
matter affecting the composition of another co-equal branch 
would be dramatically altered, an especially clear signal by 
the legislature is mandated. None is present.'' Id. at 102. 
Finding nothing in the House or Senate Reports, hearings, 
investigations or other legislative fact-finding efforts, 
``[t]he House of Representatives' apparent lack of interest in 
a statutory modification that goes to the fundamental matter of 
its composition cannot be ignored by the court.'' Id.
    Defendants also argued that the 1976 amendments to section 
141(a) of the Census Act permitted the use of statistical 
sampling for purposes of apportionment. The post-1976 version 
states:

         The Secretary shall, in the year 1990 and every 10 
        years thereafter, take a decennial census of population 
        . . . in such form and content as he may determine, 
        including the use of sampling procedures and special 
        surveys. (emphasis added)

To the extent that section 141(a), which appears to permit 
statistical sampling in apportionment, and section 195, which 
prohibits the same, conflict, the rules of statutory 
construction dictate that the more specific provision controls 
over the general. Id. at 103. The court found that section 195 
was the more specific provision and would control to the extent 
the two provisions conflict. Id. The court held that reading 
sections 141(a) and 195 together, and considering the plain 
text and legislative history, the use of statistical sampling 
to determine the population for purposes of the apportionment 
of Representatives in Congress among the States violates the 
Census Act. Id. at 104.
            b. Glavin, et al. v. Clinton, et al.
    The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of 
Virginia began its analysis with determining the interplay 
between sections 141(a) and 195 of the Census Act. The court 
found that while section 141 generally authorizes the use of 
sampling in various aspects of the census without a 
prohibition, the plain language of section 141 further 
establishes Congress' intent ``to authorize sampling for 
numerous purposes of the census other than congressional 
apportionment.'' Glavin, et al. v. Clinton, et al., No. CIV. A. 
98-207-A, 1998 WL 658650, at ``9 (E.D. Va. Sept. 24, 1998). 
Whereas with section 195, the court found that the ``except 
for'' language was clear that the use of sampling in collecting 
numbers for apportionment was prohibited. Id.
    The court rejected defendants' argument that its general 
authority to sample pursuant to section 141 negates the 
prohibition of sampling for congressional apportionment in 
section 195. The court stated that such an interpretation would 
render section 195 ``meaningless'' and ``the statute must be 
read to give meaning to both provisions.'' Id. at 10. To the 
extent that sections 141 and 195 cannot be reconciled, section 
195's more specific statutory prohibition would govern over the 
more general provisions of section 141. Id. The court found 
that this was ``the only plausible interpretation'' of the 
plain language of the Act. Id. The court concluded that ``[a]s 
Congress prohibited sampling for purposes of apportionment, the 
secretary has no authority to do anything but an actual head 
count of the population for this purpose.'' Id.

                   Subcommittee on the Civil Service

1. The Veterans' Preference Act of 1944 (58 Stat. 387)

    This law provides preferences for veterans in obtaining and 
retaining Federal employment. In connection with its 
legislative actions regarding H.R. 240 (see section III. A. 1. 
of the Subcommittee on the Civil Service), the subcommittee 
continued the review of this law that it began in the previous 
Congress. The subcommittee concluded that veterans' rights in 
reductions in force are often circumvented and, most 
importantly, that veterans do not have access to an effective 
redress system when their rights have been violated. In 
addition, the subcommittee also concluded that veterans 
entitled to preference and others who have served honorably in 
the armed forces are frequently shut out of competition for 
Federal jobs by artificial restrictions on competition. H.R. 
240, which Subcommittee Chairman Mica introduced, remedies 
these deficiencies.
    The subcommittee also reviewed this law in connection with 
its consideration of S. 1021 (see section III. A. 14. of the 
Subcommittee on the Civil Service). As passed, that measure 
(now Public Law 105-339) addresses many, but not all, of the 
key issues raised by the subcommittee's review of this law.

2. Chapter 87 of Title 5, United States Code

    This chapter establishes the Federal Employees Group Life 
Insurance program. The subcommittee reviewed these laws in 
connection with its examination of FEGLI (see section II. B. 4. 
of the Subcommittee on the Civil Service) and its consideration 
of H.R. 1316 (see section III. A. 2. of the Subcommittee on the 
Civil Service). As a result of its review of this review, the 
subcommittee concluded employees should have additional choices 
and improved benefits, including the option to choose life 
products other than term insurance. Subcommittee Chairman Mica 
introduced H.R. 2675 (see section III. A. 4. of the 
Subcommittee on the Civil Service) in order to provide those 
choices and improvements. In addition, the subcommittee 
determined that sections 8705 and 8706 should be amended to 
cure an inequity in the FEGLI program by directing OPM to pay 
the proceeds of FEGLI life insurance policies in accordance 
with certain domestic relations orders and permitting courts to 
direct the assignment of such policies to individuals specified 
in domestic relations orders.

3. Chapter 89 of Title 5, United States Code

    This chapter establishes the FEHBP. The subcommittee 
reviewed this chapter in connection with its examination of the 
following matters:
    a. H.R. 1836 (see section III. A. 3. of the Subcommittee on 
the Civil Service).--The subcommittee concluded that several 
provisions should be amended to protect the integrity of the 
FEHBP, permit certain plans to reenter the FEHBP after 
terminating their participation, expedite the distribution of 
the reserves of terminated plans, and broaden the scope of the 
preemption of State laws in order to strengthen the ability of 
national plans to offer uniform benefits and rates Nationwide. 
In addition, the subcommittee provided statutory authority to 
permit certain current and former employees of the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Board of Governors of the 
Federal Reserve System to receive health care benefits through 
the FEHBP.
    b. FEHBP option for military retirees and military 
families.--During this Congress, the subcommittee has examined 
various proposals to offer military retiree and military 
families the option of enrolling in the FEHBP as an alternative 
to military health care, including H.R. 1631, introduced by 
Subcommittee Chairman Mica, and the limited demonstration 
project established in the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1999. That demonstration project allows up to 66,000 
Medicare-eligible military retirees and certain other 
beneficiaries of military health care in 6-10 regions around 
the country to enroll in the FEHBP.
    c. MSAs.--The subcommittee reviewed this chapter in 
evaluating proposals to add Medical Savings Accounts [MSAs] as 
an option in the FEHBP, including H.R. 3166, which was 
introduced by Chairman Burton and Representative Archer, 
chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, and proposals 
considered by the Republican Health Care Task Force.
    d. Cost Accounting Standards.--The subcommittee reviewed 
the current authority of the Office of Personnel Management 
[OPM] to audit participating carriers and health care providers 
in connection with the application of Cost Accounting Standards 
to FEHBP contracts. Upon examination of this question, the 
subcommittee determined that OPM has sufficient authority under 
Chapter 89 to ensure that such contracts are adequately audited 
and that the Cost Accounting Standards, which the Office of 
Management and Budget had directed OPM to apply, are not 
compatible with insurance and health care accounting systems, 
as OPM had long recognized. Moreover, the application of those 
standards would have imposed costly burdens on participating 
health care carriers while achieving little or no benefits for 
the Federal Government. Consequently, applying the Cost 
Accounting Standards could have forced some carriers to 
discontinue participation in the FEHBP. Therefore, the 
subcommittee supported legislation to relieve OPM and the 
carriers of the burden of complying with the Cost Accounting 
Standards. Section 518 of the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 1999 provides that the Cost Accounting 
Standards shall not apply to FEHBP contracts.
    e. Prescription contraceptives.--In addition, the 
subcommittee reviewed these statutes in connection with its 
examination of section 656 of the Treasury and General 
Government Appropriations Act, 1999, which mandates coverage of 
prescription contraceptives.

4. Statutes reviewed in connection with Labor, Health and Human 
        Services, and Education appropriations, H.R. 2264, Public Law 
        105-78

    The subcommittee reviewed several title 5 provisions in 
connection with its examination of the personnel provisions of 
section 211(e) of the ``Departments of Labor, Health and Human 
Services, and Education, and Related Appropriations Act, 
1998,'' relating to the transfer of the Gillis W. Long Hansen's 
Disease Center to the State of Louisiana. These provisions 
included subchapter III of chapter 83, chapter 84, and 5 U.S.C. 
Sec. 5545. In addition, the subcommittee also reviewed Public 
Law 104-208 Sec. 101(f) (section 663 of the Treasury, Postal 
Service, and General Government Appropriations Act, 1997) in 
connection with this transfer. The subcommittee agreed to 
special rules for certain employees at the center to facilitate 
the transfer.

5. Statutes reviewed in connection with the Internal Revenue Service 
        Restructuring and Reform Act of 1997, H.R. 2676

    a. Chapters 23, 33, 35, 43, 45. 51, 53, 55, 71, 73, and 75 
of title 5, United States Code.--The subcommittee reviewed 
these statutes in connection with proposed personnel 
flexibilities that purport to reform the Internal Revenue 
Service in light of abuses revealed during Senate hearings.

6. Statutes reviewed in connection with the Defense Authorization Acts, 
        H.R. 1119, Public Law 105-85, and H.R. 3616, Public Law 105-
        261.

    The subcommittee reviewed laws within its jurisdiction in 
both sessions of this Congress in connection with its 
examination of various provisions in those bills relating to 
civilian personnel matters.
    The following statutes were examined in the first session 
in connection with H.R. 1119, Public Law 105-85:
    a. 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2108, 3309(2).--These statutes, which 
deal with veterans' preference, were amended to provide 
veterans' preference to veterans who served during the Desert 
Shield/and Desert Storm period (August 2, 1990 to January 2, 
1992) and to authorize veterans' preference for Vietnam Era 
veterans by statute.
    b. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 3329(b).--This statute was amended to 
remove the 6-month deadline for the Department of Defense to 
provide priority employment consideration for certain former 
military reserve technicians.
    c. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5334(d).--This statute was amended to 
increase management flexibility and avoid excessive costs when 
an overseas educator moves from a teaching position to a 
position covered by the General Schedule by permitting the 
Secretary of Defense to authorize pay increases of up to 20 
percent.
    d. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5520a.--This statute was amended to permit 
agencies to collect the administrative cost of garnishment from 
the employee whose wages are garnished.
    e. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5597 and the Federal Workforce 
Restructuring Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-226).--These statutes 
were amended to extend the Department of Defense's authority to 
offer buyouts through September 30, 2001 (or, for certain 
positions under the Defense Conversion, Reinvestment, and 
Transition Assistance Act of 1992, through January 1, 2002) and 
to require the Department to pay the Civil Service Retirement 
and Disability Fund 15 percent of the final basic pay of each 
employee receiving a buyout.
    f. Chapter 71 of Title 5 and various provisions of Title 
22, United States Code relating to personnel of the Panama 
Canal Commission.--The subcommittee approved special personnel 
and labor relations rules for the Commission in order to 
facilitate the transfer of the Panama Canal to the government 
of Panama in accordance with the Panama Canal Treaties of 1977.
    The following statutes were examined in the first session 
in connection with H.R. 3616, Public Law 105-261:
    a. Chapter 89 of 5 U.S.C.--This statute was amended to 
establish a demonstration project to include certain covered 
beneficiaries within the FEHBP.
    b. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5596(b).--This statute was amended to 
clarify that the 6-year limitation period set forth in the 
Tucker Act and the Barring Act applies to cases under the Back 
Pay Act unless a shorter limitations period applies.
    c. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 6304(d)(3)(A).--This statute was amended 
to provide for the restoration of annual leave accumulated by 
civilian employees at installations in the Republic of Panama 
to be closed pursuant to the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977.
    d. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5302(8)(B).--This statute was amended to 
allow for the elimination of retained pay as a basis for 
determining locality-based adjustments.
    e. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 6103(b).--This statute was amended to 
allow for the observance of certain holidays at duty posts 
outside the United States.
    f. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 3307.--This statute was amended to set a 
maximum age for entry and to provide for law enforcement and 
firefighter retirement to the Nuclear Materials Courier Force 
at the Department of Energy.
    g. 22 U.S.C. Sec. 3601 et seq. (Panama Canal Act of 
1979).--This statute was amended to deal with various aspects 
of civilian employment at Panama Canal installations.
    h. Chapter 59 of 5 U.S.C.--This statute was amended to 
provide for the sunset of U.S. overseas benefits immediately 
prior to transfer.
    i. Section 663 of the Treasury, Postal Service, and General 
Government Appropriations Act, 1997 (Public Law 104-208).--The 
subcommittee reviewed this statute, which authorizes Federal 
agencies to offer buyouts under certain conditions, in 
connection with a proposal, adopted in Conference, to permit 
the Department of Energy to provide buyouts until January 1, 
2001.
    j. 5 U.S.C. Chapter 47.--The subcommittee reviewed these 
statutes in connection with its examination of provisions 
providing additional personnel flexibility to the Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency.

7. Statutes reviewed in connection with the civil service provisions of 
        the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33

    a. Chapters 83 & 84 of title 5, United States Code.--The 
civil service provisions amended these statutes to increase the 
retirement contributions of all agencies other than the Postal 
Service and the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority by 
1.51 percent for each employee covered by the Civil Service 
Retirement System [CSRS], beginning on October 1, 1997, and 
continuing through September 30, 2002. These provisions also 
gradually raise individual contributions to the CSRS and the 
Federal Employees Retirement System [FERS] by 0.25 percent 
beginning January 3,1999, an additional 0.15 percent in 2000, 
and another 0.10 percent in 2001; the full 0.5 percent 
increased contribution remains throughout 2002. The 
subcommittee examined the impact of such increases in the 
hearing described in part II. B. 1. of the Subcommittee on the 
Civil Service.
    b. 50 U.S.C. Sec. 2021, 22 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 4045 and 
4071.--These statutes were amended to impose corresponding 
increases in the agency and employee contributions to the 
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System, 
the Foreign Service Retirement and Disability System, and the 
Foreign Service Pension System.
    c. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 8906.--This statute was amended to 
establish a permanent formula for computing the Government's 
share of health insurance premiums under the Federal Employees 
Health Benefits Program [FEHBP]. Under this formula, the 
Government's contribution will be based upon 72 percent of the 
weighted average of the subscription charges for enrollments 
for all options of all plans participating in the FEHBP. 
Separate calculations will be performed for self alone and self 
and family enrollments. Current law regarding part-time 
employees and the prohibition against the Government share 
exceeding 75 percent of any premium are retained.

8. Statutes reviewed in connection with the ``Treasury and General 
        Government Appropriations Act, 1998,'' Public Law 105-61 and 
        the ``Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
        1999,'' section 101(h) of Public Law 105-277.

    In both sessions of this Congress the subcommittee reviewed 
statutes in connection with provisions in the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Acts relating to personnel 
matters.
    The following statutes were reviewed in connection with the 
``Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1998,'' 
Public Law 105-61:
    a. 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 8334, 8337, 8339, 8334a, 8344, 8415, 
8422, and 8468.--These statutes were amended to permit former 
Members of Congress who served in an executive branch position 
at reduced pay in order to remove the impediment to the 
appointment of the Member imposed by article I, section 6, 
clause 2 of the Constitution to be computed as if he had not 
served at reduced pay. The former Member must make an 
appropriate deposit with interest to the Civil Service 
Retirement and Disability Fund.
    b. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5948 and the Federal Physicians 
Comparability Allowance Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 5948 note).--
These statutes were amended to extend agencies' authority to 
pay physicians comparability allowances until September 30, 
2002.
    c. 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 8341, 8339, 8442, and 8445.--These 
statutes were amended to provide that a survivor annuity of a 
former spouse who was married to a Federal employee for at 
least 30 years will not be terminated if, on or after January 
1, 1995, the former spouse remarries before age 55.
    d. Chapters 83 and 84 of Title 5, United States Code.--
These statutes were reviewed in connection with the ``Federal 
Employees' Retirement System Open Enrollment Act of 1997,'' 
which established an open season during which individuals 
covered by the CSRS may elect coverage under FERS.
    e. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5545.--The subcommittee reviewed this 
statute in connection with a provision in the appropriations 
act prohibiting the payment of Sunday premium pay unless an 
employee actually performed work on Sunday. The previous year's 
appropriation act prohibited the payment of both Sunday premium 
pay and night differential pay to an employee who did not 
perform work during the appropriate period. This year's House 
bill proposed to relax the prohibition on night differentials 
for individuals who have been performing night work for a 
period of 26 weeks or more. However, the conference agreement 
permits the payment of night differentials in the absence of 
work.
    The following statutes were reviewed in connection with the 
``Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1998,'' 
Public Law 105-277:
    a. 5 U.S.C. Chapter 89.--These statutes were reviewed in 
connection with its examination of the administration's 
determination to apply the Cost Accounting Standards to FEHBP 
contracts and with a provision that mandates coverage of 
prescription contraceptives. Section 518 of this legislation 
prohibits the application of those Standards. Section 656 
requires FEHBP plans to cover prescription contraceptives.
    b. 5 U.S.C. Chapter 55, subchapter V.--The subcommittee 
reviewed these statutes in connection with its examination of 
section 628 of this legislation which revises the law on 
overtime payments for Federal firefighters.
    c. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 4507.--This statute was amended to 
increase the monetary awards for career Senior Executives who 
receive the rank awards of Distinguished Executive or 
Meritorious Executive.
    d. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5384.--This statute was amended to 
increase the performance bonuses that career Senior Executives 
may earn.
    e. 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 5303 and 5304.--The subcommittee 
reviewed these statutes in connection with its examination of 
legislative proposals to curtail the President's authority to 
limit the annual increases in Federal employees' basic pay and 
locality pay. Section 647 of this legislation sets the 1999 pay 
raise for Federal employees at 3.6 percent.

9. Statutes reviewed in connection with the ``Departments of Commerce, 
        Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies 
        Appropriations Act, 1998,'' Public Law 105-119

    a. Chapters 43, 47, 51, and 53 of title 5, United States 
Code.--These statutes were reviewed in connection with the 
limited authority provided by section 122 of the act to the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 
and Firearms, the U.S. Customs Service, and the U.S. Secret 
Service to adopt alternative personnel management systems 
covering certain positions. The FBI may exercise its authority 
to establish for 3 years an alternative system to cover not 
more than 3,000 non-Special Agent employees to fill critical 
scientific, technical, engineering, intelligence analyst, 
language translator, and medical positions. The Secretary of 
the Treasury may establish a 3-year demonstration project, 
covering not more than 950 employees, who fill the same 
positions in the other agencies.

10. Statutes reviewed in connection with H.R. 2526, a bill to make the 
        percentage limitations on individual contributions to the 
        Thrift Savings Plan more consistent with the dollar amount 
        limitation on elective deferrals, and for other purposes.

    a. 5 U.S.C. Chapters 83 and 84.--This legislation would 
have amended provisions of these chapters to allow Federal 
employees to contribute more of their own money to the Thrift 
Savings Plan.

11. Statutes reviewed in connection with H.R. 2943, a bill to increase 
        the amount of leave time available to a Federal employee in any 
        year in connection with serving as an organ donor, and for 
        other purposes.

    a. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 6327.--This legislation would have amended 
this statute to allow organ donors to take 30 days leave rather 
than 7.

12. Statutes reviewed in connection with H.R. 2566, the ``Civil Service 
        Retirement System Actuarial Redeposit Act of 1998''.

    a. 5 U.S.C. Sec. 8334.--This legislation would have amended 
the statute to allow certain Federal employees to receive 
actuarially reduced annuities rather than redeposit, with 
interest, refunds previously received.

13. Statutes reviewed in connection with the ``Haskell Indian Nations 
        University and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute 
        Administrative Systems Act of 1998'' (Public Law 105-337).

    a. 5 U.S.C. Chapter 47.--The subcommittee examined the 
provisions of this chapter in connection with this legislation 
to provide the administrations of these two Indian schools with 
the authority to implement personnel policies more suitable to 
educational institutions. The subcommittee determined that 
current law would not provide the broad authority with respect 
to benefits, including retirement, that these institutions 
need.

14. Statutes reviewed in connection with the ``Department of State 
        Special Agents Retirement Act of 1998'' (Public Law 105-382).

    a. 22 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 4044, 4045, 4046, 4071a.--These 
statutes were amended to provide Department of State Special 
Agents with law enforcement retirement.

                Subcommittee on the District of Columbia

1. District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization 
        Act, Public Law 93-198.

    An act to reorganize the government structure of the 
District of Columbia, to provide a charter for local government 
in the District of Columbia, to provide a charter for local 
government in the District of Columbia subject to acceptance of 
the majority of the registered qualified electors in the 
District of Columbia, to delegate certain legislative powers to 
the local government, to implement certain recommendations of 
the commission on the organization of the government of the 
District of Columbia, and for other purposes.

2. District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management 
        Assistance Act, Public Law 104-8.

    To eliminate budget deficits and management inefficiencies 
in the government of the District of Columbia through the 
establishment of the District of Columbia Financial 
Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority, and for 
other purposes. (See II., Investigations, B.)

3. Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33, Title XI.

    ``National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 
Improvement Act of 1997.'' (See part III., Legislation, A.)

        Council Acts Transmitted in 1997 and Became Law in 1997

    1. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-310, ``Rhema Christian Center 
Property Tax Relief Act of 1996.'' To provide equitable real 
property tax relief to the Rhema Christian Center, a tax-exempt 
religious organization. Act 11-310 was published in the August 
16, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4357) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-164, effective April 9, 1997.
    2. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-311, ``Simpson-Hemline United 
Methodist Church Property Tax Relief Act of 1996.'' To provide 
equitable real property tax relief to the Simpson-Hemline 
United Methodist Church. Act 11-311 was published in the August 
16, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4359) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-165, effective April 9, 1997.
    3. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-312, ``Holy Comforter Episcopal 
Church, Saint Andrew Parish Equitable Real Property Tax Relief 
Act of 1996.'' To provide equitable real property tax relief to 
the Holy Comforter Episcopal Church, Saint Andrew Parish. To 
provide equitable real property tax relief to Holy Comforter 
Episcopal Church, a tax-exempt religious organization. Act 11-
312 was published in the August 16, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4361) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 10, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-166, effective April 
9, 1997.
    4. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-314, ``St. Matthew's Evangelical 
Lutheran Church Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 
1996.'' To provide equitable real property tax relief to St. 
Matthew's Evangelical Lutheran, a tax-exempt religious 
organization. Act 11-314 was published in the August 16, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4365) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-167, effective April 9, 1997.
    5. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-315, ``Upper Room Baptist Church 
Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1996.'' To provide 
equitable real property tax relief to Upper Room Baptist 
Church, a tax-exempt religious organization. Act 11-315 was 
published in the August 16, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4367) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 
1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-168, effective April 9, 1997.
    6. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-316, ``Commission on Mental Health 
Services Psychologists Protection Amendment Act of 1996.'' To 
amend the District of Columbia Employee Non-Liability Act to 
provide for the indemnification of psychologists in certain 
circumstances. Act 11-316 was published in the August 23, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4478) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-169, effective April 9, 1997.
    7. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-317, ``Child Support Enforcement 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of Columbia 
Child Support Enforcement Amendment Act of 1985 to require the 
court to base findings of good cause not to impose immediate 
withholding of earnings or income for child support on a 
written determination that immediate withholding is not in the 
best interest of the child, and, in cases where support orders 
are being modified, to also require proof of timely payment of 
previously ordered child support; to require child support 
court orders to include a provision that directs absent parents 
to keep the IV-D Program informed of the parent's health 
insurance coverage and policy information; to require the court 
to issue to the absent parent advance notice of intent to 
impose wage withholding in cases where wages are not subject to 
immediate withholding; to require the court to issue to 
employers a notice to withhold within 15 calendar days of the 
date of the support order in the case of immediate withholding; 
and to establish notice requirements consistent with Federal 
law in interstate withholding cases where the District of 
Columbia is the initiating or responding state. Act 11-317 was 
published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4480) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 
1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-170, effective April 9, 1997.
    8. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-318, ``Community Development 
Corporation Money Lender License Tax Exemption Amendment Act of 
1996.'' To amend an act to regulate the business of loaning 
money on security of any kind by person, firms, and 
corporations other than national banks, licensed banker, trust 
companies, savings banks, building and loan associations, and 
real estate brokers in the District of Columbia to authorize 
the Mayor to waive certain bonding requirements and to exempt 
certain community development corporations acting as money 
lenders from the money lender license tax. Retransmitted. Act 
11-318 was published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4484) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-171, effective April 
9, 1997.
    9. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-320, ``Early Intervention Services 
Sliding Fee Scale Establishment Act of 1996.'' To establish a 
program to provide early intervention services designed to meet 
the developmental needs of infants and toddlers, from birth 
through 2 years of age and their families, and to require the 
Mayor to establish a sliding fee scale for early intervention 
services based on the income of eligible families. Act 11-320 
was published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4491) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 10, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-172, effective April 
9, 1997.
    10. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-321, ``Anti-Loitering/Drug Free 
Zone Act of 1996.'' To authorize the Chief of the Metropolitan 
Police Department to determine and declare a drug enforcement 
zone and to prohibit the congregation of two or more persons on 
public space on public property, for the purpose of 
participating in the use, purchase, or sale of illegal drugs, 
within the perimeter of the drug enforcement zone. Act 11-321 
was published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4493) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 10, 1997 for a 60-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-270, effective June 3, 
1997.
    11. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-322, ``Expulsion of Students Who 
Bring Weapons Into Public Schools Temporary Act of 1996.'' To 
require, on a temporary basis, the expulsion, for not less than 
1 year, of any student who brings a weapon into a District of 
Columbia public school, absent extenuating circumstances as 
determined on a case-by-case basis by the Superintendent of 
Schools, and consistent with the Individuals With Disabilities 
Education Act. Act 11-322 was published in the August 23, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4497) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-173, effective April 9, 1997.
    12. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-323, ``Expulsion of Students Who 
Bring Weapons Into Public Schools Act of 1996.'' To require the 
expulsion, for not less than 1 year, of any student who brings 
a weapon into a District of Columbia public school, absent 
extenuating circumstances, as determined on a case-by-case 
basis by the Superintendent of Schools, and consistent with the 
Individuals With disabilities Education Act. Act 11-323 was 
published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4500) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 
1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-174, effective April 9, 1997.
    13. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-325, ``Free Clinic Assistance 
Program Extension Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Free 
Clinic Assistance Program Act of 1986 to extend the life of the 
Program until September 23, 2001. Act 11-325 was published in 
the August 16, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 
4371) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-175, effective April 9, 1997.
    14. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-326, ``Abatement of Controlled 
Dangerous Substances Nuisance Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend 
the Residential Drug-Related Evictions Amendment Act of 1990 to 
authorize the Corporation Counsel, civic association, or 
community association within whose boundary the nuisance is 
located to bring a civil action to abate a nuisance of 
controlled dangerous substances located on privately owned 
residential property. Act 11-326 was published in the August 9, 
1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4234) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-176, effective April 9, 1997.
    15. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-327, ``Vending Site Lottery 
Assignment Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of Columbia 
Municipal Regulations to authorize the Metropolitan Police 
Department to designate vending sites and assign them by 
lottery, and to require the Mayor to attempt to designate 
additional vending spaces to replace vending spaces that have 
been eliminated as a result of recent Federal measure to 
increase the security of the White House Complex and the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters. Act 11-327 was 
published in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4238) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 
1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-177, effective April 9, 1997.
    16. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-328, ``Bicyclist Responsibility 
Regulation Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend chapter 12 of 
title 18 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations to 
clarify the rights and duties of bicyclists. Act 11-328 was 
published in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4240) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 
1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-178, effective April 9, 1997.
    17. Jan. 10. 1997--Act 11-329, ``Juvenile Detention and 
Speedy Trial Act of 1996.'' To amend title 16 of the District 
of Columbia Code to limit the length of time a juvenile remains 
in secure detention. Act 11-329 was published in the August 9, 
1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4243) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-179, effective April 9, 1997.
    18. Jan 10, 1997--Act 11-331, ``Establishment of the John 
A. Wilson Building Foundation Act of 1996.'' To establish the 
John A. Wilson Building foundation, a nonprofit corporation, 
for the purpose of developing long-term plans for the use of 
the Wilson Building and to develop long-range fundraising plans 
to pay for the renovation of the Wilson Building. Act 11-331 
was published in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4246) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 10, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-180, effective April 
9, 1997.
    19. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-332, ``Nonprofit Corporation Two-
Year Report Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of 
Columbia Nonprofit Corporation Act to provide for the filing of 
a 2-year report instead of a 5-year report, to change the 
normal filing date from April 15th to January 15th effective 
January 15, 1998, and to add certain fees. Act 11-332 was 
published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4503) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 
1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-181, effective April 9, 1997.
    20. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-333, ``District of Columbia 
Income and Franchise Tax Act of 1947 Conformity Amendment Act 
of 1996.'' To amend the District of Columbia Income and 
Franchise Tax Act of 1947 to provide for greater conformity 
with Federal income tax law. Act 11-333 was published in the 
August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 
4251) and transmitted to Congress on January 10, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-182, effective April 9, 1997.
    21. Jan. 10, 1997--Act 11-334, ``Comprehensive Merit 
Personnel Act Health And Life Insurance Clarification Amendment 
Temporary Act of 1996.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the 
District of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel 
Act of 1978 to clarify eligibility for continuation of health 
and life benefits for certain employees of the District 
government first employed after September 30, 1987. Act 11-334 
was published in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4253) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 10, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-183, effective April 
9, 1997.
    22. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-337, ``Highway Trust Fund 
Establishment Act and the Water and Sewer Authority Amendment 
Act of 1996.'' To establish the District of Columbia Highway 
Trust Fund to comply with the requirement for the creation of a 
dedicated highway fund mandated by the District of Columbia 
Emergency Highway Relief Act, to require the Mayor to deposit 
into the fund an amount equivalent to revenue received from the 
motor vehicle fuel tax and associated fees and fines; to amend 
the Water and Sewer Authority Establishment and Department of 
Public Works Reorganization Act of 1996 to add one additional 
board member, to improve the Authority's bond rating, and to 
clarify the Authority's relationship to the District 
government. Act 11-337 was published in the August 9, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4265) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-184, effective April 9, 1997.
    23. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-338, ``Business Corporation Two-
Year Report Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of 
Columbia Business Corporation Act of 1954 to provide for the 
filing of a 2-year report instead of a 5-year report, and to 
make conforming amendments to the sections governing a 
proclamation of revocation. Act 11-338 was published in the 
August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 
4510) and transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-185, effective April 9, 1997.
    24. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-339, ``Fire Code Amendment Act of 
1996.'' To amend the District of Columbia Fire Prevention Code 
and the District of Columbia Building Code to permit District 
of Columbia public schools to permanently close certain exit 
doors. Act 11-339 was published in the August 23, 1996, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4513) and transmitted to 
Congress on January 13, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-186, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    25. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-340, ``Alcoholic Beverage 
Underage Penalties Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the 
District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Act to provide 
for criminal and civil penalties for misrepresentation of age 
or purchase, possession, or consumption of alcoholic beverage 
by persons under 21 years of age. Act 11-340 was published in 
the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 
4515) and transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-187, effective April 9, 1997.
    26. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-341, ``District of Columbia 
Employee Vatical Settlement Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' 
To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia 
Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to provide 
authority for the offering of Vatical settlements to terminally 
ill employees and former employees enrolled in the District of 
Columbia Group Life Insurance Program. Act 11-341 was published 
in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 
page 4273) and transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its 
having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-188, effective April 9, 1997.
    27. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-342, ``International Registration 
Plan Agreement Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To provide, 
on an temporary basis, for membership in the International 
Registration Plan pursuant to the Federally mandated reciprocal 
requirements of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 31704. Act 11-342 was published 
in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 
page 4275) and transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its 
having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-189, effective April 9, 1997.
    28. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-343, ``Council Contract Approval 
Modification Temporary Amendment Act of 1995 Temporary 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the 
District of Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985 to 
establish additional criteria for Council review and approval 
of contracts for expenditures in excess of $1 million during a 
12-month period, and to further expedite the review and 
approval of Federal-aid highway contracts. Act 11-343 was 
published in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4279) and transmitted to Congress on January 31, 
1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-190, effective April 
9, 1997.
    29. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-347, ``Health Services Planning 
Program Re-establishment Act of 1996.'' To re-establish a 
health services planning and certificate of need regulatory 
program in the District of Columbia. Act 11-347 was published 
in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 
page 4535) and transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-191, effective April 9, 1997.
    30. Jan. 23 1997--Act 11-348, ``Emergency Assistance 
Clarification Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of 
Columbia Right to Overnight Shelter Act of 1984 and the 
District of Columbia Public Assistance Act of 1982 to clarify 
the circumstances under which the District of Columbia 
government claims Federal financial participation. Act 11-348 
was published in the August 9, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4285) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 13, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-192, effective April 
9, 1997.
    31. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-349, ``Oak Hill Youth Center 
Educational Contracting Temporary Act of 1996.'' To provide, on 
an temporary basis, that the Mayor may contract for services to 
operate an education program at the Oak Hill Youth Center 
without adhering to the District's procurement laws and to 
establish procedures for the contracting of such services. Act 
11-349 was published in the August 16, 1996, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4373) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 13, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire 
on the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-193, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    32. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-354, ``Board of Real Property 
Assessments and Appeals Membership Qualification Act of 1996.'' 
To amend the District of Columbia Real Property Tax Act 
Revision Act of 1974 to require numerical diversity in the 
requirements for membership on the Board of Real Property 
Assessments and Appeals. Act 11-354 was published in the August 
23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4557) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-194, effective April 9, 1997.
    33. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-355, ``Holy Comforter-Saint 
Cyprian Roman Catholic Church Equitable Real Property Tax 
Relief Act of 1996.'' To provide equitable real property tax 
relief to Holy Comforter-Saint Cyprian Roman Catholic Church, a 
tax-exempt religious organization. Act 11-355 was published in 
the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 
4559) and transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-195, effective April 9, 1997.
    34. Jan. 13 1997--Act 11-358, ``Extension of the Moratorium 
on Retail Service Station Conversions and the Gas Station 
Advisory Board Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Retail 
Service Station Act of 1976 to extend the moratorium on the 
conversion of full service retail service stations to limited 
service retail stations until October 1, 1999, to extend the 
life of the Gas Station Advisory Board, and to modify the 
petition for exemption process. Act 11-358 was published in the 
August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 
4564) and transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-196, effective April 9, 1997.
    35. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-359, ``Housing Finance Agency 
Loan Forgiveness Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the District 
of Columbia Housing Finance Agency Act to provide that the 
District of Columbia Housing Finance Agency's loan, advanced 
from the General Fund to cover the operating and program 
expense of the Agency from 1980 to 1992, be forgiven. Act 11-
359 was published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4567) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 13, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-197, effective April 
9, 1997.
    36. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-360, ``Fiscal Year 1997 Budget 
Support Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of Columbia Real 
Estate Deed Recordation Tax Act to require that the amount of 
recordation tax be based on the higher of the assessed value or 
the sales price of the deed and other amendments. Act 11-360 
was published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4569) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 13, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-198, effective April 
9, 1997.
    37. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-361, ``Adjustment Process for 
Nonviolent Juvenile Offenders and Parent Participation in 
Court-Ordered Act of 1996.'' To amend title 16 of the District 
of Columbia Code to provide for an alternative to adjudication 
for juveniles charged with certain nonviolent offenses and to 
authorize the court to hold parents and guardians in contempt 
for not participating in a court-ordered proceeding or program. 
Act 11-361 was published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4385) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 13, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-199, effective April 
9, 1997.
    38. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-362, ``Commercial Counterfeiting 
Criminalization Act of 1996.'' To prohibit counterfeiting of 
trademarks, service marks, or other intellectual property, 
permit the seizure of counterfeit intellectual property and 
personal property used in the manufacture of counterfeit 
property, and prohibit the knowing possession of material for 
the reproduction of counterfeit intellectual property. Act 11-
362 was published in the August 23, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4585) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-271, effective June 3, 
1997.
    39. Jan. 13, 1997--Act 11-363, ``Modified Reduction-in-
Force Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend on a 
temporary basis, the District of Columbia Government 
Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to modify the 
reduction-in-force procedures to allow only one round of 
lateral bumping within a competitive level, to set a deadline 
of February 1, 1997, for personnel authorities to make final 
decisions on the identification of positions to be abolished 
through a reduction-in-force to add 5 years to creditable 
service for District residency for purposes of a reduction-in-
force, and to require the Mayor to submit to the Council by 
March 1, 1997, a list of positions to be abolished through a 
reduction-in-force. Act 11-363 was published in the August 23, 
1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 5427) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 13, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-200, effective April 9, 1997.
    40. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-364, ``Boating While Intoxicated 
Temporary Act of 1996.'' To prohibit, on a temporary basis, the 
operation of any watercraft while under the influence of, or 
intoxicated by, alcohol or any controlled substance. Act 11-364 
was published in the August 16, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4390) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-201, effective April 
9, 1997.
    41. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-367, ``Medicare Supplement 
Insurance Minimum Standards Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend 
the Medicare Supplement Insurance Minimum Standards Act of 1992 
in order to implement requirements of the Medicare supplement 
minimum standards as mandated by the Social Security Act 
Amendments of 1994. These changes to the regulatory programs 
will ensure that the District of Columbia maintains approval as 
meeting minimum Federal standards. Act 11-367 was published in 
the November 15, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 
page 6054) and transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-202, effective April 9, 1997.
    42. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-370, ``Closing of Public Alleys 
and Abandonment and Establishment of Easements in Square 878, 
S.O. 95-38, Act of 1996.'' To order the closing of public 
alleys and abandonment and establishment of easements in Square 
878, bounded by I Street, SE, 6th Street, SE, and 7th Street, 
SE, in ward 6. Act 11-370 was published in the August 30, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4670) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-203, effective April 9, 1997.
    43. March 27, 1997--Act 11-371, ``Lottery Games Amendment 
Act of 1996.'' To amend the law to legalize lotteries, daily 
numbers games, and bingo and raffles for charitable purposes in 
the District of Columbia to permit Maryland lottery advertising 
in the District on a reciprocal basis and to clarify that 
lottery ticket receipts are held in trust by lottery sales 
agents until transferred to the Lottery Board. Act 11-371 was 
published in the January 15, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 43 page 4672) and transmitted to Congress on March 27, 
1997 for a 60-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-272, effective June 3, 1997.
    44. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-372, ``Testing of District 
Government Drivers of Commercial Motor Vehicles for Alcohol and 
Controlled Substances Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To 
amend, on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia 
Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to 
authorize and require that District employees and candidates 
for employment with the District government who need to have a 
commercial driver's license, as a condition of employment, be 
tested for the use of alcohol and controlled substances. Act 
11-372 was published in the August 30, 1996, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4674) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire 
on the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-204, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    45. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-374, ``Public Assistance Fair 
Hearing Procedures Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend, 
on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia Public 
Assistance Act of 1982 to change the requirement that a 
verbatim written transcript be prepared for every fair hearing 
and to require recorded testimony instead, and to authorize 
transcripts when requested by a claimant, if ordered by the 
hearing officer or for purposes of judicial review, with costs 
of transcription to be borne by the Mayor. Act 11-374 was 
published in the September 13, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4935) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-205, effective April 
9, 1997.
    46. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-378, ``Paternity Acknowledgment 
and Gas Station Advisory Board Re-establishment Temporary Act 
of 1996.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, chapter 9 of title 
16 of the District of Columbia Code to require each public and 
private birthing hospital in the District of Columbia to 
operate a hospital-based program that provides services to 
facilitate the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity 
immediately before and after the birth of a child to an 
unmarried woman, to require each birthing hospital to transmit 
completed voluntary acknowledgment of paternity forms to the 
Mayor, and to require the Mayor to provide to the staff of each 
birthing hospital the forms, materials, and training required 
to operate the program; and to amend the Retail Service Station 
Act of 1976 to re-establish the Gas Station Advisory Board. Act 
11-378 was published in the August 30, 1996, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4684) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire 
on the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-206, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    47. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-380, ``Real Property Tax 
Reassessment Temporary Act of 1996.'' To extend, on a temporary 
basis, time deadlines in the District of Columbia Real Property 
tax revision Act of 1974 for the assessment of class 1 and 
class 2 real property for the tax year 1997, to extend the time 
for the appeal of a real property tax assessment for the tax 
year 1997, to provide that the latest assessment shall be 
considered the final assessment for purposes of appeal, and to 
increase the limit on the compensation of the members of the 
Board of Real Property Assessments and Appeals for the District 
of Columbia. Act 11-380 was published in the August 30, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4691) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-207, effective April 9, 1997.
    48. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-381, ``District of Columbia 
Housing Authority Police Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To 
amend, on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia Housing 
Authority Act of 1994 to create a public housing police force. 
Act 11-381 was published in the August 30, 1996, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4695) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire 
on the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-208, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    49. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-384, ``Preservation of 
Residential Neighborhoods Against Nuisances Temporary Act of 
1996.'' To deem, on a temporary basis, that new restaurants in 
any residentially zoned area within the boundaries of the 
Georgetown Historic District that engage in carry out or 
delivery services that comprise more than 5 percent of their 
business operations constitute a public nuisance. Act 11-384 
was published in the August 30, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4700) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-209, effective April 
9, 1997.
    50. Jan 15. 1997--Act 11-386, ``Cable Television Franchise 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Cable Television 
Communications Act of 1981 to establish a procedure to award 
additional cable service franchises. Act 11-386 was published 
in the August 30, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 
page 4700) and transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-210, effective April 9, 1997.
    51. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-387, ``Closing of a Public Alley 
in Square 375, S.O. 95-54, Act of 1996.'' To order the closing 
of a public alley in Square 375, bounded by H Street, NW, 9th 
Street, NW, G Place, NW, and 10th Street, NW, in ward 2.
    52. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-389, ``Health and Hospitals 
Public Benefit Corporation Act of 1996.'' To establish a public 
benefit corporation to be known as the District of Columbia 
Health and Hospitals Public Benefit Corp. to provide 
comprehensive community centered health care to residents of 
the district and assume the functions and personnel 
responsibilities of the D.C. General Hospital and the 
Commission on Public Health community clinics. Act 11-392 was 
published in the September 13, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4992) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-214, effective April 
9, 1997.
    53. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-391, ``Drug Paraphernalia 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Drug Paraphernalia Act of 
1982 by including glassy bags and zip-lock bags of certain 
sizes within the definition of ``drug paraphernalia'', creating 
an inference that glassy bags and zip lock bags of certain 
sizes sold by a commercial establishment are drug 
paraphernalia, and requiring the license and certification of 
occupancy for the commercial establishment be suspended upon 
conviction. Act 11-391 was published in the September 13, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 4990) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-213, effective April 9, 1997.
    54. Jan 15, 1997--Act 11-392, ``Reorganization Plan No. 5 
for the Department of Human Services and Department of 
Corrections Temporary Act of 1996.'' To reorganize on a 
temporary basis, the Department of Human Services to transfer 
the Bureau of Correctional Services from the Department of 
Human Services to the Department of Corrections. Act 11-392 was 
published in the September 13, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 4992) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-214, effective April 
9, 1997.
    55. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-413, ``Oyster Elementary School 
Modernization and Development Project Temporary Act of 1996.'' 
To provide, on a temporary basis, authorization to modernize 
the James F. Oyster Elementary School, to privately develop a 
portion of the Oyster School site, and to fund the improvements 
to Oyster School and other public school facilities through 
payments in lieu of taxes on the privately developed portion of 
the Oyster School site. Act 11-413 was published in the 
November 15, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 
6070) and transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-
day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its 
having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-215, effective April 9, 1997.
    56. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-414, ``Economic Recovery 
Conformity Temporary Act of 1996.'' To prohibit, on a temporary 
basis, the increase in the individual income tax, the sales and 
use tax, and real property tax rates contingent on the 
enactment of an act of Congress which would reduce the 
percentage of Federal income tax applicable solely to residents 
of the District of Columbia under the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986. Act 11-414 was published in the November 15, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 6074) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-216, effective April 9, 1997.
    57. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-415, ``Real Property Tax Rates 
for Tax Year 1997 Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' Act 11-415 
was published in the November 15, 1996, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 43 page 6076) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-217, effective April 
9, 1997.
    58. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-431, ``Zero Tolerance for Guns 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Firearms Control 
Regulations Act of 1975 to provide for civil forfeiture for 
weapons offenses; title 23 of the District of Columbia Code to 
permit pretrial detention for individuals charged with weapons 
offenses and individuals who pose a risk of flight or other 
serious risk; and the District of Columbia Work Release Act to 
permit the director of the Department of Corrections to grant 
work release and to increase the fine and days of incarceration 
for violations of work release plans. Act 11-431 was published 
in the November 15, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 
page 6168) and transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for 
a 60-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-273, effective June 3, 1997.
    59. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-432, ``New Hires Police Officers, 
Fire Fighter, and Teachers Pension Modification Amendment Act 
of 1996.'' Act 11-414 was published in the November 15, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 6172) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-218, effective April 9, 1997.
    60. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-433, ``BNA Washington Inc., Real 
Property Tax Deferral Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To 
amend, on an temporary basis, the real property tax deferral 
procedure to provide for the deferral of real property taxes on 
certain real property. Act 11-433 was published in the November 
15, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 6176) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-219, effective April 9, 1997.
    61. Jan. 15, 1997--Act 11-434, ``District of Columbia 
Moratorium on the 1997 Real Property Assessments for Real 
Property Tax year 1998 Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' Act 
11-434 was published in the November 15, 1996, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 6181) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 15, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire 
on the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-220, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    62. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-438, ``Lead-Based Paint Abatement 
and Control Act of 1996.'' To establish a program to reduce, 
eliminate, and abate lead-based paint hazards in the District 
of Columbia Act 11-438 was published in the December 27, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 6854) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-221, effective April 9, 1997.
    63. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-441, ``Real Property Tax Rates 
for Tax Year 1997 Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the 
District of Columbia Real Property Tax Revision Act of 1974 to 
establish real property tax rates and the real property special 
tax rates for real property tax year 1997 and to update reports 
adopted by the Council. Act 11-441 was published in the January 
10, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 108) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-222, effective April 9, 1997.
    64. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-442, ``District of Columbia 
Moratorium on the 1997 Real Property Assessments for Real 
Property Tax Year 1998 Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the 
District of Columbia Real Property Tax Revision Act of 1974 to 
provide that the Mayor shall publish in the District of 
Columbia Register the proposed 1997 real property tax rate son 
the third Friday following the date 1997 real property 
assessment roll is certified and to provide that the assessed 
value of all real property located in the District of Columbia 
for real property tax year 1998 shall be the assessed value for 
real property tax year 1997 and the valuation date for real 
property tax year 1998 real property assessments shall be 
January 1, 1997. Act 11-442 was published in the January 10, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 111) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-223, effective April 9, 1997.
    65. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-443, ``Tax Revision Commission 
Establishment Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the Tax Revision Commission Establishment Act 
of 1996 to increase the number of members of the Commission. 
Act 11-443 was published in the January 10, 1997, edition of 
the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 114) and transmitted to 
Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act 
shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken effect. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-
224, effective April 9, 1997.
    66. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-452, ``Insurers' Records Access 
and Control Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Law on 
Examinations Act of 1993 to clarify that an insurer may use 
reliable electronically stored data or other process which 
accurately reproduces or forms a durable medium for storing 
records and under what circumstances the original may be 
destroyed. Act 11-452 was published in the January 10, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 122) and transmitted 
to Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress 
not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-225, 
effective April 9, 1997.
    67. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-453, ``Fiscal Year 1997 Budget 
Temporary Act of 1996.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the 
District of Columbia Real Property Tax Revision Act of 1974 to 
provide that real property assessments shall be made on a 
biennial basis. Act 11-453 was published in the January 10, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 124) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-226, effective April 9, 1997.
    68. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-455, ``Insurance Agents and 
Brokers Licensing Revision Act of 1996.'' To specify the 
qualifications and procedures for the licensing of insurance 
agents and insurance brokers in all lines of insurance. Act 11-
455 was published in the January 10, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 140) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-227, effective April 
9, 1997.
    69. March 27, 1997--Act 11-458, ``Initiative 51 Real 
Property Assessment and Tax Initiative of 1996.'' To allow any 
taxpayer to challenge tax assessments on the public's behalf, 
or to intervene in assessment appeals before the Board of Real 
Property Assessments and Appeals; require that all proceedings 
of the Board be held in public and that all information 
presented to the Board be publicly available; and establish a 
``Public Advocate'' to represent the public interest before the 
Board and the courts on matters, including, but not limited to, 
property assessments; to conduct investigations; to appeal any 
assessments; and to advise the public of its rights under the 
tax laws. Act 11-458 was published in the December 27, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 43 page 6868) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-269, effective April 9, 1997.
    70. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-460, ``Eldebrooke United 
Methodist Church Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 
1996.'' To provide equitable real property tax relief to 
Eldebrooke Untied Methodist Church, a tax-exempt religious 
organization. Act 11-460 was published in the January 24, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 386) and transmitted 
to Congress on January 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress 
not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-228 
effective April 9, 1997.
    71. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-461, ``Chevy Chase Baptist Church 
Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1996.'' To provide 
equitable real property tax relief to Eldebrooke United 
Methodist Church, a tax-exempt religious organization. Act 11-
461 was published in the January 24, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 388) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-229, effective April 
9, 1997.
    72. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-462, ``Department of Corrections 
Criminal Background Investigation Authorization Temporary Act 
of 1996.'' To authorize, on a temporary basis, the director of 
the Department of Corrections to conduct criminal background 
investigations on all employees, including non-probationary 
employees, of the Department of Corrections. Act 11-462 was 
published in the January 23, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 390) and transmitted to Congress on January 23, 
1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-230, effective April 
9, 1997.
    73. Jan. 23, 1997--Act 11-463, ``Check Identification Fraud 
Prevention Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the Use of Consumer Identification Information 
Act of 1991 to allow a person to request the display of a 
second form of identification such as a credit card or other 
form of identification. Act 11-463 was published in the January 
24, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 392) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-231, effective April 9, 1997.
    74. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-490, ``Closing of Portions of 3rd 
Street, NW, and L Street, NW, Adjacent to Squares 525, 526, 
556, and 558, SO 90-18, Act of 1996.'' To order the closing of 
portions of 3rd Street, NW, and L Street, NW, adjacent to 
Squares 525, 526, and 558, collectively bounded by New York 
Avenue, NW, New Jersey Avenue, NW, K Street, NW, and 4th 
Street, NW, in ward 2. Act 11-490 was published in the January 
10, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 217) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-232, effective April 9, 1997.
    75. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-493, ``Risk-Based Capital Act of 
1996.'' To enact a Model Risk-Based Capital Act for insurers 
and to protect the confidentiality of reports filed with the 
Insurance Administration by both property and casualty and life 
and health insurance companies. Act 11-493 was published in the 
February 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
765) and transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-233, effective April 9, 1997.
    76. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-494, ``Uniform Partnership Act of 
1996.'' To enact the Revised Uniform Partnership Act in the 
District of Columbia. Act 11-494 was published in the February 
14, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 777) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-234, effective April 9, 1997.
    77. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-495, ``Health Maintenance 
Organization Act of 1996.'' To set forth standards for the 
formation, operation, and regulation of Health maintenance 
Organizations in the District of Columbia. Act 11-495 was 
published in the February 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 818) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 31, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-235, effective April 
9, 1997.
    78. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-496, ``Naming of Public Spaces 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Street and Alley Closing 
and Acquisition Procedures Act of 1982 to permit symbolic 
naming of public spaces, to establish additional standards for 
naming public spaces, and to require payment of fees for the 
naming of public spaces. Act 11-496 was published in the 
February 21, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
917) and transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-236, effective April 9, 1997.
    79. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-497, ``Uniform Commercial Code 
Negotiable Instruments Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend 
article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code by adding a provision 
concerning lost, destroyed, or stolen cashier's checks, 
teller's checks, or certified checks. Act 11-497 was published 
in the February 21, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 920) and transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-237, effective April 9, 1997.
    80. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-498, ``Uniform Commercial Code--
Letters of Credit Act of 1996.'' Act 11-498 was published in 
the February 21, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 923) and transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-238, effective April 9, 1997.
    81. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-499, ``Uniform Commercial Code--
Bulk Sales Act of 1996.'' To revise article 6 of the Uniform 
Commercial Code and to make conforming amendments to articles 1 
and 2. Act 11-499 was published in the February 21, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 936) and transmitted 
to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress 
not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-239, 
effective April 9, 1997.
    82. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-500, ``Uniform Commercial Code 
Investment Securities Revision Act of 1996.'' To enact revised 
Article 8 of the Uniform Commercial code in the District of 
Columbia and to make conforming amendments to articles 1, 4, 5, 
9, and 10. Act 11-500 was published in the February 28, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1087) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-240, effective April 9, 1997.
    83. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-501, ``Newborn Health Insurance 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To require that all individual and 
group health insurance policies provide coverage for a minimum 
stay in a hospital or other birthing facility for a mother and 
child following the birth of a child, and for other purposes. 
Act 11-501 was published in the February 28, 1997, edition of 
the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1125) and transmitted to 
Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-241, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    84. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-502, ``Real Estate Licensure 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of Columbia Real 
Estate Licensure Act of 1982 relating to the duties of real 
estate brokers, salespersons, and property managers. Act 11-502 
was published in the February 28, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1128) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 24, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-242, effective April 
9, 1997.
    85. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-503, ``Victims of Violent Crime 
Compensation.'' To establish a Crime Victims Compensation 
Program in the District of Columbia and to designate the 
administration of the program to the Superior Court of the 
District of Columbia. Act 11-503 was published in the February 
28, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1142) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-243, effective April 9, 1997.
    86. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-504, ``Mandatory Use of Seat 
Belts Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the Mandatory Use of 
Seat Belts Act of 1985 to require the driver and all passengers 
in a motor vehicle to wear a properly adjusted and fastened 
safety belt while the driver is in control of the vehicle, to 
provide an exemption for passengers in a vehicle if all seating 
positions with seat belts in the vehicle are occupied by other 
persons, provided that the driver shall insure that children 16 
years of age and under shall have preference to seating 
positions with seat belts, to provide for an enforcement date, 
to provide that efforts to educate the public about the 
requirements and purpose of this act shall be multi-lingual and 
in alternative formats, to increase the monetary fine for a 
violation, to provide for primary enforcement, to provide for 
the assessment of 2 points to the driving record of a driver 
found in violation, to make the driver of the vehicle, except 
the operator of a passenger vehicle for hire, responsible for 
ensuring that passengers comply with this act; to amend title 
31 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations to 
establish a mandatory seatbelt usage signage requirement for 
passenger vehicles for hire; and to provide for a $100 fine for 
drivers of public vehicles for hire who fail to comply with the 
signage requirement. Act 11-504 was published in the February 
28, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1155) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 24, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-244, effective April 9, 1997.
    87. Jan. 24, 1997--Act 11-505, ``Hospital and Medical 
Services Corporation Regulatory Act of 1996.'' Act 11-505 was 
published in the February 28, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1158) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 24, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-245, effective April 
9, 1997.
    88. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-506, ``Collateral Reform 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend, on a temporary 
basis, title 18 of the District of Columbia Municipal 
Regulations to establish the amount of collateral to be paid by 
a person charged with failure to obey under 18 DCMR 2000.2 
based upon the number of times the person has committed the 
offense. Act 11-506 was published in the March 7, 1997, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1223) and transmitted to 
Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act 
shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken effect. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-
246, effective April 9, 1997.
    89. Jan. 30, 1997--Act 11-507, ``Mortgage Lender and Broker 
Act of 1996 Time Extension Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' 
To amend, on a temporary basis, the Mortgage Lender and Broker 
Act of 1996 to extend the time for mortgage lenders and brokers 
to obtain a license and to allow the superintendent of the 
Office of Banking and Financial Institutions the authority, if 
necessary, to issue provisional licenses. Act 11-507 was 
published in the March 7, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 1225) and transmitted to Congress on January 31, 
1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-247, effective April 
9, 1997.
    90. Jan. 30, 1997--Act 11-510, ``Sex Offender Registration 
Act of 1996.'' To establish a sex offender registration program 
in the District of Columbia that will operate in accordance 
with the recommendations of a newly created advisory council, 
and to provide for selective community disclosure of 
registration information that is relevant and necessary to 
protect the public and to counteract the assessed dangerousness 
of convicted sex offenders who have returned to the community. 
Act 11-510 was published in the March 7, 1997, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1232) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 31, 1997 for a 60-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-274, effective June 3, 
1997.
    91. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-511, ``Boating While Intoxicated 
Act of 1996.'' To prohibit the operation of any watercraft 
while under the influence of, or intoxicated by, alcohol or any 
controlled substance, to establish no-wake zones, and increase 
registration fees. Act 11-511 was published in the March 7, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1242) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-248, effective April 9, 1997.
    92. Feb. 6, 1997--Act 11-512, ``Recorder of Deeds 
Recordation Surcharge Amendment Act of 1996.'' Act 11-512 was 
published in the March 7, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 1247) and transmitted to Congress on February 6, 
1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 11-257, effective April 15, 1997
    93. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-513, ``Closing of a Public Alley 
in Square 107, S.O. 95-56, Act of 1996.'' To order the closing 
of a public alley in Square 107, bounded by K Street, NW, 19th 
Street, NW, L Street, NW, and 18th Street, NW, in ward 2. Act 
11-513 was published in the March 7, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1251) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 31, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-249, effective April 
9, 1997.
    94. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-514, ``BNA Washington, Inc., Real 
Property Tax Deferral Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend the 
real property tax deferral procedure to provide for the 
deferral of real property taxes on certain real property. Act 
11-514 was published in the March 7, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1253) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 31, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-250, effective April 
9, 1997.
    95. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-515, ``Joseph H. Cole Fitness 
Center Designation Act of 1996.'' To rename the recreation 
center located at 1200 Morse Street, NE, presently known as the 
Wheatley Recreation Center, as the Joseph H. Cole Fitness 
Center. Act 11-515 was published in the March 7, 1997, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1259) and transmitted to 
Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-251, effective 
April 9, 1997.
    96. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-516, ``Closing of a Portion of M 
Street, SW, Adjacent to Square 651, SO 95-239 Act of 1996.'' To 
order the closing of a portion of M Street, SW and 
establishment of an easement, at the intersection of M Street, 
SW, and South Capitol Street, adjacent to Square 651, in ward 
2. Act 11-516 was published in the March 7, 1997, edition of 
the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1260) and transmitted to 
Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-252 effective 
April 9, 1997.
    97. Jan. 31, 1997-- Act 11-517, ``Closing of a Portion of 
Ingraham Street, NE, and Public Alleys Adjacent to Squares 3700 
and 3701, SO. 96-27, Act of 1996.'' To order the closing of a 
portion of Ingraham Street, NE, east of First Place, NE, and 
adjacent to Square 3700 and Square 3701, and the closing of a 
public alley between Ingraham Street, NE, and Lot 806 in Square 
3700, in ward 5. Act 11-517 was published in the March 7, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1262) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-253, effective April 9, 1997.
    98. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-518, ``Title 47, D.C. Code 
Enactment Act of 1996.'' To enact and amend title 47 of the 
District of Columbia Code and District of Columbia Enactment 
Act of 1996. Act 11-518 was published in the March 7, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1264) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-253, effective April 9, 1997.
    99. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-519, ``Second Technical 
Amendments Act of 1996.'' To amend the District of Columbia 
Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiative Act of 1979 to 
correct a grammatical error; to amend the District of Columbia 
Comprehensive Plan Act of 1984 to correct a grammatical error. 
Act 11-519 was published in the March 7, 1997, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1271) and transmitted to Congress 
on January 31, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-255, effective April 
9, 1997.
    100. Jan. 30, 1997--Act 11-520, ``Second Criminal Code 
Technical Amendments Act of 1996.'' To amend an act to 
establish a code of law for the District of Columbia to correct 
a punctuation error and to delete extraneous language. Act 11-
520 was published in the March 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1464) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 30, 1997 for a 60-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-275, effective June 3, 
1997.
    101. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11-521, ``Air Pollution Control 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend, on at temporary 
basis, the District of Columbia Air Pollution Control Act of 
1984 to authorize the Mayor to issue or amend the air pollution 
control rules to implement the act. Act 11-521 was published in 
the March 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
1414) and transmitted to Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 30-
day review. Act 11-520 was published in the March 14, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1464) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 30, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-275, effective June 3, 1997.
    102. Jan. 31, 1997--Act 11 523, ``Correctional Treatment 
Facility Act of 1996.'' Act 11-523 was published in the March 
14, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1416) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 31, 1997 for a 60-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-276, effective June 3, 1997.
    103. March 21, 1997--Act 11-524, ``Department of Insurance 
and Securities Regulation Establishment Act of 1996.'' Act 11-
524 was published in the March 28, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1730) and transmitted to Congress on 
March 21, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-268, effective May 21, 
1997.
    104. Feb. 6, 1997--Act 11-525, ``Alcohol Beverage Control 
Act Private Club Exception Amendment Act of 1996.'' Act 11-525 
was published in the March 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1421) and transmitted to Congress on 
February 6, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-258, effective April 
15, 1997.
    105. Feb. 6, 1997--Act 11-526, ``Procurement Reform 
Amendment Act of 1996.'' To amend an act to establish a code of 
law for the District of Columbia to establish a $5 surcharge to 
be collected at the time a document is submitted for 
recordation at the Recorder of Deeds: to amend an act providing 
for the expenses of the offices of the recorder of deeds and 
register of wills of the District of Columbia to provide that 
the funds generated by the surcharge shall be used exclusively 
to cover the costs of purchasing a state-of-the-art automated 
system at the Recorder of Deeds, maintaining the new computer 
system, training staff to implement and operate the new 
computer system and repairing an upgrading the infrastructure 
components at the Recorder of Deeds which are necessary and 
essential to meet its overall mission; to provide that the 
funds generated by the surcharge shall be deposited in a fund 
entitled the Recorder of Deeds Automation and Infrastructure 
Improvement Fund; to require the Mayor to make an annual budget 
request for the restricted use of the funds collected pursuant 
to this act; to amend the District of Columbia Income and 
Franchise Tax Act of 1947 to encourage the establishment of new 
business enterprises in the District of Columbia by enacting a 
deduction for dividends received by a corporation from a 
wholly-owned subsidiary after March 1, 1997; and to amend the 
District of Columbia Sales Tax Act to tax the sale of prepaid 
telephone calling card as the sale of tangible personal 
property, subject only to such taxes as are imposed on the sale 
or use of tangible personal property, even if no card has been 
issued. Act 11-526 was published in the March 14, 1997, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1423) and transmitted to 
Congress on February 6, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-259, effective 
April 15, 1997.
    106. Feb. 25, 1997--Act 11-527, ``Natural and Artificial 
Gas Gross Receipts Tax Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' Act 
11-524 was published in the March 28, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1452) and transmitted to Congress on 
February 25, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-260, effective April 
25, 1997.
    107. Feb. 25, 1997--Act 11-528, ``Washington Metropolitan 
Area Transit Authority Safety Regulation Temporary Act of 
1997.'' To regulate, on a temporary basis, the safety and 
security of the rail fixed guideway system operated by the 
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority by creating and 
operating a joint entity among the District of Columbia, 
Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of Maryland to oversee 
this regulation and by authorizing the Mayor of the District of 
Columbia to enter into and implement an agreement with Virginia 
and Maryland to achieve these purposes. Act 11-528 was 
published in the March 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 1455) and transmitted to Congress on February 25, 
1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-261, effective April 
25, 1997.
    108. Feb 25, 1997--Act 11-529, ``Washington Convention 
Center Authority Act of 1994 Time Extension Temporary Amendment 
Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Washington 
Convention Center Authority Act of 1994 to change the time in 
which the Authority has to submit final financial requirements 
and a feasibility analysis to the Mayor and the Council. Act 
11-529 was published in the March 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 1460) and transmitted to Congress on 
February 25, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-262, effective April 
25, 1997.
    109. Feb. 25, 1997--Act 11-530, ``Designation of Excepted 
Services Positions Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, 
on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia Government 
Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978, to increase, to a 
total of 200 the number of all positions under the Mayor's 
authority and the number of Excepted Service employees that the 
Mayor may appoint to subordinate agencies, to allocate up to 40 
of the positions subject to appointment by the Mayor to the 
Office of the Inspector General and, during a Control year up 
to 20 positions to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, 
and to repeal the requirement that lists of Excepted Service 
positions and incumbents in those positions be published in the 
District of Columbia Register. Act 11-530 was published in the 
March 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
1462) and transmitted to Congress on February 25, 1997 for a 
30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its 
having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 11-263, effective April 25, 1997.
    110. Feb 25, 1997--Act 11-531, ``Supplemental Security 
Income Payment Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on 
a temporary basis, the District of Columbia Public Assistance 
Act of 1982 to eliminate the supplement to the Federal 
Supplemental Security Income payment for District residents who 
live independently and re-direct the supplemental payment to 
persons who receive the Supplemental Security Income benefits 
and who live in community residential facilities; and to codify 
the current special living arrangement rates that have been 
established by rule. Act 11-531 was published in the March 14, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1464) and 
transmitted to Congress on February 25, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 11-264, effective April 25, 1997.
    111. Feb 25, 1997--Act 11-532, ``Cooperative Association 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary 
basis, the District of Columbia Cooperative Association Act to 
permit regular corporations to become members of an association 
formed under that act; to apply some sections of the District 
of Columbia Business Corporation Act to associations formed 
under the District of Columbia Cooperative Association Act; to 
permit a trade association representing cooperative 
organizations to use the word ``cooperative'' in its name; and 
to amend the D.C. Nonprofit Corporation Act to permit nonprofit 
cooperatives to be organized under the act. Act 11-532 was 
published in the March, 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 1467) and transmitted to Congress on February 25, 
1997 for 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day 
of its having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, 
this act became D.C. Law 11-265, effective April 25, 1997.
    112. March 6, 1997--Act 11-533, ``Unemployment Compensation 
Federal Conformity Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, 
on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia Unemployment 
Compensation Act to conform with the Federal requirement to 
permit the withholding of Federal income taxes from 
unemployment compensation benefits at the request of the 
claimant. Act 11-533 was published in the March 21, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1576) and 
transmitted to Congress on March 6, 1997 for 30-day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 11-266, effective May 7, 1997.
    113. March 6, 1997--Act 11-534, ``Equal Opportunity for 
Local, Small and Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Temporary 
Act of 1997.'' To establish new size standards for small 
business enterprise categories, require an assessment every 3 
years of the continued need for the local, small, and 
disadvantage programs, establish a 2 tier set-aside program for 
small business enterprises, establish affiliated interest 
standards for small and disadvantaged business enterprises, and 
to amend the Minority Contracting Act of 1976 to authorize 
board members participation at Minority Business Opportunity 
Commission meetings by conference telephone. Act 11-534 was 
published in the March 21, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 1579) and transmitted to Congress on March 6, 
1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 11-267, effective May 7, 
1997.
    114. March 6, 1997--Act 12-5, ``General Obligation Note Act 
of 1997.'' This act authorizes the issuance of general 
obligation notes of the District of Colombia for the purposes 
of financing certain appropriations for which unappropriated 
revenues are not available. Act 12-5 was published in the March 
14, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1469) and 
transmitted to Congress on March 6, 1997 for 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-1, 
effective May 7, 1997.
    115. March 6, 1997--Act 12-15, ``District of Columbia 
Unemployment Compensation Tax Stabilization Temporary Amendment 
Act of 1997.'' The purpose of the act is to amend, on a 
temporary basis, the District of Colombia Unemployment 
Compensation Act to reduce the taxable wage base, lower the 
maximum weekly benefit amount, and eliminate the dependent's 
allowance. Act 12-15 was published in the March 28, 1996, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 1751) and 
transmitted to Congress on March 6, 1997 for a 30-day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-2, effective May 7, 1997.
    116. April 8, 1997--Act 12-45, ``Mortgage Lender and Broker 
Act of 1996 Temporary Amendment of 1997.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the Mortgage Lender and Broker Act of 1996 to 
clarify certain requirements of the act and to conform certain 
definitions to Federal law; the District of Columbia Real 
Estate Licensure Act of 1982 to exempt mortgage brokers and 
lenders from the requirements of the act; and an act to 
regulate the business of loaning money on security of any kind 
by persons, firms, or corporations other than national banks, 
licensed bankers, trust companies, savings banks, building and 
loan associations, and real estate brokers in the District of 
Columbia to add certain exemptions. Act 12-45 was published in 
the March 28, 1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
2098) and transmitted to Congress on April 8, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-3, effective May 23, 1997.
    117. April 8, 1997--Act 12-46, ``Fiscal Year 1997 Budget 
Support Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the fiscal year 1997 budget support tax of 
1996 to repeal the requirement that deed recordation tax and 
transfer taxes be based on the higher of the assessed value of 
the sale price of the deed, to repeal the requirement the 
employees file returns for withholdings on a quarterly basis, 
to repeal the requirement that returns for gross receipt taxes 
and toll telecommunication service taxes be made on a quarterly 
basis, and to repeal the requirement that all requests for 
proposals for public schools include a clause giving the 
schools the option to accept contracted services or to receive 
funds representing their proportionate share of the costs for 
contracted services. Act 12-46 was published in the April 8, 
1996, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 2101) and 
transmitted to Congress on April 8, 1997 for a 30-day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-4, effective June 5, 1997.
    118. April 17, 1997--Act 12-61, ``Tenant Representative 
Services Lease Negotiation and Review Temporary Amendment Act 
of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of 
Columbia Revenue Act of 1970 to expedite Council review of new 
leases or renewals as existing leases where the District is a 
tenant and the Mayor is obligated to expend funds for 
construction or alteration of tenant improvements in excess on 
$1 million or average annual gross rental in excess of $1 
million over the lease period, and to allow the direct 
negotiation of new leases or renewals of existing leases where 
the District represented by a duly licensed private sector 
commercial real estate broker. Act 12-61 was published in the 
April 25, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
2410) and transmitted to Congress on April 17, 1997 for a 30-
day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its 
having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-5, effective June 5, 1997.
    119. April 17, 1997--Act 12-63, ``District of Columbia 
Taxicab Commission Establishment Act of 1985 Temporary 
Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend on a temporary basis, the 
District of Columbia Taxicab Commission Establishment Act of 
1985 to authorize hearing examiners to hear and decide 
complaints against taxicab owners, operators, companies, 
associations, fleets, and radio dispatch operations. Act 12-63 
was published in the April 25, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 2432) and transmitted to Congress on 
April 17, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-6, effective June 5, 
1997.
    120. June 11, 1997--Act 12-79, ``Public Assistance 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend on a temporary 
basis, the District of Columbia Public Assistance Act of 1982 
to comply with provisions of the Personal Responsibility and 
Work Opportunity Act of 1996, Public Law 104-193, by repealing 
the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program, 
establishing the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families as a 
non entitlement program of assistance, and making the following 
conforming amendments: (1) imposing a time limit for receipt of 
benefits under TANF; (2) revising certain eligibility 
requirements related to children absent from the home; (3) 
revising the duty to assign child support rights while on 
assistance; (4) defining the duty to cooperate in pursuing 
child support; (5) defining the ``good cause'' exception to the 
cooperation requirement; (6) establishing alien eligibility for 
TANF and Medicaid; (7) extending the current payment level and 
amount of assistance; (8) revising the living at home 
requirements for pregnant and parenting teens; (9) broadening 
the application of the school attendance provisions of the 
Demonstration Project for pregnant and parenting teens; (10) 
denying assistance to recipients engaging in certain kinds of 
fraud, fugitive felons, and parole violators; (11) making 
technical amendments to reflect the termination of the pass-
through of the first $50 of child support; and, (12) 
establishing confidentiality provisions; and to amend an act to 
enable the District of Columbia to receive Federal financial 
assistance until title XIX of the Social Security Act for a 
medical assistance program, and for other purposes to make 
conforming changes to the Medicaid law. Act 12-79, was 
published in the June 13, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 3353) and transmitted to Congress on June 11, 
1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-7, effective August 1, 
1997.
    121. June 11, 1997--Act 12-80, ``District of Columbia 
Regional Airports Authority Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend 
the District of Columbia Regional Airports Authority Act of 
1985 to increase the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority 
from 11 to 13 members. Act 12-80 was published in the June 13, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3371) and 
transmitted to Congress on June 11, 1997 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-8, 
effective August 1, 1997.
    122. June 25, 1997--Act 12-83, ``Procurement Reform 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary 
basis, the Procurement Reform Amendment Act of 1996 to increase 
the penalties of Civil False Claims and Qui Tam provisions and 
to change the title of the head of the Office of Contracting 
Procurement. Act 12-83 was published in the July 4, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3721) and 
transmitted to Congress on June 25, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-17, effective September 12, 1997.
    123. June 25, 1997--Act 12-84, ``BNA Washington, Inc., Real 
Property Tax Deferral Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend the real property tax deferral procedure to provide for 
the deferral of real property taxes on certain real property. 
Act 12-84 was published in the July 4, 1997, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3740) and transmitted to Congress 
on June 25, 1997 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-18, effective 
September 12, 1997.
    124. June 18, 1997--Act 12-85, ``Children's Defense Fund 
Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To provide, on a temporary basis, equitable real 
property tax relief to the Children's Defense Fund, a tax-
exempt organization. Act 12-85 was published in the June 27, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3610) and 
transmitted to Congress on June 18, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-9, effective September 5, 1997.
    125. June 18, 1997--Act 12-86, ``Closing of a Public Alley 
in Square 253, S.O. 88-107, Temporary Act of 1997.'' To order, 
on a temporary basis, the closing of a public alley in Square 
253, bounded by F Street, NW, 13th Street, NW, G Street NW, and 
14th Street NW, in ward 2. Act 12-86 was published in the June 
27, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3612) and 
transmitted to Congress on June 18, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-10, effective September 5, 1997.
    126. June 18, 1997--Act 12-87, ``Assessments Initiative 
Procedures Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the Real Property Assessment and Tax 
Initiative of 1997 to delay its applicability until the real 
property tax year 1999. Act 12-87 was published in the June 27, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3614) and 
transmitted to Congress on June 18, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-11, effective September 5, 1997.
    127. June 18, 1997--Act 12-88, ``Closing of a Public Alley 
in Square 484, S.O. 90-272, Temporary Act of 1997.'' To order, 
on a temporary basis, the closing of a public alley in Square 
484, bounded by K Street NW, 5th Street, NW, Massachusetts 
Avenues, NW, and 6th Street NW, in ward 2. Act 12-88 was 
published in the June 27, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 3616) and transmitted to Congress on June 18, 
1997 for a 30 day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-12, effective 
September 5, 1997.
    128. June 18, 1997--Act 12-90, ``Motor Vehicle Biennial 
Inspection fund Act of 1997.'' To amend an act to provide for 
the annual inspection of all motor vehicles in the District of 
Columbia to establish a dedicated fund for the District of 
Columbia Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program as 
mandated by the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Act 
12-90 was published in the June 27, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 3618) and transmitted to Congress on 
June 18, 1997 for a 30 day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-13, effective 
September 5, 1997.
    129. June 18, 1997--Act 12-91, ``International Registration 
Plan Agreement Act of 1997.'' To provide for membership in the 
International Registration Plan pursuant to the Federally 
mandated reciprocal registration requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
Sec. 31704. Act 12-91 was published in the June 27, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3620) and 
transmitted to Congress on June 18, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
14, effective September 5, 1997.
    130. June 18, 1997--Act 12-92, ``Ivy City Yard Fixed Right-
of-Way Mass Transit System Designation Temporary Act of 1997.'' 
To designate, on a temporary basis, all buildings, structures, 
and other improvements located at the Ivy City Yard as related 
to a fixed right-of-way mass transit system which is exempt 
from the subdivision requirement for certain proposed actions 
pertaining to the erection or construction of buildings, 
structures, and other improvements. Act 12-92 was published in 
the June 27, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
3625) and transmitted to Congress on June 18, 1997 for a 30 day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-15, effective September 5, 1997.
    131. June 18, 1997--Act 12-93, ``Motor Vehicle Excessive 
Idling Fine Increase Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend, on temporary basis, 16 DCMR 3224 and 18 DCMR 2601.2 to 
increase the civil infractions fine for violating the engine 
idling provisions of the District of Columbia Air Pollution 
Control Act of 1984 and the Traffic Adjudication Act of 1978 
and to amend the idling restriction of 18 DCMR 2418.3 to make 
it comply with the District of Columbia Air Pollution Control 
Act of 1984. Act 12-93 was published in the June 27, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3627) and 
transmitted to Congress on June 18, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-16, effective September 5, 1997.
    132. July 11, 1997--Act 12-95, ``Ivy City Yard Fixed Right-
of-Way Mass Transit System Designation Act of 1997.'' To 
designate all buildings, structures, and other improvements 
located at the Ivy City Yard as related to a fixed right-of-way 
mass transit system which is exempt from the subdivision 
requirement for certain proposed actions pertaining to the 
erection or construction of buildings, structures, and other 
improvements. Act 12-95 was published in the July 18, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3998) and 
transmitted to Congress on July 11, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
19, effective September 23, 1997.
    133. July 11, 1997--Act 12-97, ``Washington Metropolitan 
Area Transit Authority Safety Regulation Act of 1997.'' To 
regulate the safety and security of the rail fixed guide way 
system operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 
Authority by creating and operating a joint entity among the 
District of Columbia. Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State 
of Maryland to oversee this regulation and by authorizing the 
Mayor of the District of Columbia to enter into and implement 
an agreement with Virginia and Maryland to achieve these 
purpose. Act 12-95 was published in the July 18, 1997, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 3998) and transmitted to 
Congress on July 11, 1997 for a 30 day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-19, effective 
September 23, 1997.
    134. July 11, 1997--Act 12-98, ``General Public Assistance 
Program Termination Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend, on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia General 
Public Assistance Act of 1982 to terminate the General Public 
assistance program. Act 12-98 was published in the July 18, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4028) and 
transmitted to Congress on July 11, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-21, effective September 23, 1997.
    135. July 11, 1997--Act 12-99, ``Washington Convention 
Center Authority Collective Bargaining Amendment Act of 1997.'' 
To amend the Washington Convention Center Authority Act of 1994 
to provide for coverage of the Washington Convention Center 
Employees by the Public Employee Relations Board and by the 
labor-management relations title of the District of Columbia 
Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978. Act 12-99 
was published in the July 25, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 4168) and transmitted to Congress on 
July 11, 1997 for a 30 day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-22, effective 
September 23, 1997.
    136. July 11, 1997--Act 12-100, ``Business Improvement 
District Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the Business Improvement Districts Act of 1996 
to authorize the establishment and administration of business 
improvement districts in the District of Columbia and the 
assessment and collection of taxes for the improvement of 
business improvement districts. Act 12-100 was published in the 
July 25, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4170) 
and transmitted to Congress on July 11, 1997 for a 30 day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-23, effective September 23, 1997.
    137. July 29, 1997--Act 12-107, ``Closing of a Public Alley 
in Square 253, S.O. 88-107, Reinstatement Act of 1997.'' To 
reinstate an act that ordered the closing of a public alley in 
Square 253, bounded by F Street, NW, 13th Street, NW, G Street, 
NW, and 14th Street, NW, in ward 2. Act 12-107 was published in 
the August 1, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
4316) and transmitted to Congress on July 29, 1997 for a 30 day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-24, effective October 8, 1997.
    138. July 29, 1997--Act 12-108, ``Closing of a Public Alley 
in Square 484 S.O. 90-272, Reinstatement Act of 1997.'' To 
reinstate an act that ordered the closing of a public alley in 
Square 484, bounded by K Street, NW, 5th Street, NW, 
Massachusetts Avenue, NW, and 6th Street, NW in ward 2, and to 
amend the closing of a public alley in Square 107, S.O. 95-56, 
Act of 1996 to clarify a provision requiring an affordable 
housing contribution. Act 12-108 was published in the August 1, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4318) and 
transmitted to Congress on July 29, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
25, effective October 8, 1997.
    139. July 29, 1997--Act 12-109, ``Business Improvement 
Districts Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend the Business 
Improvement Districts Act of 1996 to authorize the 
establishment and administration of business improvement 
districts in the District of Columbia and the assessment and 
collection of taxes for the improvement of business improvement 
districts in the District of Columbia and the assessment and 
collection of taxes for the improvement of business improvement 
districts. Act 12-109 was published in the August 1, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4320) and 
transmitted to Congress on July 29, 1997 for a 30 day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
26, effective October 8, 1997.
    140. July 29, 1997--Act 12-113, ``Health Insurance 
Portability and Accountability Federal Law Conformity Temporary 
Act of 1997.'' To provide, on a temporary basis, individual and 
group health insurance subscribers in the District of Columbia 
the benefits and protections mandated by the Health Insurance 
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Act 12-113 was 
published in the August 1, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 44 page 4345) and transmitted to Congress on July 29, 
1997 for a 30 day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-27, effective October 
8, 1997.
    141. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-117, ``Sex Offender Registration 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary 
basis, the Sex Offender Registration Act of 1996 to require the 
Metropolitan Police Department to update its registry promptly, 
and to require new residents to the District of Columbia who 
fall within the registration requirements to register with the 
Metropolitan Police Department within 10 days of establishing 
residence in the District of Columbia. Act 12-117 was published 
in the August 8, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 4506) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its 
having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-28, effective October 23, 1997.
    142. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-119, ``Iglesia Del Dios Vivo 
Columna Y Apoya De La Verdad La Lux Del Mundo Equitable Real 
Property Tax Relief Act of 1997.'' To provide equitable real 
property tax relief to the Iglesia Del Dios Vivo Columna Y 
Apoya De La Verdad ``La Lux Del Mundo'', a tax exempt religious 
organization. Act 12-119 was published in the August 15, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4641) and 
transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-29, effective October 23, 1997.
    143. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-125, ``Living Word Church 
Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1997.'' To provide 
equitable real property tax relief to the Living Word Church, a 
tax exempt religious organization. Act 12-125 was published in 
the August 15, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
4656) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-30, effective October 23, 1997.
    144. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-126, ``Faith Tabernacle Church 
Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1997.'' To provide 
equitable real property tax relief to Faith Tabernacle Church, 
a tax exempt religious organization. Act 12-126 was published 
in the August 15, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 4658) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-31, effective October 23, 1997.
    145. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-128, ``Healthcare Entity 
Conversion Act of 1997.'' To establish procedures to ensure the 
protection of charitable assets held in the public trust by 
Healthcare entities when those assets are transferred to 
entitles that are for-profit and to make conforming amendments 
to the Health Services Planning Program Reestablishment Act of 
1996, the Hospital and Medical Services Corporation Regulatory 
Act of 1996, and the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 
1996, and to authorize the Corporation Counsel to approve all 
conversions. Act 12-128 was published in the August 22, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4819) and 
transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-32, effective October 23, 1997.
    146. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-129, ``Washington Home for 
Incurables Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1997.'' To 
provide equitable real property tax relief to the Washington 
Home for Incurables a tax exempt. Act 12-129 was published in 
the August 15, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
4660) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-33, effective October 23, 1997.
    147. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-130, ``Real Property Interest 
Reporting Improvement Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend an act 
to establish a code of law for the District of Columbia to 
require the owner mortgagee, secured party under a deed of 
trust, trustee, and lienholder of any real property to notify 
the Recorder of Deeds when there is a name or address change, 
and to authorize an administrative fee to cover the cost of 
additional research to locate an owner, a mortgagee, a secured 
party under a deed of trust, a trustee, or a lienholder after 
an unsuccessful attempt using available information. Act 12-130 
was published in the August 22, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 4827) and transmitted to Congress on 
September 3, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-34, effective October 
23, 1997.
    148. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-131, ``Health Care for the 
Homeless Project, Inc., Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act 
of 1997.'' To provide equitable real property tax, and transfer 
tax relief to the Health Care for the Homeless Project, Inc., 
the National Health Plan, and the Community Group Health 
Foundation, tax exempt organizations. Act 12-131 was published 
in the August 22, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 4662) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-35, effective October 23, 1997.
    149. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-132, ``Comprehensive Merit 
Personnel Act Pay Limit Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend, on a temporary basis, the District of Columbia 
Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to repeal 
the prohibition on an employee receiving a rate of basic pay in 
excess of the rate of pay for the Mayor; and to amend the 
District of Columbia Police and Firemen's Salary Act of 1958 to 
authorize the Council to change or suspend by resolution the 
compensation provisions for officers and members of the 
Metropolitan Police Department and the Fire and Emergency 
Medical Services Department. Act 12-132 was published in the 
August 22, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
4829) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-36, effective October 23, 1997.
    150. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-139, ``Real Property Tax sale 
Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend Title 47 of the District of 
Columbia Code to prevent owners of real property with 
delinquent real property taxes from participating in real 
property tax sales. Act 12-139 was published in the August 22, 
1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4850) and 
transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-37, effective October 23, 1997.
    151. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-140, ``Homestead Exemption 
Penalty Expansion Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend title 47 of 
the District of Columbia Code to establish as a misdemeanor the 
failure to notify the Mayor of termination of eligibility for 
the Homestead tax exemption program. Act 12-140 was published 
in the August 22, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 4852) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-38, effective October 23, 1997.
    152. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-143, ``Human Rights Amendment 
Act of 1997.'' To amend the Human Rights Act of 1977 to 
establish a mandatory mediation process prior to the formal 
investigation of a complaint by the Office of Human Rights, to 
provide for a period of up to 60 days for completion of the 
conciliation process after the Office of Human Rights completes 
its formal investigation, to permit the Commission to order the 
payment of civil penalties, to provide for a 1-year statute of 
limitations for filing a court action, and to provide for the 
tolling of the 1-year statute of limitations during the 
pendency of a complaint before the Office of Human Rights. Act 
12-143 was published in the August 22, 1997, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 4856) and transmitted to Congress 
on September 3, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-39, effective October 
23, 1997.
    153. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-144, ``Real Property Assessment 
Process and Tax Revenue Anticipation Notes Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend title 47 of the District of Columbia Code to 
provide for an administrative appeal process for supplemental 
assessments, provide that real property shall be assessed at 
least once every 3 years, establish an administrative appeal 
process for triennial assessments, establish a process for 
appeals filed outside of the triennial assessment period, 
establish an appeal process for new owners, provide that the 
assessment role shall be estimated instead of certified, and 
authorize the issuance of District of Columbia general 
obligation tax revenue anticipation notes of the District of 
Columbia to finance general governmental expenses for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1997. Act 12-144 was published 
in the August 22, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 4859) and transmitted to Congress on September 3, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-40, effective October 23, 1997.

   COUNCIL ACTS ENACTED INTO LAW DURING THE 2ND SESSION OF THE 105TH 
                                CONGRESS

    1. Sept. 26, 1997--Act 12-106 (Law 12-42), ``Arts and 
Humanities Enterprise Fund Establishment Amendment Act of 
1997.'' Act 12-106 was published in the October 3, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 5577) and 
transmitted to Congress on September 26, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-42, effective January 29, 1998.
    2. Oct. 3, 1997--Act 12-127 (Law 12-43), ``CFO Membership 
on the Health and Hospitals Public Benefit Corporation Board, 
Council Review of Board Promulgation, and Approval of 
Organizational and Operational Plan Amendment Act of 1997.'' 
Act 12-127 was published in the October 10, 1997, edition of 
the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 5763) and transmitted to 
Congress on October 3, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-43, effective 
February 6, 1998.
    3. Oct. 12, 1997--Act 12-158 (Law 12-44), ``Public Before 
and After School Care Exemption Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, Chapter 3 of Title 29 
of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations to ensure 
that child development centers that receive Federal funds and 
that provide a before school child development program, an 
after school development program, or a before and after school 
child development program in the District of Columbia Public 
Schools meet licensure requirements and to exempt certain 
others from licensure. Act 12-158 was published in the October 
24, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6051) and 
transmitted to Congress on October 22, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-44, effective February 26, 1998.
    4. Oct. 22, 1997--Act 12-160 (Law 12-45), ``Juvenile Curfew 
and Retired Police Officer Redeployment Temporary Amendment Act 
of 1997.'' Act 12-160 was published in the October 24, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6055) and 
transmitted to Congress on October 22, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-45 effective February 26, 1998.
    5. Oct. 22, 1997--Act 12-161 (Law 12-46), ``Comprehensive 
Merit Personnel Act Annuity Offset Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of 
Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 
to eliminate the requirement that the pay of a judge receiving 
an annuity from the Judges; Retirement Fund be reduced by the 
amount of annuity allocable to the period of employment as a 
re-employed annuity. Act 12-161 was published in the October 
24, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6057) and 
transmitted to Congress on October 22, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-46, effective February 26, 1998.
    6. Oct. 23, 1997--Act 12-163 (Law 12-49), ``Fleet Traffic 
Adjudication Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis the District of Columbia Traffic Adjudication 
Act of 1978 to provide a separate process for the 
administrative adjudication and enforcement of parking 
infractions incurred by fleet owners during the regular course 
of business. Act 12-163 was published in the October 31, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6219) and 
transmitted to Congress on October 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-49, effective February 27, 1998.
    7. Oct. 23, 1997--Act 12-164 (Law 12-50), ``Small Purchase 
Authority Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend the Procurement 
Practices Act of 1985 to reestablish small purchase authority. 
Act 12-164 was published in the October 31, 1997, edition of 
the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6222) and transmitted to 
Congress on October 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-50, effective 
February 27, 1998.
    8. Oct. 22, 1997--Act 12-166 (Law 12-47), ``Comprehensive 
Merit Personnel Act Pilot Program Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of 
Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978, 
to authorize the Department of Employment Services, the 
Department of Recreation and Parks, and the Office of personnel 
to implement pilot personnel programs to the areas of 
classification and compensation and incentive awards related to 
performance during a control period. Act 12-166 was published 
in the October 24, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 6061) and transmitted to Congress on October 22, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-47, effective February 26, 1998.
    9. Oct. 22, 1997--Act 12-167 (Law 12-48), ``Alcoholic 
Beverage Control DC Arena Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend, on an temporary basis, the District of Columbia 
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act and the Alcoholic Beverages and 
Food Regulations to establish and provide for the initial 
issuance of one or more licenses Class Arena C/X for the D.C. 
Arena and to provide for the initial issuance of other class C 
retailer's licenses at the D.C. Arena. Act 12-167 was published 
in the October 24, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 6064) and transmitted to Congress on October 22, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-48, effective February 26, 1998.
    10. Oct. 23, 1997--Act 12-168 (Law 12-51), ``Child Abuse 
and Neglect Prevention Children's Trust Fund Temporary 
Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the 
Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Children's Trust Fund Act of 
1993, to require that the foundation for the National Capital 
region temporarily serve as the fiduciary agent of the trust 
fund, allow the trust fund to hold and distribute funds for 
other organizations, eliminate the requirement of retained 
assets, eliminate the requirement that the director of the 
Mayor's Youth Initiative Office serve as a member of the Board, 
and permit the expansion of the Board membership and length of 
service. Act 12-168 was published in the October 31, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6224) and 
transmitted to Congress on October 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-51, effective February 27, 1998.
    11. Oct. 23, 1997--Act 12-169 (Law 12-52), ``Nuisance 
Repairs Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend section 1 of an act 
to provide for the abatement of nuisances in the District of 
Columbia, and for other purposes, to require owners of real 
property that have become a nuisance to pay fair market value 
for repairs made to the property by the District of Columbia 
government. Act 12-169 was published in the October 31, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6226) and 
transmitted to Congress on October 23, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-52, effective February 27, 1998.
    12. Oct. 23, 1997--Act 12-170 (Law 12-53), ``Supplemental 
Security Income Payment Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend the 
District of Columbia Public Assistance Act of 1982 to eliminate 
the District supplement to the Federal Supplemental Security 
Income payment for District residents who live independently 
and re-direct the supplemental payment to persons who receive 
the supplemental Security Income benefits and who live in 
community residential facilities, and to codify the current 
special living arrangement rates that have been established by 
rule. Act 12-170 was published in the October 31, 1997, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6228) and transmitted to 
Congress on October 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-53, effective 
February 27, 1998.
    13. Oct. 23, 1997--Act 12-171 (Law 12-54), ``Paternity 
Acknowledgment Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend Chapter 9 
Title 16 of the District of Columbia Code to require each 
public and private birthing hospital in the District of 
Columbia to operate a hospital based program that provides 
services to facilitate the voluntary acknowledgment of 
paternity immediately before and after the birth of a child to 
an unmarried woman, to require each birthing hospital to 
transmit completed voluntary acknowledgment of paternity forms 
to the Mayor, and to require the Mayor to provide to the staff 
of each birthing hospital the forms, materials, and training 
required to operate the program. Act 12-171 was published in 
the October 31, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 6231) and transmitted to Congress on October 23, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-154, effective February 27, 1998.
    14. Oct. 23, 1997--Act 12-172 (Law 12-55), ``Public 
Assistance Fair Hearing Procedures Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend the Public Assistance Act of 1982 to change the 
requirement that a verbatim written transcript be prepared for 
every fair hearing and to require recorded testimony instead, 
and to authorize transcript when requested by a claimant, if 
ordered by the hearing office or for purposes of judicial 
review, with costs of transcription to be borne by the Mayor. 
Act 12-172 was published in the October 24, 1997, edition of 
the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6068) and transmitted to 
Congress on October 23, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-55, effective 
February 27, 1998.
    15. Nov. 12, 1997--Act 12-176 (Law 12-113), ``Felony Murder 
Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend an act to establish code of 
law for the District of Columbia to include the offenses of 
first degree child sexual abuse and first degree cruelty to 
children as crimes supporting a first degree murder conviction 
regardless of a defendants intent to kill, if a child's death 
occurs during or in furtherance of an act of first degree child 
sexual abuse or first degree cruelty to children. Act 12-176 
was published in the November 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 6931) and transmitted to Congress on 
November 12, 1997 for a 60-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-113 effective May 16, 
1998.
    16. Nov. 12 1997--Act 12-177 (Law 12-56), ``Financial 
Institutions Deposit and Investment Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend Chapter 3 of Title 47 of the District of Columbia code to 
establish methods for depositing and investing District funds 
and obtaining financial services, including a system that will 
award banking business based upon a competitive bidding process 
involving the ranking of financial institutions, and 
diversification of the Districts investment portfolio. Act 12-
177 was published in the November 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 6933) and transmitted to Congress on 
November 12, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-56, effective March 
18, 1998.
    17. Nov. 12, 1997--Act 12-180 (Law 12-57), ``Defined 
Contribution Transition Vesting Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of 
Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 
to allow District government employees whose participation in 
the District Defined Contribution Plan ceases as a result of 
the implementation of provisions of the National Capital 
Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997 to 
credit their service with certain employers that provide the 
services previously performed by the District government toward 
the vesting requirement of the Defined Contribution Plan. Act 
12-180 was published in the November 14, 1997, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 6951) and transmitted to Congress 
on November 12, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-57, effective March 
28, 1998.
    18. Nov. 20, 1997--Act 12-189 (Law 12-58), ``Police 
Officers, Fire Fighters, and Teachers Retirement Benefit 
Replacement Plan Temporary Act of 1997.'' To establish, on a 
temporary basis, an actuarially sound retirement replacement 
plan for pension benefits accrued after June 30, 1997, for 
police officers, fire fighters, and teachers. Act 12-189 was 
published in the November 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 6970) and transmitted to Congress on 
November 20, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-58, effective March 
20, 1998.
    19. Dec. 11, 1997--Act 12-190 (Law 12-59), ``Fiscal Year 
1998 Revised Budget Support Temporary Act of 1997.'' Act 12-180 
was published in the November 14, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 6951) and transmitted to Congress on 
November 12, 1997 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-59, effective March 
28, 1998.
    20. Dec. 11 1997--Act 12-191 (Law 12-60), ``Fiscal Year 
1998 Revised Budget Support Act of 1997.'' To amend the 
District of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel 
Act of 1978 to eliminate the cap on compensation of members of 
the Board of Real Property Assessments and Appeals, to amend 
the District of Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985 to 
provide the chief procurement officer the authority to 
establish a certification program for individuals in district 
procurement; to amend the Community Residence Facilities 
Licenser Act of 1977 to abolish certain health-related duties 
and to transfer others to the Department of Health; to amend 
the District of Columbia Public School Nurse Assignment Act of 
1987 to transfer certain functions from the Commissioner of 
Public Health to the director, Department of Health, to 
establish within the Districts General Fund a special account 
consisting of a portion of the program fees and earnings 
derived from the sale of industrial revenue bonds, to be used 
for the industrial revenue bond program and for other purposes, 
to amend the District of Columbia Government Comprehensive 
Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to mandate the direct deposit or 
mailing of payroll checks to employees, to amend the District 
of Columbia Public Assistance Act of 1982 to abolish General 
Public Assistance for adults; to amend the Health and Hospitals 
Public Benefit Corporation Act of 1996 to transfer to the 
Corporation's management and control of the functions, assets, 
property, records, and obligations of the Bureau of School 
Nursing; to amend the BNA Washington, Inc. Real Property Tax 
Deferral Amendment Act of 1996 to change the date the Mayor is 
required to submit proposed legislation to establish 
comprehensive standards for the provision of incentives by the 
District government to maintain existing employers in the 
District and to attract new employers, to amend the District of 
Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 
to eliminate shift differential and premium pay as negotiation 
issues subject to collective bargaining for all employees 
except uniformed members of the Fire and emergency Medical 
Services Department and 24-hour health care workers employed at 
the Department of Human Services, to repeal the District of 
Columbia Government Employer-Assisted Housing Act of 1992; to 
amend the District of Columbia Unemployment Compensation Act to 
exclude persons who serve as Mayor, members of the Council of 
the District of Columbia or members of the School Board from 
eligibility for unemployment benefits; to require the District 
of Columbia Public Schools to develop and submit for Council 
approval by November 1, 1997, written procedures outlining an 
ongoing process for evaluating facilities needs; to establish 
the 21st Century Public School Information Technology Program 
to provide a computer literacy and training project for 
teachers employed by the District of Columbia Public Schools; 
to amend an act to authorize the Commissioners of the District 
of Columbia to prescribe penalties for the handling and 
collection of dishonored checks to authorize the Mayor to add 
the costs of collection to the amount due on any dishonored 
checks written to the District government in payment of any 
obligation owed to the District; to amend Title 47 of the 
District of Columbia Code to change the period of limitation 
upon assessment and collection of income and on franchise taxes 
from 10 years to 3 years to amend the Uniform Disposition of 
Unclaimed Property Act of 1980 to expedite compliance with the 
act; and to establish an Office of Banking and Financial 
Institutions Enterprise Fund to require the crediting to this 
fund of all fees received under laws administered by the Office 
of Banking and Financial Institutions, and to reserve this fund 
for the exclusive use of the Office of Banking and Financial 
Institution, subject to appropriations by Congress. Act 12-191 
was published in the December 12, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 7482) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 9, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-60, effective March 
28, 1998.
    21. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-198 (Law 12-62), ``Housing 
Authority Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend the District of 
Columbia Housing Authority Act of 1994 to create a public 
housing police force. Act 12-198 was published in the December 
12, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 7486) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 9, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
62, effective March 28, 1998.
    22. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-199 (Law 12-63), ``Check 
Identification Fraud Prevention Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Use of Consumer 
Identification Information Act of 1991 to allow a person to 
request the display of a second form of identification, such as 
a credit card or other form of identification. Act 12-199 was 
published in the December 12, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 7486) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 9, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-63, effective March 
20, 1998.
    23. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-200 (Law 12-64), ``Collateral 
Reform Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, Title 18 of the District of Columbia Municipal 
Regulations to establish the amount of collateral to be paid by 
a person charged with failure to obey under 18 DCMR 2000.2 
based upon the number of times the person has committed the 
offense. Act 12-200 was published in the December 12, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 7493) and 
transmitted to Congress on December 18, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-64, effective March 20, 1998.
    24. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-204 (Law 12-65), ``Comprehensive 
Merit Personnel Employee Viaticum Settlement Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend the District of Columbia Government 
Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to provide authority 
for the offering of Viaticum settlements to terminally ill 
employees and former employees enrolled in the District of 
Columbia Group Life Insurance Program. Act 12-204 was published 
in the December 19, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 
page 7608) and transmitted to Congress on December 18, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-65, effective March 20, 1998.
    25. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-205 (Law 12-66), ``Comprehensive 
Merit Personnel Act Health and Life Insurance Clarification 
Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend the District of Columbia 
Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to clarify 
eligibility for continuation of health and life benefits for 
certain employees of the District government first employed 
after September 30, 1987. Act 12-205 was published in the 
December 12, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
7486) and transmitted to Congress on December 18, 1997 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-66, effective March 20, 1998.
    26. Sept. 3, 1997--Act 12-208 (Law 12-41), ``General 
Obligation Bond for Fiscal Year 1998 Act of 1997.'' Act 12-208 
was published in the August 22, 1997, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 44 page 4859) and transmitted to Congress on 
September 3, 1997 for a 30-day review. This legislation became 
effective on the date that the President of the United States 
signed Public Law 105-100. This act became D.C. Law 12-41, 
effective November 19, 1997.
    27. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-209 (Law 12-67), ``Chief 
Procurement Officer Qualification Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' Act 12-209 was published in the December 12, 1997, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 7486) and 
transmitted to Congress on December 18, 1997 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-67, effective March 20, 1998.
    28. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-210 (Law 12-68), ``Department of 
Corrections Criminal Background Investigation Authorization 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' Act 12-210 was published in 
the December 19, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 4 
page 374) and transmitted to Congress on December 18, 1997 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-68, effective March 20, 1998.
    29. Dec. 18, 1997--Act 12-211 (Law 12-69), ``District of 
Columbia Unemployment Compensation Federal Conformity Temporary 
Amendment Act of 1997.'' Act 12-257 was published in the 
December 19, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 44 page 
7610) and transmitted to Congress on December 18, 1997 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-69, effective March 20, 1998.
    30. Jan. 9, 1998--Act 12-219 (Law 12-70), ``TANF and TANF-
Related Medicaid Managed Care Program Temporary Amendment Act 
of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, an act to enable the 
District of Columbia to receive Federal financial assistance 
under title XIX of the Social Security Act for a medical 
assistance program, and for other purposes, to require the 
Mayor to establish a plan to mandate enrollment of TANF and 
TANF-related Medicaid recipients in an HMO. Act 12-219 was 
published in the January 9, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 101) and transmitted to Congress on January 9, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-70, effective March 20, 1998.
    31. Jan. 9, 1998--Act 12-223 (Law 12-71), ``Child 
Development Facilities Regulation Temporary Act of 1997.'' To 
create, on a temporary basis, a statutory framework for the 
regulation of child development facilities. Act 12-223 was 
published in the January 9, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 101) and transmitted to Congress on January 9, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-71, effective March 20, 1998.
    32. Jan. 9, 1998--Act 12-224 (Law 12-72), ``Day Care Policy 
Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend, on a temporary 
basis, the Day Care Policy Act of 1979 to comply with the 
provisions of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996, Public Law 104-193 by eliminating 
the requirement that the Department of Human services pay the 
full cost of day care, revising the eligibility criteria for 
the Mayor to supplement the payment for day care services, 
eliminating the requirement that the District pay a child 
development center that has maintained a 90 percent attendance 
rate for District subsidized children and eliminating the 2 
year of age or older limitation for children who will be cared 
for by child development centers under contract with the 
District government. Act 12-224 was published in the January 9, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 148) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 9, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
72, effective March 20, 1998.
    33. Feb. 2, 1998--Act 12-226 (Law 12-84), ``James M. McGee, 
Jr., Street, SE. Designation Act of 1997.'' To designate the 
2700 block of Irving Street, SE., as James M. McGee, Jr., 
Street, SE. (ward 8). Act 12-226 was published in the January 
23, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 378) and 
transmitted to Congress on February 2, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-84, effective March 25, 1998.
    34. Feb. 2, 1998--Act 12-227 (Law 12-85), ``Ronald H. Brown 
Building Designation Act of 1997.'' To rename Daniel C. Roper 
Middle School, at 4800 Meade Street, NE., as the Ronald H. 
Brown Middle School in honor of the late Secretary of Commerce 
of the United States. Act 12-227 was published in the January 
23, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 378) and 
transmitted to Congress on February 2, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-84, effective March 25, 1998.
    35. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-228 (Law 12-73), ``Brian T.A. 
Gibson Memorial Building Designation Act of 1997.'' To 
designate the Fourth District Police Headquarters, located at 
6001 Georgia Avenue, NW., as the Brian T.A. Gibson Memorial 
Building in honor of the late Metropolitan Police Officer. Act 
12-228 was published in the January 23, 1998, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 380) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 29, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-73, effective March 
24, 1998.
    36. Jan. 9, 1998--Act 12-229 (Law 12-74), ``Closing of 
Public Alley in Square 5157, S.O. 95-107, Act of 1997.'' To 
order the closing of a public alley in Square 5157, bounded by 
Sheriff Road, NE., 45th Place, NE., Lee Street, NE., and Square 
5125, in ward 7. Act 12-229 was published in the January 23, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 382) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 29, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-74, effective March 24, 1998.
    37. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-230 (Law 12-75), ``Taxicab 
Commission Hearing Examiner Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend 
the District of Columbia Taxicab Commission Establishment Act 
of 1985 to authorize hearing examiners to hear and decide 
complaints against taxicab owners, operators, companies, 
associations, fleets, and radio dispatch operations. Act 12-230 
was published in the January 23, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 384) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 29, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-75, effective March 
24, 1998.
    38. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-231 (Law 12-76), ``Fleet Traffic 
Adjudication Amendment Act of 1997.'' To amend the District of 
Columbia Traffic Adjudication Act of 1978 to provide a separate 
process for the administrative adjudication and enforcement of 
parking infractions incurred by fleet owners during the regular 
course of business. Act 12-231 was published in the January 30, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 481) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 29, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-76, effective March 24, 1998.
    39. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-232 (Law 12-77), ``Closing of a 
Public Alley in Square 5405, S.O. 96-135, Act of 1997.'' To 
order the closing of a public alley in Square 5405, bounded by 
Texas Avenue, SE., and East Capitol Street, SE., in ward 7. Act 
12-232 was published in the January 30, 1998, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 484) and transmitted to Congress on 
January 29, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-77, effective March 
24, 1998.
    40. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-233 (Law 12-114), ``Criminal Code 
Technical Amendments Act of 1997.'' To amend the Law to 
Legalize Lotteries, Daily Numbers Games, and Bingo and Raffles 
for Charitable Purposes in the District of Columbia to make 
stylistic and punctuation corrections, to amend Title 23 of the 
District of Columbia Code to make stylistic and spelling 
corrections, and to amend the Prison Industries Act of 1996 to 
make a stylistic correction. A 60-day review period is required 
by section 602(2) of the District Home Rule. Act 12-233 was 
published in the January 30, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 486) and transmitted to Congress on January 29, 
1998 for a 60-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-114, effective May 22, 1998.
    41. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-234 (Law 12-78), ``Establishment 
of Council Contract Review Criteria Temporary Amendment Act of 
1997.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of 
Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985 to establish 
criteria for Council review and approval of contracts of 
expenditures in excess of $1 million during a 12-month period, 
and to expedite the review and approval of Federal-aid highway 
contracts. Act 12-230 was published in the January 30, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 488) and transmitted 
to Congress on January 29, 1998 for a 30-day review. This act 
shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken effect. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
78, effective March 24, 1998.
    42. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-235 (Law 12-79), ``Tax Revision 
Commission Establishment Temporary Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend, on a temporary basis, the Tax Revision Commission 
Establishment Act of 1996 to increase the number of members of 
the Commission. Act 12-235 was published in the January 30, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 492) and 
transmitted to Congress on January 29, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-79, effective March 24, 1998.
    43. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-236 (Law 12-80), ``Reorganization 
Plan No. 5 for the Department of Human Services and Department 
of Corrections Temporary Act of 1997.'' Act 12-236 was 
published in the January 30, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 494) and transmitted to Congress on January 29, 
1998 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-80, effective March 
24, 1998.
    44. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-246 (Law 12-81), ``Technical 
Amendments Act of 1997.'' Act 12-246 was published in the 
February 13, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
745) and transmitted to Congress on January 29, 1998 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-81, effective March 24, 1998.
    45. Jan. 29, 1998--Act 12-249 (Law 12-82), ``Chief 
Procurement Officer Qualification Amendment Act of 1997.'' To 
amend the District of Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 
1985 to clarify the procurement experience required of the 
Chief Procurement Officer, to require that the Chief 
Procurement Officer be provided with a list of personnel whose 
procurement functions fall under the authority of the Chief 
Procurement Officer, to require the transfer to the Office of 
Contracting and Procurement of all employees under its 
authority along the provisions of the act do not apply to the 
operations of the Health and Hospitals Public Benefit 
Corporation. A 60-day review period is required by section 
602(2) of the District Home Rule. Act 12-249 was published in 
the February 13, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 
page 772) and transmitted to Congress on January 29, 1998 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-82, effective March 24, 1998.
    46. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-254 (Law 12-85), ``Dave Clarke 
School of Law Designation Act of 1998.'' To rename the 
University of the District of Columbia School of Law, at 4250 
Connecticut Avenue, NW., the Dave Clark School of Law in honor 
of the late chairman of the Council of the District of 
Columbia. Act 12-254 was published in the March 6, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1167) and 
transmitted to Congress on February 27, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-85, effective April 29, 1998.
    47. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-256 (Law 12-86), ``Omnibus 
Regulatory Reform Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend Chapter 28 
of Title 47 of the District of Columbia Code to establish a 
simplified and unified overall business regulatory structure 
for the District of Columbia by: 1) requiring that all 
businesses of whatever nature operating in the District of 
Columbia be licensed, 2) providing for two business license 
classifications, 3) establishing a business license center 
within the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, 4) 
establishing reasonable fees for master licenses, endorsements, 
and all other licenses, 5) establishing procedures for 
issuance, expiration, reinstatement, and denial of licenses, 6) 
establishing a fund to be credited with all fees that are 
collected for the issuance of master license and endorsements, 
and 7) to repeal sections 47-2801 through 47-2805; to amend the 
Life Insurance Act and section 47-2608 of the District of 
Columbia Code to decrease the tax paid by insurance companies 
and associations from 2.25 percent to 1.7 percent to establish 
a Health Regulation Reform Task Force to review the boards 
created by the District of Columbia Health Occupations Revision 
Act of 1985 and make recommendations to the Mayor and Council 
on the restructuring of the boards, simplifying the licensure 
process, and making administrative changes to improve the 
transition of health professional licensure to the Department 
of Health, to amend the following acts to abolish the 
respective boards, commissions, authorities, or task forces 
established by or pursuant to the acts; the Business Incubator 
Facilitation Act of 1985, the Commission on Youth Affairs Act 
of 1988, the District of Columbia Bicentennial Commission Act 
of 1987, the Task Force on Hunger Act of 1990, an act to 
provide recognition for meritorious service by members of the 
police and fire departments of the District of Columbia, the 
District of Columbia Housing Authority Act of 1994, the Nuclear 
Weapons Freeze Act of 1982, the Prison Industries Act of 1996, 
the District of Columbia Post-Secondary Education 
Reorganization Act, and the Education in Partnership with 
Technology Corporation Establishment Act of 1986, to abolish 
the following commissions, committees, advisory boards, or task 
forces established pursuant to Mayor's orders; the Cooperative 
Economic Development Commission, the Mayor's Advisory Council 
on District of Columbia General Hospital, the District of 
Columbia Community Advisory Board on the De-
institutionalization of Forest Haven, the Drug Free Workplace 
Program Task Force, the Finance and Taxes Advisory Committee, 
the Food, Nutrition and Health Committee, the Historical 
Records Advisory Board, the Housing and Community Development 
Advisory Board, the Housing Production Trust Fund Advisory 
Board Advisory Board, the Commission on the Medical Examiner's 
Office, the Parole Advisory Board, the Mayor's Task Force on 
Parole, the Parole Advisory Committee, the Committee on Police 
Media Passes, the Mayor's Citizens Panel on Public Safety and 
Justice, the Mayor's Citizen Advisory Panel on Recreation and 
Parks, the Mayor's Advisory Committee on Resources and Budget. 
Act 12-256 was published in the March 6, 1997, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1172) and transmitted to Congress 
on February 27, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-86, effective April 
29, 1998.
    48. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-257 (Law 12-87), ``Collateral 
Reform Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend Title 18 of the 
District of Columbia Municipal regulations to establish the 
amount of collateral to be paid by a person charged with 
failure to obey under 18 DCM 2000.2 based upon the number of 
times the person has committed the offense. Act 12-257 was 
published in the March 6, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1226) and transmitted to Congress on February 27, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-87, effective April 29, 1998.
    49. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-259 (Law 12-88), ``Check 
Identification Fraud Prevention Amendment Act of 1998.'' To 
amend Chapter 31 of Title 47 of the District of Columbia Code 
to allow a person to request the display of second form of 
identification such as a credit card or other form of 
identification. Act 12-259 was published in the March 6, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1230) and 
transmitted to Congress on February 27, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-88, effective April 29, 1998.
    50. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-260 (Law 12-126), ``Department of 
Correction Criminal Background Investigation Authorization Act 
of 1998.'' To authorize the Director of the Department of 
Corrections to conduct criminal background investigations on 
all employees, including non-probationary employees, of the 
Department of Corrections. A 60-day review period is required 
by section 602(2) of the District Home Rule. Act 12-260 was 
published in the March 6, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1232) and transmitted to Congress on February 27, 
1998 for a 60-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-126, effective June 19, 1998.
    51. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-261 (Law 12-127), ``Drug House 
Abatement Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend an act to enjoin 
and abate of lewdness, assignation, and prostitution, to 
declare the same to be nuisances, to enjoin the person or 
persons who conduct or maintain the same and the owner or agent 
of any building used for such purpose, and to assess a tax 
against the person maintaining said nuisance and against the 
building and owner thereof, by adding buildings in which 
illegal drug activity takes place to the category of nuisance 
specified, and by adding the Corporation Counsel of the 
District of Columbia to the list of persons with standing to 
bring an action in equity for abatement of nuisances. A 60-day 
review period is required by section 602(c)(1) of the District 
Home Rule. Act 12-261 was published in the March 13, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1304) and 
transmitted to Congress on February 27, 1998 for a 60-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-127, effective June 19, 1998.
    52. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-262 (Law 12-89), ``Life Insurance 
Special Contingency Reserve Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend 
the District of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit 
Personnel Act of 1978 to authorize the transfer of a special 
contingency reserve from one life insurance policy to a 
successor life insurance policy. Act 12-262 was published in 
the March 13, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
1306) and transmitted to Congress on February 27, 1998 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-89, effective April 29, 1998.
    53. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-263 (Law 12-90), ``Illegal 
Dumping Enforcement Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the 
Illegal Dumping Enforcement Act of 1994 to define terms, to 
make the unlawful disposal of solid waste for a commercial 
purpose a felony, to make the unlawful disposal of medical 
waste a felony, and to increase the criminal penalty for the 
unlawful disposal of hazardous waste. Act 12-263 was published 
in the March 13, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 
page 1308) and transmitted to Congress on February 27, 1998 for 
a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-90, effective April 29, 1998.
    54. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-264 (Law 12-91), ``Advisory 
Neighborhood Commissions Quorum Definition Amendment Act of 
1998.'' Act 12-264 was published in the March 13, 1998, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1314) and transmitted to 
Congress on February 27, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-91, effective 
April 29, 1998.
    55. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-265 (Law 12-92), ``Defined 
Contribution Transition Vesting Clarification Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend the District of Columbia Government 
Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to allow District 
government employees, whose participation in the District 
Defined Contribution Plan ceases as a result of the 
implementation of provisions of the National Capital 
Revitalization and Self-government Improvement Act of 1997, to 
credit their continuous service with the District of Columbia 
courts after September 30, 1997 and service with certain 
employers that provide the services previously performed by the 
District government toward the vesting requirement of the 
defined Contribution Plan; and the Defined Contribution 
Transition Vesting Temporary Amendment Act of 1997 to clarify 
that District government employees also include non-judicial 
employees of the District of Columbia courts. Act 12-265 was 
published in the March 13, 1997, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1314) and transmitted to Congress on February 27, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-92, effective April 29, 1998.
    56. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-266 (Law 12-93), ``New Washington 
Convention Center Neighborhood Stability Act of 1998.'' To 
protect community stability and neighborhood character in the 
vicinity of the new Washington Convention Center, by providing 
interim protection of potentially historic properties from 
demolition, until such time as the Historic Preservation Review 
Board has an opportunity to evaluate and consider designation 
of potential historic districts in the vicinity of the new 
convention center, for a period of time not to exceed 18 months 
or the date of a designation determination. Act 12-266 was 
published in the March 13, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1316) and transmitted to Congress on February 27, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-93, effective April 29, 1998.
    57. Feb. 27, 1998--Act 12-267 (Law 12-94), ``Uniform 
Interstate Family Support Temporary Amendment Act of 1998.'' To 
amend, on a temporary basis, the Uniform Interstate Family 
Support Act of 1995. Act 12-267 was published in the March 13, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1322) and 
transmitted to Congress on February 27, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-94, effective April 29, 1998.
    58. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-268 (Law 12-95), ``Unemployment 
Compensation Tax Stabilization Second Temporary Amendment Act 
of 1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of 
Columbia Unemployment Compensation Act to reduce the taxable 
wage base, lower the maximum weekly benefit amount, and 
eliminate the dependent's allowance. Act 12-268 was published 
in the March 13, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 
page 1329) and transmitted to Congress on March 2, 1998 for a 
30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its 
having taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-95, effective April 30, 1998.
    59. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-270 (Law 12-96), ``Testing of 
District Government Drivers of Commercial Motor Vehicles for 
Alcohol and Controlled Substances Temporary Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the District of 
Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978 
to authorize and require that District employees and candidates 
for employment with the District government who need to have a 
commercial driver's license, as a condition of employment, be 
tested for the use of alcohol and controlled substances. Act 
12-270 was published in the March 13, 1998 edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 1335) and transmitted to Congress on 
March 2, 1998 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 
225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-96, effective April 
30, 1998.
    60. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-271 (Law 12-97), ``Suspension of 
Liquor Licenses Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the District 
of Columbia alcoholic Beverage Control Act to authorize the 
suspension of a liquor license at an establishment where there 
have been repeated acts of violence, complaints from residents, 
or the need for improvement by the Metropolitan Police 
Department. Act 12-271 was published in the March 20, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1571) and 
transmitted to Congress on March 2, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
97, effective April 30, 1998.
    61. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-272 (Law 12-98), ``Make a 
Difference Selection Committee Establishment Act of 1998.'' To 
establish the Make a Difference Selection Committee to identify 
and recognize the humanitarian contributions and achievements 
of private U.S. citizens by installing commemorative markers on 
public space under District of Columbia Control and to grant 
the Make a Difference Foundation exclusive authority to install 
the commemorative markers. Act 12-272 was published in the 
March 20, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
1519) and transmitted to Congress on March 2, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-98, effective April 30, 1998.
    62. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-273 (Law 12-99), ``Natural and 
Artificial Gas Gross Receipts Tax Amendment Act of 1998.'' To 
amend section 47-2005 of the District of Columbia Code to 
exempt from the gross receipts tax any sale of natural or 
artificial gas delivered by non-public utilities for 
residential use in the District, and section 47-2501 of the 
District of Columbia Code to impose a gross receipts tax on 
receipts attributed to the retail sale of natural or artificial 
gas delivered by other than a public utility, by any method, to 
an end-user in the District. Act 12-273 was published in the 
March 20, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
1524) and transmitted to Congress on March 2, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-99, effective April 30, 1998.
    63. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-275 (Law 12-125), ``Real Property 
Tax Reassessment Temporary Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend, 
on a temporary basis, Chapter 8 of Title 47 of the District of 
Columbia Code to extend the time deadlines for the assessment 
of Class 1 and Class 2 real property for the tax year 1997, to 
extend the time for the appeal of a real property tax 
assessment for the tax year 1997, to provide that the latest 
assessment shall be considered the final assessment for 
purposes of appeal; the District of Columbia Comprehensive 
Merit Personnel Act of 1978 to increase the limit on the 
compensation of the members of the Board of Real Property 
Assessments and Appeals for the District of Columbia; and the 
Rental Housing Act of 1985 to permit the eviction of tenants 
when the temperature falls below 32 degrees Fahrenheit if the 
tenant has abandoned the premises. This act shall expire on the 
225th day of its having taken effect. Act 12-275 was published 
in the March 20, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 
page 1529) and transmitted to Congress on April 21, 1998 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-125, effective June 10, 1998.
    64. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-276 (Law 12-100), ``Commercial 
Mobile Telecommunication Service Tax Clarification Amendment 
Act of 1998.'' To amend section 47-1508 of the District of 
Columbia Code to exempt personal property, excluding Office 
equipment and office furniture, located in the District and 
owned by wireless telecommunication companies and toll 
telecommunication companies, from the Personal Property tax, 
sections 47-2001 and 2201 of the District of Columbia Code to 
remove the phrases cellular mobile telecommunication services, 
specialized mobile radio services, paging services, and 
dispatch services from the definition of a retail sale and sale 
of retail under the Gross Sales tax provision, section 47-2005 
of the District of Columbia Code to exempt sales of personal 
property, excluding office equipment and office furniture, 
purchased by wireless telecommunication companies and toll 
telecommunication companies from the Gross Sales tax, sections 
47-3901 through 3907 of the District of Columbia Code to impose 
a tax on commercial mobile service companies for the privilege 
of providing commercial mobile telecommunication service in the 
District, and section 47-3918 of the District of Columbia Code 
to clarify the definition reference. Act 12-276 was published 
in the March 20, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 
page 1533) and transmitted to Congress on March 2, 1998 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-100, effective April 30, 1998.
    65. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-277 (Law 12-101), ``Mortgage 
Lender and Broker Act of 1996 Temporary Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Mortgage Lender and 
Broker Act of 1996 to clarify certain requirements of the act 
and to conform certain definitions to Federal law; the District 
of Columbia Real Estate Licenser Act of 1982 to exempt mortgage 
brokers and lenders from the requirements of that act, and an 
act to regulate the business of loaning money on security of 
any kind by persons, firms, and corporations other than 
national banks, licensed bankers, trust companies, savings 
banks, building and loan associations, and real estate brokers 
in the District of Columbia to add certain exemptions. Act 12-
277 was published in the March 20, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 1540) and transmitted to Congress on 
March 2, 1998 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 
225th day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-101, effective April 
30, 1998.
    66. Mar. 2, 1998--Act 12-278 (Law 12-102), ``Equal 
Opportunity for Local, Small, and Disadvantaged Business 
Enterprises Temporary Act of 1998.'' To reenact and amend, on a 
temporary basis, the provisions of the Equal Opportunity for 
Local, Small, and Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Act of 
1992 to establish new size standards for small business 
enterprise categories, require an assessment every 3 years of 
the continued need for the local, small, and disadvantaged 
programs, establish a 2 tier set-aside program for small 
business enterprises, establish affiliated interest standards 
for small and disadvantaged business enterprises, and to amend 
the Minority Contracting Act of 1976 to authorize board members 
participation of Minority Business Opportunity Commission 
meetings by conference telephone. Act 12-278 was published in 
the March 20, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
1542) and transmitted to Congress on March 2, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-102, effective April 30, 1998.
    67. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-279 (Law 12-103), ``Child Support 
and Welfare Reform Compliance Temporary Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Medicaid Benefits 
Protection Act of 1994 to include requirements regarding 
employee health insurance coverage for a child subject to a 
support order; to amend the Vital Record Act of 1981 to change 
the procedures for establishing paternity and require Social 
Security numbers to be included on certain records, and to 
limit the circumstances under which the name of the father of a 
non-marital child may be recorded on a birth certificate; to 
amend Title 16 of the District of Columbia Code to restrict the 
bases for challenging a paternity adjudication, to require 
specific notice before the signing of a voluntary paternity 
acknowledgment, to permit rescission of a voluntary paternity 
acknowledgment, to establish voluntary paternity acknowledgment 
programs at birthing hospitals and the birth records agency, to 
require medical support in all child support orders, to modify 
the process for adjusting support orders every 3 years, to 
require the Mayor to establish privacy protections and 
safeguards for victims of domestic violence, to permit 
paternity adjudication's that were barred by prior statutes of 
limitations, to require genetic testing in certain situations, 
to establish responsibility for payment of genetic tests, to 
clarify that ex parte hearings are unnecessary before entry of 
a default paternity adjudication, to require inclusion of 
Social Security numbers in paternity and support records, and 
to require temporary child support in certain paternity cases; 
to amend an act to require premarital examinations for a 
marriage license; to amend the Child Support Enforcement 
Amendment Act of 1985 to alter the basis for modifying certain 
support orders, to require inclusion of medical support in 
support orders, to mandate notice concerning medical insurance 
coverage, to require notice that all child support orders will 
be reported to a consumer credit agency, to require that such 
reports be made to credit agencies, to clarify that hearings 
are not required before imposition of income withholding, to 
permit the IV-D agency to execute a withholding order without 
notice, to reduce the amount of time before a holder must 
withhold income, to permit application of another State; income 
withholding rules in interstate cases, to permit liens to arise 
by operation of law in support cases, to provide full faith and 
credit to other States liens, to modify license denial and 
revocation requirements, to require parties to file and update 
information with the Superior Court and the IV-D agency, to 
grant the IV-D agency certain new powers to expedite paternity 
and support processes, to establish a District of Columbia 
Directory of New Hires, and to require reporting to the 
Directory; to amend the Cable Television Communications Act of 
1981 to permit disclosure of certain customer information; to 
amend an act making appropriations to provide for the expenses 
of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1914, to permit disclosure of customer information; to amend 
the District of Columbia Unemployment Compensation Act to 
permit disclosure of unemployment information; to amend Title 
47 of the D.C. Code to permit disclosure of tax information, 
and to require inclusion of Social Security numbers on certain 
license applications; and to require financial institutions to 
conduct data matches with the IV-D agency. Act 12-279 was 
published in the March 27, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1660) and transmitted to Congress on March 10, 
1998 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-103, effective May 8, 
1998.
    68. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-280 (Law 12-280), ``Procurement 
Reform Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the District of 
Columbia Procurement Practices Act of 1985 to increase the 
penalties of the civil false claims and qui tam provisions and 
to change the title of the head of the Office of Contracting 
and Procurement; and the District of Columbia Revenue Act of 
1970 to allow the District to renegotiate existing leases to 
lower rental rates and increase tenant allowances. Act 12-280 
was published in the March 27, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 1687) and transmitted to Congress on 
March 10, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-104, effective May 8, 
1998.
    69. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-283 (Law 12-105), ``Dwight 
Anderson Mostly Athletic Field Designation Act of 1998.'' To 
designate the outdoor recreational facilities of Tart Junior 
High School, at 18th and Perry Streets, NE., the Dwight 
Anderson Mostly Athletic Field (ward 5). Act 12-283 was 
published in the March 27, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1722) and transmitted to Congress on March 10, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-105, effective May 8, 1998.
    70. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-284 (Law 12-106), ``Wastewater 
System Regulation Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the 
Wastewater System Regulation Amendment Act of 1985 to update 
the uniform requirements for discharges into the District of 
Columbia's wastewater system and to conform the requirements to 
Federal statutes and regulations. Act 12-284 was published in 
the March 27, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
1724) and transmitted to Congress on March 10, 1998 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-106, effective May 8, 1998.
    71. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-285 (Law 12-107), ``Free Gospel 
Church Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1998.'' To 
provide equitable real property tax relief to Free Gospel 
Church, a tax-exempt religious organization. Act 12-285 was 
published in the March 27, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1734) and transmitted to Congress on March 10, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-107, effective May 8, 1998.
    72. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-286 (Law 12-108), ``Drug Abuse, 
Alcohol Abuse, and Mental Illness Insurance Coverage Temporary 
Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the 
Drug Abuse, Alcohol Abuse, and Mental Illness Insurance 
Coverage Act of 1986 to comply with the mental parity mandates 
of the Mental Health Parity Act of 1986. Act 12-286 was 
published in the March 27, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1736) and transmitted to Congress on March 10, 
1998 for a 30-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-108, effective May 8, 
1998.
    73. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-287 (Law 12-109), ``Brightwood 
Methodist Episcopal Church Equitable Real Property Tax Relief 
Act of 1998.'' To provide equitable real property tax relief to 
Brightwood Methodist Episcopal Church, a tax-exempt religious 
organization. Act 12-287 was published in the March 27, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1739) and 
transmitted to Congress on March 10, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
109, effective May 8, 1998.
    74. Mar. 10, 1998--Act 12-288 (Law 12-110), ``Celestial 
Church of Christ NW Parish Equitable Real Property.'' To 
provide equitable real property tax relief to the Celestial of 
Christ NW Parish, a tax-exempt religious organization. Act 12-
288 was published in the March 27, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 1741) and transmitted to Congress on 
March 10, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-110, effective May 8, 
1998.
    75. Mar. 12, 1998--Act 12-300 (Law 12-111), ``Check Cashers 
Act of 1998.'' To provide for the licensing and regulation of 
check cashers by the Superintendent of the Office of Banking 
and Financial Institutions; to authorize fees for license 
applications and renewals; to require check cashers to file a 
bond; to limit charges for check cashing; to provide for 
revocation and suspension of licenses; and to authorize the 
Superintendent to require maintenance of records, to 
investigate possible violations, and to issue cease and desist 
orders. Act 12-300 was published in the March 27, 1998, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1782) and transmitted to 
Congress on March 12, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-111, effective 
May 12, 1998.
    76. Mar. 12, 1998--Act 12-301 (Law 12-112), ``Reciprocal 
Insurance Company Conversion Act of 1998.'' To allow a 
reciprocal insurance company to restructure itself by forming a 
mutual insurance holding company that directly or indirectly 
owns the insurance company, with the reorganized insurance 
company continuing its existence as a stock insurance company. 
Act 12-301 was published in the March 27, 1998, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1792) and transmitted to Congress 
on March 12, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-112, effective May 12, 
1998.
    77. Mar. 31, 1998--Act 12-312 (Law 12-115), ``Omnibus 
Sports Consolidation Amendment Act of 1998.'' Act 12-312 was 
published in the March 31, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 1957) and transmitted to Congress on March 31, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-115, effective June 6, 1998.
    78. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-316 (Law 12-117), ``Omnibus 
Regulatory Reform Amendment Act of 1998 Temporary Repealer Act 
of 1998.'' To repeal, on a temporary basis, section 1301(b)(4) 
of the Omnibus Regulatory Reform Amendment Act of 1998 to 
eliminate the provision that authorizes the Department of 
Consumer and Regulatory Affairs to appoint private attorneys to 
take action on consumer complaints. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Act 12-316 was 
published in the April 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 2283) and transmitted to Congress on April 21, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-117, effective June 11, 1998.
    79. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-317 (Law 12-118), ``Sex Offender 
Registration Immunity From Liability Temporary Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Sex Offender 
Registration Act of 1996 to provide absolute immunity from 
civil liability and immunity from other liability for good 
faith conduct under the act to members of the Sex Offender 
Registration Advisory Council, and to District government 
employees who assist them, and to provide immunity for good 
faith conduct under the act to law enforcement agencies, the 
District, and their employees. This act shall expire on the 
225th day of its having taken effect. Act 12-317 was published 
in the April 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 
page 2285) and transmitted to Congress on April 21, 1998 for a 
30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-118, effective June 11, 1998.
    80. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-318 (Law 12-115), ``Mutual 
Holding Company Mergers and Acquisition Temporary Amendment Act 
of 1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Mutual Holding 
Company Act of 1996 to provide procedures for endorsing and 
amending the articles of incorporation for a mutual insurance 
company, to exempt a director of a mutual insurance holding 
company from having to be a stock holder thereof, to allow for 
reasonable expenses to be recovered in an action brought 
challenging the validity of acts taken under the act, and to 
enable District mutual insurance holding companies to pursue 
opportunities for mergers, acquisitions, and strategic 
alliances. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Act 12-318 was published in the April 17, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2287) and 
transmitted to Congress on April 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
119, effective June 11, 1998.
    81. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-319 (Law 12-120), ``Solid Waste 
Facility Permit Temporary Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend, on 
a temporary basis, the District of Columbia Solid Waste 
Facility Permit Act of 1995 to protect residential communities 
from the harmful effects of existing solid waste facilities by 
establishing a moratorium on the issuance of new permits, by 
establishing immediately applicable standards of operation for 
existing solid waste facilities, and by requiring existing 
solid waste facilities to take immediate remedial action to 
redress the present adverse impacts. This act shall expire on 
the 225th day of its having taken effect. Act 12-319 was 
published in the April 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 2292) and transmitted to Congress on April 21, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-119, effective June 11, 1998.
    82. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-322 (Law 12-121), ``Southeastern 
University Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1998.'' To 
provide equitable real property tax relief to Southeastern 
University, a tax-exempt entity. Act 12-322 was published in 
the April 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
2298) and transmitted to Congress on April 21, 1998 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-121, effective June 11, 1998.
    83. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-323 (Law 12-123), ``Real Property 
Tax Rates and Assessment Initiative Amendment Act of 1998.'' To 
amend Title 47 of the District of Columbia Code to establish 
the real property tax rates and real property special tax rates 
for tax year 1998 and to adopt certain reports submitted by the 
Mayor regarding real property taxes and other major issues and 
the Real Property Assessment and Tax Initiative of 1996 to 
extend the applicability date. Act 12-323 was published in the 
April 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
2300) and transmitted to Congress on April 21, 1998 for a 30-
day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-122, effective June 10, 1998.
    84. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-324 (Law 12-125), ``Real Property 
Tax Rates and Assessment Initiative Temporary Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, Title 47 of the 
District of Columbia Code to establish the real property tax 
rates and real property special tax rates for tax year 1998 and 
to adopt certain reports submitted by the Mayor regarding real 
property taxes and other major taxes and the Real Property 
Assessment and Tax Initiative of 1996 to extend the 
applicability date. This act shall expire on the 225th day of 
its having taken effect. Act 12-324 was published in the April 
21, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 1529) and 
transmitted to Congress on April 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
125, effective June 10, 1998.
    85. Apr. 21, 1998--Act 12-326 (Law 12-124), ``Omnibus 
Personnel Reform Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the District 
of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 
1978 to modify the definition of a grievance to exclude certain 
adverse actions, to exclude the Department of Public and 
Assisted Housing, the Commission on Public Health, Commission 
for Women, Office of Policy, Office of Program Evaluation, 
Office of Housing Reorganization, Commission on Asian and 
Pacific Islander Affairs, Office of Communications, the Office 
of Documents, and the Office of International Business from the 
list of subordinate agencies and add the Commission on the Arts 
and Humanities, Department of Health, Office of Contracting and 
Procurement, the Commission on Health Care Finance, and the 
Department of Insurance and Securities Regulation as 
subordinate agencies, to change the name of the Department of 
Human Services to the Department of Human Development in the 
list of subordinate agencies, to add the budget director to the 
Council to the list of statutory officeholders, to subject all 
remaking, including those pertaining to health, life insurance, 
and retirement benefits to a 30-day review period rather than 
the current 60-day period, to limit employee appeals to the 
Office of Employee Appeals to disciplinary actions, and RIF's, 
or certain disciplinary actions that result in removals, 
reductions in grades, and suspensions of 10 days or more within 
30 days of an disciplinary action and to require employees 
covered by a negotiated grievance procedure to elect remedies 
between that procedure and OEA, to limit agency hearing 
procedures to removals and to provide for enforced leave 
without pay in instances involving fraud or criminal charges, 
to allow the Office of employee appeals to develop a mediation 
program, to allow time-limited appointments to positions below 
DS-13 in the Career Service to be noncompetitive, include 
District residency as a criterion for consideration in 
reduction-in-force proceedings in the Career and Educational 
Services, to allow qualified retreat rights from the Excepted 
Service to the Career, Management Supervisory, and Educational 
Services, and prohibit appointment in those services for 
certain employees leaving the excepted service in the 6-month 
period preceding a Mayoral election, to establish an 
alternative pay system, allow performance incentives, provide 
for separation pay, and allow reimbursement for certain 
employment costs to Excepted Service employees, to allow the 
Director of Personnel to waive the residency requirement for 
hard-to-fill Excepted Service position, to establish the 
Management Supervisory Service to be composed of employees 
whose functions include responsibility for project management 
and supervision of staff and the achievement of the project's 
overall goals and objectives, to re-establish the Executive 
Service with pay enhancements, travel allowances, and income 
performance incentives, to provide the Mayor with the authority 
to establish pilot personnel programs in the areas of 
classification and compensation in the Department of Employment 
Services, the Department of Recreation and Parks, and the 
Office of Personnel, to require the Mayor to include compressed 
worked schedules in the work hours regulations, to make certain 
enhancements to the annual leave bank program, to require the 
Mayor to develop a universal leave system for certain full-time 
and part-time employees hired after September 30, 1987, to 
eliminate the performance evaluation system and establish a 
comprehensive performance management system including a 
requirement linking performance to step increase, to re-
establish the adverse action and grievance provision of the act 
with the intent of installing more positive approaches toward 
employee discipline, to permit tangible incentive awards a 
monetary value of no more than $50 and time off without loss of 
pay or charge to leave and permit cash awards to $5,000 or 10 
percent of the employee's schedule rate of basic pay, whichever 
is greater, to grant the Mayor authority to initiate pilot 
incentive award programs including gain sharing, to require the 
Mayor and each personnel authority to establish a program to 
comply with Federal regulations concerning employees who are 
drivers of commercial motor vehicles, to authorize the Mayor to 
establish a disability income program for non-job-related 
injuries and illnesses, to re-establish the reduction-in-force 
provision to include attorneys appointed to the Excepted 
Service, provide for 1 round of lateral competition limited to 
positions within the employee's competitive level, provide 
employees who are residents of the District with 3 years 
additional creditable service for RIF purposes, reduce the 30-
day notice requirement before a RIF can be instituted to 15 
days notice, and establish 26 weeks pay as the maximum amount 
of severance pay, eliminate the provision allowing RIF policies 
and procedures to be appropriate matters for collective 
bargaining, to remove the Office of Employee Appeals from the 
process of adjudicating requests for waivers of government 
claims for erroneous payment to an employee and to eliminate an 
employee's right to appeal a decision by the Mayor or an agency 
head concerning privacy of personnel records and employee's 
access to his or her personnel records, and to repeal the 
annual reporting requirement on the personnel system; and to 
amend the District of Columbia Police and Firemen's Salary Act 
of 1958 to allow the Council, by resolution, to suspend all 
provisions of the act, related District employees, except 
provision concerning the Council's authority to promulgate 
regulations, retroactive pay, and the Mayor's and certain 
Federal agency head's authority to delegate their authority. 
Act 12-326 was published in the April 17, 1998, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2464) and transmitted to Congress 
on April 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-124, effective June 
10, 1998.
    86. May 19, 1998--Act 12-328 (Law 12-129), ``Children's 
Defense Fund Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Temporary Act 
of 1998.'' To provide, on a temporary basis, equitable real 
property tax relief to the Children's Defense Fund, a tax-
exempt organization. Act 12-328 was published in the May 22, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 3082) and 
transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-129, effective July 24, 1998.
    87. May 19, 1998--Act 12-329 (Law 12-130), ``Public 
Assistance Temporary Amendment Act 1998.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the District of Columbia Public Assistance Act 
of 1982 to comply with provisions of the a Personal 
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, 
Public Law 104-193, by repealing the Aid to Families with 
Dependent Children Program, establishing the Temporary 
Assistance to Needy Families as a non-entitlement program of 
assistance, and making the following conforming amendments: (1) 
imposing a time limit for receipt of benefits under TANF, (2) 
revising certain eligibility requirements related to children 
absent from the home, (3) revising the duty to assign child 
support, (5) defining the good cause exception to the 
cooperation requirement, (6) establishing job search and work 
participation and development of individual responsibility 
plans, including sanctions for noncompliance, (7) establishing 
alien eligibility for TANF and Medicaid, (8) extending the 
current payment level and amount of assistance, (9) revising 
the living at home requirements for pregnant and parenting 
teens, (10) broadening the application of the school attendance 
provisions of the Demonstration Project for pregnant and 
parenting teens, (11) denying assistance to recipients engaging 
in certain kinds of fraud, fugitive felons, and parole 
violaters, (12) making technical amendments to reflect the 
termination of the pass-through of the first $50 of child 
support, and (13) establishing confidentiality provisions; and 
to amend an act to enable the District of Columbia to receive 
Federal financial assistance under Title XIX of the Social 
Security Act for a medical assistance program, to make 
conforming changes to the Medicaid law and for other purposes. 
Act 12-329 was published in the May 22, 1998, edition of the 
D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 3084) and transmitted to Congress 
on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-130, effective July 
24, 1998.
    88. May 19, 1998--Act 12-330 (Law 12-131), ``Uniform 
Interstate Family Support Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the 
Uniform Interstate Family Support Act of 1995 to modify the 
definition of 3 terms in the act, to modify which support order 
is the controlling order if there are multiple orders from one 
or more States, to authorize a District of Columbia tribunal to 
issue a certificate and make findings required by a responding 
State's law if a responding State has not enacted this act or 
legislation substantially similar to this act, to eliminate the 
requirement that notification be given by first class mail, to 
authorize the Mayor to order a support enforcement agency 
neglecting or refusing to provide services to an individual to 
perform its duties pursuant to this act, to set forth the 
duties of an obligor's employer to comply with an income 
withholding order issued by another State, and to authorize a 
District of Columbia tribunal to modify a support order of 
another State in certain circumstances. Act 12-330 was 
published in the May 15, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 2924) and transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 
for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-131, effective July 24, 1998.
    89. May 1, 1998--Act 12-331 (Law 12-128), ``Juvenile Curfew 
Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the Juvenile Curfew Act of 
1995 to repeal the sunset provision. Act 12-301 was published 
in the May 8, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
2796) and transmitted to Congress on May 1, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-128, effective June 20, 1998.
    90. May 19, 1998--Act 12-332 (Law 12-132), ``District of 
Columbia Unemployment Compensation Federal Conformity Amendment 
Act of 1998.'' Act 12-332 was published in the May 15, 1998 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2931) and 
transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
132, effective July 24, 1998.
    91. May 19, 1998--Act 12-333 (Law 12-133), ``Eastern Market 
Open Air Retailing Temporary Act of 1998.'' To permit, on a 
temporary basis, the interim continuation of non-food open air 
retailing in the exterior space at Eastern Market that is not 
otherwise leased. Act 12-333 was published in the May 15, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2933) and 
transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-133, effective July 24, 1998.
    92. May 19, 1998--Act 12-334 (Law 12-134), ``Motor Vehicle 
Excessive Idling Fine Increase Temporary Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, 16 DCMR 3224 and 18 
DCMR 2601.2 to increase the civil infractions fine for 
violating the engine idling provisions of the District of 
Columbia Air Pollution Control Act of 1984 and the Traffic 
Adjudication Act of 1978 and to amend the idling restriction of 
18 DCMR 2418.3 to make it comply with the District of Columbia 
Air Pollution Control Act of 1984. Act 12-334 was published in 
the May 15, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 
2935) and transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having 
taken effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became 
D.C. Law 12-134, effective July 24, 1998.
    93. May 19, 1998--Act 12-335 (Law 12-164), ``Correctional 
Treatment Facility Temporary Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend, 
on a temporary basis, the Correctional Treatment Facility Act 
of 1996 to authorize the use of force and use of weapons by 
correctional officers employed by the operator of any private 
prison facility housing inmates in the District of Columbia for 
the District of Columbia Department of Corrections or the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons, in addition to the Correctional 
Treatment Facility. A 60-day review period is required by 
section 602(2) of the District Home Rule. Act 12-335 was 
published in the May 15, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 2937 ) and transmitted to Congress on May 19, 
1998 for a 60-day review. This act shall expire on the 225th 
day of its having taken effect. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-164, effective October 
10, 1998.
    94. May 19, 1998--Act 12-336 (Law 12-135), ``Parking Meter 
Fee Moratorium Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend Title 18 of 
the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations to impose a 
parking meter fee moratorium for meter parking on Saturdays and 
other days between 5:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Act 12-336 was 
published in the May 15, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 2940) and transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 
for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-135, effective July 24, 1998.
    95. May 19, 1998--Act 12-337 (Law 12-136), ``Uniform 
Controlled Substances Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the 
District of Columbia Uniform Controlled Substances Act of 1981 
to give the Mayor rulemaking authority regarding the scheduling 
of controlled substances, to clarify the authority of 
registrants of controlled substances, and to expand enforcement 
authority. Act 12-337 was published in the May 15, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2942) and 
transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
136, effective July 24, 1998.
    96. May 19, 1998--Act 12-338 (Law 12-137), ``Georgetown 
Business Improvement District Temporary Amendment Act of 
1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Business 
Improvement Districts Act of 1996 to authorize the 
establishment and administration of a business improvement 
district in Georgetown. Act 12-338 was published in the May 15, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2944) and 
transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-137, effective July 24, 1998.
    97. May 19, 1998--Act 12-340 (Law 12-138), ``Residency 
Requirement Reinstatement Amendment Act of 1998.'' Act 12-340 
was published in the May 15, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 2972) and transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 
for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this act 
became D.C. Law 12-138, effective July 24, 1998.
    98. May 19, 1998--Act 12-341 (Law 12-139), ``Definition of 
Optometry Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the District of 
Columbia Health Occupations Revision Act to authorize a 
District of Columbia tribunal to issue a certificate and make 
findings required by a responding States law if a responding 
State has not enacted this act or legislation substantially 
similar to this act, to eliminate the requirement that 
notification be given by first class mail, to authorize the 
Mayor to order a support enforcement agency neglecting or 
refusing to provide services to an individual to perform its 
duties pursuant to this act, to set forth the duties of an 
obligors employer to comply with an income withholding order 
issued by another State, and to authorize a District of 
Columbia tribunal to modify a support order of another State in 
certain circumstances. Act 12-341 was published in the May 15, 
1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2975) and 
transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
This act shall expire on the 225th day of its having taken 
effect. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-139, effective July 24, 1998.
    99. May 19, 1998--Act 12-342 (Law 12-140), ``Advisory 
Neighborhood Commissions Act of 1975 Financial Reporting 
Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend the Advisory Neighborhood 
Commissions Act of 1975 to require Advisory Neighborhood 
Commissions to file quarterly financial reports approved by the 
auditor within 30 days of the end of each quarter, to require 
the auditor to approve of the report within 7 days of its 
filing, and to require funds reserved or a Commission to return 
to the General Fund on the last day of the fiscal year if the 
Commission failed to file a quarterly report approved by the 
auditor. Act 12-342 was published in the May 15, 1998, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2975) and transmitted to 
Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. This act shall 
expire on the 225th day of its having taken effect. Congress 
not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-140, 
effective July 24, 1998.
    100. May 19, 1998--Act 12-343 (Law 12-165), ``Truth in 
Sentencing Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend an act to 
establish a Board of Indeterminate Sentence and Parole for the 
District of Columbia and to determine its functions, and for 
other purposes, to require judges to impose determinate 
sentences for certain felonies committed on or after August 5, 
2000, to mandate that persons convicted of such felonies serve 
at least 85 percent of imposed sentences, to abolish parole for 
these felonies, to require that felons receive an adequate 
period of supervised release following incarceration and to 
apply the Federal good time credits provisions to felonies in 
compliance with the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33; to amend 
section 23-1329 of the District of Columbia Code and an act for 
the establishment of probation system for the District of 
Colombia to allow the temporary placement in custody of 
conditionally released persons and persons on probation who 
violate certain conditions of release or probation, and to 
amend the Medical and Geriatric Parole Act of 1992 to provide 
the Director of the Bureau of Prisons the authority to request 
medical and geriatric release for persons convicted of certain 
felonies. Act 12-343 was published in the May 15, 1998, edition 
of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 2980) and transmitted to 
Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 60-day review. Congress not 
having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-165, effective 
October 10, 1998.
    101. May 19, 1998--Act 12-344 (Law 12-141), ``TANF and 
TANF-Related Medicaid Managed Care Program Temporary Amendment 
Act of 1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Health 
Maintenance Organization Act of 1996 to require an HMO 
providing Medicaid managed care services under contract with 
the District to provide or arrange for mental health and 
substance abuse services for TANF and TANF-related Medicaid 
recipients on a fee-for service basis unless the District 
government makes arrangements to provide such services. Act 12-
344 was published in the May 15, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 2972) and transmitted to Congress on May 
19, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, 
this act became D.C. Law 12-141, effective July 24, 1998.
    102. July 21, 1998--Act 12-383 (Law 12-156), ``School 
Transit Subsidy Act of 1978 Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend 
the School Transit Subsidy Act of 1978 to permit disabled 
students over 19 years of age and under 22 years of age to 
participate in the school transit subsidy program. Act 12-383 
was published in the July 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 4617) and transmitted to Congress on 
July 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-156, effective October 
7, 1998.
    103. July 21, 1998--Act 12-384 (Law 12-157), ``Bishop 
Aimilianos Laloussis Park Designation Act of 1998.'' To 
designate the small park located at 36th Street, Massachusetts 
Avenue and Garfield Street, NW., Reservation 330 N, as the 
Bishop Aimilianos Laloussis Park (ward 3). Act 12-384 was 
published in the July 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register 
(Vol. 45 page 4619) and transmitted to Congress on July 21, 
1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, this 
act became D.C. Law 12-157, effective October 7, 1998.
    104. July 21, 1998--Act 12-385 (Law 12-158), ``Abatement of 
Controlled Dangerous Substances Nuisances Temporary Amendment 
Act of 1998.'' To amend, on a temporary basis, the Residential 
Drug-related Evictions Amendment Act of 1990 to expand the 
definition of a controlled dangerous substance to include the 
controlled substances defined in Title II of the District of 
Columbia Uniform Controlled Substances Act of 1981. Act 12-385 
was published in the July 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 4621) and transmitted to Congress on 
July 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-158, effective October 
7, 1998.
    105. July 21, 1998--Act 12-386 (Law 12-1), ``Sex Offender 
Registration Temporary Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the Sex Offender Registration Act of 1996 to 
require the Metropolitan Police Department to update its 
registry promptly, and to require new residents to the District 
of Columbia who fall within the registration requirements to 
register with the Metropolitan Police Department within 10 days 
of establishing residence in the District of Columbia. Act 12-
340 was published in the May 15, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 2972) and transmitted to Congress on May 
19, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having disapproved, 
this act became D.C. Law 12-138, effective July 24, 1998.
    106. July 21, 1998--Act 12-393 (Law 12-159), ``Quick 
Payment Temporary Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend, on a 
temporary basis, the District of Columbia Government Quick 
Payment Act to limit the time during which a claim for interest 
can be filed by vendors doing business with the District of 
Columbia, and to clarify the procedures for filing a claim 
under the Quick Payment Act. Act 12-393 was published in the 
July 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 4642) 
and transmitted to Congress on July 21, 1998 for a 30-day 
review. Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. 
Law 12-159, effective October 7, 1998.
    107. July 21, 1998--Act 12-398 (Law 12-160), 
``Whistleblower Reinforcement Act of 1998.'' To amend the 
District of Columbia Government Comprehensive Merit Personnel 
Act of 1978 to increase protection for District government 
employees who report waste, fraud, abuse of authority, 
violations of law, or threat to public health or safety, and to 
impose an enforceable obligation on District government 
supervisors to report violations of law when circumstances 
require, and to afford the same whistleblower protections to 
employees of District instrumentality and employees of 
contractors who perform work on District contracts. Act 12-398 
was published in the July 17, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 5147) and transmitted to Congress on 
July 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-160, effective October 
7, 1998.
    108. July 21, 1998--Act 12-402, ``Washington Convention 
Center Authority Financing Amendment Act of 1998.'' To amend 
the Washington Convention Center Authority Act of 1994 to 
eliminate the surtaxes imposed by D.C. Code section 47-
1807.2(a)(4) and section 47-1808.3(a)(4) and to the hotel 
occupancy tax imposed by D.C. Code section 47-3206 from the 
definition of dedicated taxes; to authorize the Authority to 
enter into various interest rate agreements; to reconstitute 
the Board of Directors of the Authority to consist of seven 
public members, the chief financial officer of the District of 
Columbia and one other ex-officio voting member; to require the 
Authority to submit revised financial requirements if an 
adjustment in the guaranteed maximum price is needed; to 
provide that dedicated taxes collected by the Mayor as agent 
for the Authority to apply dedicated taxes to the payments of 
costs; to establish the Washington Convention Center Marketing 
Fund; to require the Authority to enter into marketing services 
contracts for the purpose of promoting conventions and tourism 
in the District of Columbia; to clarify that the Council has 
the authority to delegate its bond issuing powers to the 
Authority; to increase the permitted maturity of revenue bonds 
issued by the Authority from 30 to 34 years; to allow the 
Authority to use revenues for redemption or purchase of 
outstanding indebtedness of the Authority prior to delivering 
excess revenues for redemption or purchase of outstanding 
indebtedness of the Authority prior to delivering excess 
revenues to the District; to permit the Authority to create 
additional reserves if it determines that such additional 
reserves are required; to repeal the transition provisions; and 
to amend the provisions specifying the procedures employed by 
the District of Columbia auditor in certifying as to the 
sufficiency of certain taxes to meet expenses and reserves of 
the Authority; to amend Title 47 of the District of Columbia 
Code to eliminate the transfer of certain business surtaxes to 
the Washington Convention Center Authority Fund; to decrease 
the sales and compensating use tax rate on public 
accommodations from 10.5 percent to 10.05 percent; to increase 
the percentage of the tax to be collected on behalf of the 
Authority from 2.5 percent to 4.45 percent; and repeal the 
Hotel and Occupancy Tax. Act 12-402 was published in the July 
24, 1998, edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 4826) and 
transmitted to Congress on July 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
This legislation became effective on the date that the 
President of the United States signed Public Law 105-227. This 
act became D.C. Law 12-142 effective August 12, 1998.
    109. July 29, 1998--Act 12-403, ``Old Rock Creek Church 
Road Designation Act of 1998.'' To designate the unnumbered 
block of Road, NW., between North Capitol and Webster Streets, 
NW., as Old Rock Creek Church Road (ward 4).
    110. July 21, 1998--Act 12-404 (Law 12-161), ``Closing of 
Public Alley in Square 185, S.O. 97-106, Act of 1998.'' To 
order the legal closing of a public alley in square 185, 
bounded by I Street, NW., 16th Street, NW., in ward 2. Act 12-
404 was published in the August 7, 1998, edition of the D.C. 
Register (Vol. 45 page 5171) and transmitted to Congress on 
July 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. Congress not having 
disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-161, effective October 
7, 1998.
    111. July 21, 1998--Act 12-405 (Law 12-162), ``Windshield 
Wipers and Headlamp Regulation Amendment Act of 1998.'' To 
amend Title 18 of the District of Columbia Municipal 
Regulations to require the use of motor vehicle headlamps when 
the windshield wipers are being operated under certain 
conditions. Act 12-405 was published in the August 7, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 5173) and 
transmitted to Congress on July 21, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
162, effective October 7, 1998.
    112. July 21, 1998--Act 12-407 (Law 12-163), ``Closing of 
8th, L, and M Streets, NW., and the Closing of Public Alleys in 
Squares 400, 401, 402, 426, 425, and 424, S.O. 96-90, Act of 
1998.'' To order the closing of 8th Street, NW., between 7th 
and 9th Streets, NW., and the closing of certain public alleys 
in Squares 400, 401, 402, 426, 425, and 424, to facilitate the 
development of a new convention center at Mount Vernon Square, 
in ward 2. Act 12-407 was published in the August 7, 1998, 
edition of the D.C. Register (Vol. 45 page 5175) and 
transmitted to Congress on May 19, 1998 for a 30-day review. 
Congress not having disapproved, this act became D.C. Law 12-
163, effective October 7, 1998.
    113. July 29, 1998--Act 12-410, ``Advisory Commission on 
Sentencing Establishment Act of 1998.'' To establish the 
Advisory Commission on Sentencing to make recommendations to 
the Council regarding criminal sentencing reforms required by 
the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 
Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-33.
    114. July 29, 1998--Act 12-411, ``Kenneth H. Nash Post #8 
American Legion Real Property Tax Exemption and Equitable Real 
Property Tax Relief Act of 1998.'' To amend Title 47 of the 
District of Columbia Code to exempt from taxation certain 
property of the American Legion in the District of Columbia to 
confer a tax exemption, and to provide equitable property tax 
relief to the Kenneth H. Nash Post #8 American Legion, from the 
expiration of the ``Kenneth H. Nash Post #8 American Legion 
Property Tax Exemption and Tax Relief Emergency Act of 1996, 
until the effective date of this act.
    115. July 29, 1998--Act 12-412, ``Bethea-Welch Post 7284, 
Veterans of Foreign Wars Real Property Tax Exemption and 
Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1998, and Tax 
Increment Financing Authorization and National Capital 
Revitalization Corporation Technical Amendments Act of 1998.'' 
To amend Title 47 of the District of Columbia Code to exempt 
from taxation certain property of the Bethea-Welch Post 7284, 
Veterans of Foreign Wars in the District of Columbia to Confer 
a tax-exemption, and to provide equitable property tax relief 
to the Bethea-Welch Post 7284, Veterans of Foreign Wars; and to 
make technical amendments to the Tax Increment Financing 
Authorization Act of 1998 and the National Capital 
Revitalization Corporation Act of 1998.
    116. July 29, 1998--Act 12-413, ``Society of the Cincinnati 
Real Property Tax Exemption and Equitable Real Property Tax 
Relief Act of 1998.'' To amend Chapter 10 of Title 47 of the 
District of Columbia Code to designate additional property 
owned by the Society of the Cincinnati as Tax exempt and to 
provide tax relief to the Society for such property from the 
time the Society obtained the property until the effective date 
of this act.
    117. July 29, 1998--Act 12-414, ``American Legion, James 
Reese Europe Post No. 5 Real Property Tax Exemption and 
Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1998.'' To amend 
Chapter 10 of Title 47 of the District of Columbia Code to 
designate real property owned by the American Legion, James 
Reese Europe Post No. 5, as tax exempt, and to provide 
equitable real property tax relief for such property from 
October 1, 1997 until March 31, 1998.
    118. July 29, 1998--Act 12-415, ``Prince Hall Freemason and 
Eastern Star Charitable Foundation Real Property Tax Exemption 
and Equitable Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1998.'' To amend 
Chapter 10 of Title 47 of the District of Columbia Code to 
designate real property owned by the Prince Hall Freemason and 
Eastern Star Charitable Foundation as tax exempt and to provide 
equitable real property tax relief to the Prince Hall Freemason 
and Eastern Star Charitable Foundation for such property from 
December 5, 1997, through March 31, 1998.
    119. July 29, 1998--Act 12-417, ``Temple Micah Equitable 
Real Property Tax Relief Act of 1998.'' To provide equitable 
real property tax relief to the Temple Micah, a tax exempt 
religious organization.

                    Subcommittee on Human Resources

1. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 104-4, 104th 
        Congress, March 22, 1995, 109 Stat. 67

    This law imposes parliamentary barriers to discourage the 
imposition of Federal mandates on State, local, and tribal 
governments without adequate funding if the mandates would 
displace other essential governmental priorities. It also 
requires the legislative and executive branches to identify and 
quantify costs incurred by those governments in complying with 
Federal statutory and regulatory mandates. In addition, it 
required a study of existing mandates.
    The Human Resources Subcommittee is continuing to monitor 
Federal department compliance with the legislation, with 
special attention to two portions--the title II requirement 
that Federal agencies review proposed and final regulations for 
mandate impacts and consider less burdensome alternatives, and 
the title III requirement that a review of existing mandates be 
conducted.

2. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, Public Law 104-
        191, 104th Congress, signed into law August 21, 1996

    The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 
1996 [HIPAA] provided for changes in the health insurance 
market and imposed certain requirements on health insurance 
plans offered by public and private employers. It guaranteed 
the availability and renewability of health insurance coverage 
for certain employees and individuals, limiting the use of pre-
existing condition restrictions. It created Federal standards 
for insurers, health maintenance organizations [HMOs] and 
employer plans, including those who are self-insured. It 
ensures greater availability of health coverage plans for small 
employers. Medical Savings Accounts--personal savings accounts 
for unreimbursed medical expenses--were created by the act.
    The law also created a new program to combat health care 
fraud and abuse, established the Medicare Integrity Program, 
set up a new Medicare anti-fraud and abuse control account 
within the Medicare hospital trust fund, extended criminal 
sanctions under the Social Security Act for Medicare, Medicaid 
and other Federal health care programs and established new 
rules and penalties for fraud and abuse in Medicare and 
Medicaid.
    The Human Resources Subcommittee has been monitoring the 
implementation of the legislation, particularly the fraud and 
abuse provisions, tracking the amount of recouped resources as 
a result of successful collaborative anti-fraud initiatives on 
the part of the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS], 
the Office of the Inspector General [OIG], the Department of 
Justice [DOJ], and State agencies' efforts. The subcommittee 
has been monitoring the implementation of the new Adverse 
Action Data Base, the Medicare Integrity Program, and following 
the OIG expansion of its Operation Restore Trust initiative.

3. Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, Public Law 103-62, 
        103d Congress, August 3, 1993, 107 Stat. 285.

    Under the Government Performance and Results Act (commonly 
referred to as the Results Act), every Federal agency must 
improve Federal program effectiveness and public accountability 
by promoting a new focus on results, service quality, and 
customer satisfaction. To achieve this each Federal agency must 
develop a mission statement, set goals, measure performance, 
and report on their accomplishments. The Human Resources 
Subcommittee has been monitoring the Department's of Labor, 
Education, and Health and Human Services compliance with the 
requirements of the act.
    The Government Performance and Results Act requires that 
Federal agencies improve program effectiveness and ensure 
accountability by focusing on results based on program mandate, 
program quality and customer satisfaction. To achieve this, 
agencies are required to develop a mission statement, establish 
program goals, develop a performance measurement and report on 
accomplishments. The subcommittee has monitored the Department 
of Health and Human Services compliance with this act through 
their required submissions to GAO.

   Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
                           Regulatory Affairs

1. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, May 22, 1995

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 furthers the goals of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, including to have the 
Federal agencies become more responsible and publicly 
accountable for reducing the burden of Federal paperwork on the 
public. Under this law and Executive Order 12866 (and its 
predecessor orders), the Office of Management and Budget's 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs is responsible for 
paperwork and regulatory reviews of agency paperwork and 
regulatory plans and proposals.

2. Congressional Review Act, Public Law 104-121, March 29, 1996

    The Congressional Review Act [CRA] requires the agencies to 
file certain reports with Congress for each new rule before 
that rule can legally take effect. If a rule is not reported, 
it is an illegal rule. The CRA restored accountability to 
regulation by giving Congress the opportunity to review and, if 
necessary, disapprove any new rule or regulation.

                   Subcommittee on the Postal Service

1. The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, Public Law 91-375, August 12, 
        1970, 84 Stat. 719

    The Subcommittee on the Postal Service has legislative 
jurisdiction and oversight over the U.S. Postal Service, U.S. 
Postal Rate Commission and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. 
These entities operate under the authority granted pursuant to 
the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 [PRA] which traces 
congressional authority for postal services to Article I, 
Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which direct Congress 
``(t)o establish Post Offices and Post Roads.''
    The U.S. Postal Service is governed by an 11 member Board 
of Governors; 9 of whom are appointed by the President and 
confirmed by the Senate who in turn employ a Postmaster General 
and Deputy Postmaster General who also become members of the 
Board. The U.S. Postal Service handles 40 percent of the 
world's mail volume; it had total revenues in 1995 of $54.3 
billion; it employs 1 out of every 170 Americans; and processed 
181 billion pieces of mail or about 580 million pieces per day 
and delivered to 128 million addresses in 1995.
    The U.S. Postal Rate Commission, independent of the U.S. 
Postal Service, is governed by five, full-time, Presidentially-
appointed and Senate-confirmed Commissioners. It is responsible 
by hearing a request of the U.S. Postal Service for an increase 
in postage rates, reclassification of its postage schedule and 
for making a recommended decision upon such a request. The 
Commission also hears complaints from outside parties regarding 
postal rates or services.
    The Postal Inspection Service is the law enforcement branch 
of the U.S. Postal Service and is responsible for enforcing the 
Mail Fraud Act, Mail Order Consumer Protection Amendments of 
1983, Drug and Household Substance Mailing Act of 1990, and for 
enforcing the Private Express Statutes which give the Postal 
Service its letter-mail monopoly. It is also entrusted with 
insuring the security and safety of postal facilities and 
employees and for serving in the dual role of Inspector General 
for the agency.
    The subcommittee continued its in-depth oversight of the 
operations of these entities. During the first session of the 
104th Congress, the subcommittee conducted a series of in-depth 
oversight hearings which highlighted the need for reform of 
postal operations. These hearings laid the foundation for the 
reforms contained in H.R. 3717, the Postal Reform Act of 1996, 
the first comprehensive postal reform legislation in a quarter 
century. H.R. 3717 focused constructive debate in the postal 
community on the future of the Postal Service in meeting its 
statutory mandate of provision of universal mail service. The 
subcommittee believes that shifting mail volumes and stagnant 
postal revenue growth requires an examination of the statutory 
structure under which our current postal system now operates if 
the Service is to maintain this important public service 
mission.
    The oversight hearings identified several weaknesses in the 
current statutory structure of the Postal Service. One weakness 
highlighted is the Postal Service's inability to compete under 
the procedures required by the current, 28 year old ratemaking 
structure. According to the General Accounting Office, the U.S. 
Postal Service controlled virtually all of the Express Mail 
market in the early 1970's; by 1995 its share had dropped to 
approximately 13 percent. Similarly, the Postal Service is 
moving considerably fewer parcels today than 25 years ago. In 
1971 the Postal Service handled 536 million parcel pieces and 
enjoyed a 65 percent share of the ground surface delivery 
market. This is in comparison to 1990 when the Postal Service 
parcel volume had dropped to 122 million pieces with a 
resulting market share of about 6 percent.
    Even first-class financial transactions and personal 
correspondence mail--monopoly protected areas under the Private 
Express Statutes--are showing the effect of electronic 
communications competition. Financial institutions are 
promoting computer software to consumers as a method of 
conducting their bill-paying and general banking, while 
Internet service providers and online subscription services are 
offering consumers the ability to send electronic messages to 
anyone in the world or around the corner. Similarly, many 
postal users have become accustomed to the immediacy of the 
facsimile machine. These new communication technologies all 
carry correspondence that formerly flowed through the Postal 
Service. These former sources of revenues supported a postal 
infrastructure dedicated to the mission of universal service.
    This shift in postal revenues will have a negative long-
term effect on the financial well being of the Postal Service. 
The subcommittee believes that should the Service continue to 
labor under the restrictions established by the 1970 act, its 
inability to compete, develop new products and respond to 
changing market conditions jeopardizes its ability to continue 
to provide universal service to the diverse geographic areas of 
our Nation. Congress must review reforms to the current postal 
statutory structure which will provide the Postal Service more 
competitive flexibility while assuring all postal customers of 
a continued universal mail service at reasonable and affordable 
rates. H.R. 3717 meets this goal by replacing the zero-sum game 
of the current ratemaking structure with a system that insures 
reasonable postal rates while allowing the Postal Service the 
flexibility it needs to compete in today's changing 
communication markets.
    As evidenced in our review of data quality, the act has 
fostered an entrenched distrust between the Postal Service and 
the Postal Rate Commission and allowed the two agencies to 
develop an inter-agency antagonism which fosters a sense of 
favoritism between postal customers. This problem is 
exacerbated by the existing cost-based ratemaking process.
    Fortune Magazine ranks the Postal Service the 10th largest 
entity in the United States, if it were a private company. Its 
income ranks the Postal Service 82nd on Fortune magazine's 
Global 500 and 18th on its U.S. top 20 list. However, the 
Postal Service is ranked in last place in terms of equity 
position. The Postal Service employs over 800,000 career 
employees who make it possible to deliver mail daily to more 
than 130 million addresses. The Postmaster General reported in 
October that the USPS expects to end 1998 with a surplus of 
$500-$600 million, however, there are about $4 billion 
accumulated losses since 1971 still to be recovered. Postal 
rates will increase by a penny in January 1999, after the 
holiday season.
    The U.S. Postal Rate Commission is independent of the U.S. 
Postal Service. It is governed by five, full-time, 
Presidentially-appointed and Senate-confirmed Commissioners. It 
is responsible for hearing a request of the Postal Service for 
an increase on postage rate, reclassification of its postage 
schedule and for making a recommended decision upon such a 
request. The Commission also hears complaints from outside 
parties regarding postal rates or services.
    The Inspector General of the Postal Service is independent 
of postal management and is appointed by and reports directly 
to the nine Presidentially appointed Governors of the Postal 
Service. The primary mission of the Inspector General is to 
prevent, detect and report fraud waste and program abuse and to 
promote efficiency in the operations of the Postal Service. The 
Office of the Inspector General [OIG] investigates and audits 
programs and operations of the Postal Service to ensure the 
efficiency and integrity of the postal system and plays an 
integral part in maintaining effective programs and operation 
in the Postal Service. The OIG has the authority to conduct 
audits and investigations, take sworn statements and issue 
subpoenas.
    The subcommittee continues its oversight of the operations 
of these five entities and continues to refine legislation to 
reorganize the Postal Service which is facing extraordinary 
times in the competitive arena and its mission to offer 
universal service. The Postal Service will not be able to 
compete in coming years if it must operate under the governing 
laws, enacted in 1970. These laws do not permit the Postal 
Service to react swiftly and predictably to market conditions. 
Congress must review reforms to the current postal statutory 
structure which will provide the Postal Service more 
competitive flexibility while assuring all postal customers of 
a continued universal mail service at reasonable and affordable 
rates. New technologies have put additional burdens on the 
manner in which communications and business are being conducted 
and the diversion of mail from the Postal Service to faster and 
often more reliable forms of correspondence.
    The subcommittee will continue to study, monitor and report 
on the effectiveness of the Postal Reorganization Act and will 
continue to seek needed reforms to improve the overall 
performance of the Postal Service and provide better service to 
all postal customers.

                      IV. Other Current Activities

                  A. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE REPORTS

               Government Reform and Oversight Committee

1. ``Financial Audit: Independent Counsel Expenditures for the Six 
        Months Ended September 30, 1996,'' March 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-64
    a. Summary.--The Department of Justice and the independent 
counsels are required under 28 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 594(d)(2), (h) 
and 596(c)(1) to report on expenditures from a permanent, 
indefinite appropriation established within Justice to fund 
independent counsel activities. In order to satisfy the 
requirements of 28 U.S.C. Sec. 596(c)(2) and Public Law 100-
202, which established a permanent, indefinite appropriation 
within Justice to fund independent counsels, the GAO is 
required to audit the independent counsels' expenditures from 
the appropriation for each 6-month period in which they have 
operations and report those findings to the appropriate 
congressional committees.
    The GAO found that the statements of expenditures for the 
offices of independent counsel Arlin M. Adams/Larry D. 
Thompson, David M. Barrett, Joseph E. diGenova/Michael F. 
Zeldin, Daniel S. Pearson, Donald C. Smaltz, and Kenneth W. 
Starr were reliable in all material respects.
2. ``Financial Audit: Independent Counsel Expenditures for the Six 
        Months Ended March 31, 1997,'' September 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-164
    a. Summary.--The Department of Justice and the independent 
counsels are required under 28 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 594(d)(2), (h) 
and 596(c)(1) to report on expenditures from a permanent, 
indefinite appropriation established within Justice to fund 
independent counsel activities. In order to satisfy the 
requirements of 28 U.S.C. Sec. 596(c)(2) and Public Law 100-
202, which established a permanent, indefinite appropriation 
within Justice to fund independent counsels, the GAO is 
required to audit the independent counsels' expenditures from 
the appropriation for each 6-month period in which they have 
operations and report those findings to the appropriate 
congressional committees.
    The GAO found that the statements of expenditures for the 
offices of independent counsel Arlin M. Adams/Larry D. 
Thompson, David M. Barrett, Joseph E. diGenova/Michael F. 
Zeldin, Daniel S. Pearson, Donald C. Smaltz, Kenneth W. Starr, 
and a sealed independent counsel were reliable in all material 
respects.
3. ``GPRA: Managerial Accountability and Flexibility Pilot Did Not Work 
        As Intended,'' April 1997, GAO/GGD-97-36
    a. Summary.--This report was addressed to the chairman and 
ranking member of the House Government Reform and Oversight 
Committee and the chairman and ranking member of the Senate 
Governmental Affairs Committee. The report was developed in 
partial response to the Government Performance and Results 
Act's requirement that GAO report on the act's implementation 
during the initial pilot phase--fiscal years 1994 to 1996--and 
on the prospects for its government-wide implementation.
    The Results Act provides for a series of pilot projects so 
that Federal agencies can gain experience in using the act's 
provisions and provide lessons to other agencies before 
government-wide implementation. One set of these pilot projects 
focused on managerial accountability and flexibility.
    GAO found that the managerial accountability and 
flexibility pilot did not work as intended. OMB did not 
designate any of the 7 departments and 1 independent agency 
that submitted a total of 61 waiver proposals as pilots. For 
about three-quarters of the waiver proposals, OMB or other 
central management agencies determined that the waivers were 
not allowable for statutory or other reasons or that the 
requirement for which the waivers were proposed no longer 
existed. For the remaining proposals, OMB or other central 
management agencies approved waivers or developed compromises 
by using authorities that were already available independent of 
GPRA.
    GAO found that three major factors contributed to the 
failure of the managerial accountability and flexibility pilot 
phase. First, changes in Federal management practices and laws 
that occurred after the Results Act was enacted affected 
agencies' need for the Results Act process. Second, the Results 
Act was not the only means by which agencies could receive 
waivers from administrative requirements, and thereby obtain 
needed managerial flexibility. And third, OMB did not work 
activity with agencies that were seeking to take part in the 
managerial accountability and flexibility pilot.
    As of November 1996, almost 11 months after OMB had 
received the endorsements by the central management agencies, 
OMB had not formally notified two of the eight agencies that 
nine of their requested waivers had been approved outside of 
the Results Act pilot process or that a compromise had been 
developed. Overall, officials in five of the eight agencies 
that submitted a waiver proposal to OMB said that they never 
received feedback from OMB on the status of their waiver 
proposals, or notification of specific concerns that OMB may 
have had about the quality and scope of the proposals, or 
explicit instructions from OMB on how their proposals could be 
improved to better meet OMB's expectations.
    b. Benefits.--This report was helpful to Congress in 
overseeing agency and OMB compliance with the Results Act, and 
in determining which pilot phases of the act would be 
instructional for government-wide implementation of the act.
4. ``The Government Performance and Results Act: 1997 Government-wide 
        Implementation Will Be Uneven,'' June 1997, GAO/GGD-97-109
    a. Summary.--This report was addressed to the chairman and 
ranking members of the following: the House Government Reform 
and Oversight Committee, the Senate Governmental Affairs 
Committee, the House Committee on Budget, the Senate Committee 
on Budget, the House Committee on Appropriations, and the 
Senate Committee on Appropriations. This report is in response 
to the Results Act requirement that GAO report to Congress on 
the prospects for government-wide implementation of the act.
    GAO's report indicated that the Results Act's 
implementation up to that point had achieved mixed results, 
which would lead to highly uneven government-wide 
implementation in the 1997. While agencies would likely meet 
statutory deadlines for producing initial strategic plans and 
annual performance plans, GAO found that those documents will 
not be of a consistently high quality or as useful for 
congressional and agency decisionmaking as they could be.
    GAO observed the following challenges for government-wide 
implementation: (1) Overlapping and fragmented crosscutting 
program efforts can undermine efforts to establish clear 
missions and goals; (2) The often limited or indirect influence 
that the Federal Government has in determining whether desired 
results is achieved complicates the effort to identify and 
measure the discrete contribution of the Federal initiative to 
a specific program result; (3) The lack of quality and the 
dearth of results-oriented performance information in many 
agencies hampers efforts to identify appropriate goals and 
confidently assess performance; and, (4) Instilling within 
agencies an organizational culture that focuses on results 
remain a work in progress across the Federal Government.
    b. Benefits.--This report helps Congress anticipate and 
oversee the administration's implementation of the Results Act. 
It gives a realistic view of the compliance to expect from 
agencies, the challenges agencies face. Congress can then 
better know where, when, and how to apply pressure on the 
administration to try and get the best compliance possible.
5. ``Managing for Results: Regulatory Agencies Identified Significant 
        Barriers to Focusing on Results,'' June 1997, GAO/GGD-97-83
    a. Summary.--While addressed to the chairman and ranking 
member of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee 
and the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Governmental 
Affairs Committee, this report was initiated by GAO to support 
the broader responsibility of the GAO to report to Congress on 
the prospects for the Results Acts's implementation government-
wide, as required by the act.
    GAO found that officials at many regulatory agencies cited 
numerous barriers to their efforts to establish results-
oriented goals and measures. These barriers included 
significant problems in identifying and collecting the data 
they needed to demonstrate their agencies' results. Agencies 
also cited as a barrier the fact that diverse and complex 
factors affect agencies' results (e.g., business cycles, 
technological innovations, or the need to deliver Federal 
program initiatives and thus achieve results through third 
parties), and their lack of control or influence over those 
factors. Finally, agency officials observed that the long time 
period needed to see results in some areas of Federal 
regulation was a barrier to identifying and managing toward 
those results in the framework of annual performance plans and 
budgets. The impact of some agencies' regulatory actions, such 
as limiting exposure to a hazardous chemical, may not be 
evident for years. GAO thinks these barriers suggest that the 
implementation of the Results Act in a regulatory environment 
may prove more difficult in some cases than in others.
    b. Benefits.--This GAO report is important in aiding 
Congress to oversee and anticipate agency compliance with the 
Results Act. It is also important in helping executive branch 
agencies themselves prepare for government-wide implementation 
of the act.
6. ``Managing For Results: Using the Results Act to Address Mission 
        Fragmentation and Program Overlap,'' August 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-
        146
    a. Summary.--As requested by Majority Leader Armey, 
Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Dan Burton, 
Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich, and Appropriations 
Committee Chairman Bob Livingston, GAO compiled its 
documentation of mission fragmentation and program overlap and 
reported on the specific ways in which the Results Act can 
focus attention on these management challenges and help to 
develop strategies to harmonize Federal responses.
    GAO found that the Results Act should offer a new and 
structured framework to address crosscutting issues. Each of 
its key stages--defining missions and desired outcomes, 
measuring performance, and using performance information--
offers a new opportunity to address fragmentation and overlap. 
The Results Act is intended to foster a dialog on strategic 
goals involving the Congress as well as agency and external 
stakeholders. This dialog should help to identify agencies and 
programs addressing similar missions and associated performance 
implications. The act's emphasis on results-based performance 
measures should lead to more explicit discussions of 
contributions and accomplishments within crosscutting programs 
and encourage related programs to develop common performance 
measures. Finally, if the Results Act is successfully 
implemented, performance information should become available to 
clarify the consequences of fragmentation and the implication 
of alternative policy and service delivery options, which, in 
tern, can affect future decisions concerning department and 
agency missions and the allocation of resources among those 
missions.
    b. Benefits.--This report helped confirm the requestors 
expectation that the Results Act would be a useful tool for 
addressing program overlap and fragmentation. As each stage of 
the Results Act is implemented by executive branch agencies, it 
is critical for Congress to know if its expectations are 
realistic so that oversight can be as effective as possible.
7. ``Managing for Results: Critical Issues for Improving Federal 
        Agencies' Strategic Plans,'' September 1997, GAO/GGD-97-180
    a. Summary.--In response to a request from Majority Leader 
Dick Armey, Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman 
Dan Burton, Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich, and 
Appropriations Committee Chairman Bob Livingston, GAO reviewed 
and evaluated the latest available version of the draft 
strategic plans that were submitted to Congress for 
consultation by cabinet departments and selected independent 
agencies. Those reviews of the draft plans: (1) assessed the 
draft plans' compliance with the act's required elements and 
their overall quality; (2) determined if the plans reflected 
the key statutory requirements for each agency; (3) identified 
whether the plans reflected discussions about crosscutting 
activities and coordination with other agencies having similar 
activities; (4) determined if the draft plans addressed major 
management challenges; and, (5) provided a preliminary 
assessment of the capacity of the departments and agencies to 
provide reliable information about performance.
    GAO found in their review that several critical strategic 
planning issues are in need of sustained attention if agencies 
are to develop the dynamic strategic planning processes 
envisioned by the Results Act. First, most of the draft plans 
did not adequately link required elements in the plans. Second, 
long-term strategic goals often tended to have weaknesses. 
Third, many agencies did not fully develop strategies 
explaining how their long-term strategic goals would be 
achieved. Fourth, most agencies did not reflect in their draft 
plans the identification and planned coordination of activities 
and programs that cut across multiple agencies. Fifth, the 
questionable capacity of many agencies to gather performance 
information has hampered efforts to identify appropriate goals 
and confidently assess performance. And sixth, the draft 
strategic plans did not adequately address program evaluations.
    b. Benefits.--While Congress had set up congressional staff 
teams to review the individual draft strategic plans submitted 
by agencies, it was critical for congressional planning and 
oversight of the Results Act to have a review of all the plans 
taken as a whole. GAO's assessment again gave Congress a better 
sense of what expectations of agencies could be and where the 
weaknesses in the plans were.
8. A series of reports were issued during 1997 regarding, ``The Results 
        Act: Observations on the Draft Strategic Plans of the 
        Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, 
        Energy, Health and Human Services', Housing and Urban 
        Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, State, Transportation, 
        Treasury, Veterans Affairs, EPA's, Federal Emergency Management 
        Agency, General Services Administration, NASA, National Science 
        Foundation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Management 
        and Budget, Office of Personnel Management, Small Business 
        Administration, Social Security Administration, the Postal 
        Service, USAID, and USTR's''
    a. Summary.--As requested by Majority Leader Dick Armey, 
Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Dan Burton, 
Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich, and Appropriations 
Committee Chairman Bob Livingston, GAO performed reviews on an 
individual basis of the draft strategic plans of all of the 
Chief Financial Officers Act agencies and a handful of other 
important Federal entities. These entities included: Labor, 
Treasury, Postal Service, HHS, Commerce, OPM, Interior, 
Transportation, DOD, OMB, HUD, NASA, Energy, Justice, EPA, 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, SBA, FEMA, NSF, GSA, 
Agriculture, USTR, State, USAID, SSA, Education, and the 
Veterans Administration.
    b. Benefits.--GAO's individual reviews aided the 
congressional teams that were set up to examine specific agency 
strategic plans and consult with those agencies regarding the 
direction and implications of those plans. GAO's individual 
reviews were necessary especially in cases where the team was 
pressed for time in reviewing the draft plan itself or did not 
know the agencies programs in as great detail as the GAO. GAO 
also brought a great deal of expertise to their examination, 
which helped in many cases ask and answer important Results Act 
questions for the congressional teams.
9. ``Managing for Results: The Statutory Framework for Performance-
        Based Management and Accountability,'' Letter Report, 01/28/98, 
        GAO/GGD/AIMD-98-52
    a. Summary.--GAO provided an overview of certain major 
statutes that Congress has enacted to instill a more 
performance-based approach to management and accountability of 
the Federal Government.
    GAO noted that, implemented together, these laws provide a 
powerful framework for developing and fully integrating 
information about agencies' missions and strategic priorities, 
the results-oriented performance goals that flow from those 
priorities, performance data to show the level of achievement 
of those goals, and the relationship of information technology 
investments to the achievement of performance goals--along with 
reliable and audited financial information about the costs of 
achieving mission results. This framework should promote a more 
results-oriented management and decisionmaking process within 
both Congress and the executive branch.
    b. Benefits.--This GAO report identifies the power and 
usefulness of the framework of management laws currently in 
place. It can be useful to Members by providing information 
that is pertinent to a broad range of management-related 
decisions confronting them in their capabilities as members of 
budget, authorization, oversight, and appropriations 
committees. However, GAO's work has shown that critical 
implementation issues remain to be addressed, and for example, 
although the statutory framework for more performance-based 
government is in place, key parts of the framework are in their 
first years of implementation, and how best to integrate the 
implementation is a continuing work in progress.
10. ``Managing For Results: Agencies' Annual Performance Plans Can Help 
        Address Strategic Planning Challenges,'' Letter Report, 01/30/
        98, GAO/GGD-98-44
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed Federal agencies' strategic plans 
submitted in response to the Government Performance and Results 
Act of 1993 and summarized its observations on agencies' 
September plans. GAO also provided additional information on 
how the next phase of the Results Act's implementation--
performance planning measurement--can be used to address the 
critical planning issue GAO observed in reviewing the September 
strategic plans.
    GAO noted that agencies' strategic planning efforts are 
still very much a work in progress. GAO's reviews of September 
plans indicate that continued progress is needed in how 
agencies address three difficult planning challenges--setting a 
strategic direction, coordinating crosscutting programs, and 
ensuring the capacity to gather and use performance and cost 
data. GAO found that agencies can build upon their initial 
efforts to set a strategic direction for their programs and 
activities and that the next stage in the Results Act's 
implementation--performance planning and measurement--can 
assist agencies in addressing the challenge of setting a 
strategic direction.
    b. Benefits.--This report is helpful in instructing the 
Congress and agencies about the major challenges that need to 
be overcome in order for the annual performance plans to be the 
most useful. GAO found that although agencies have begun to 
recognize the importance of coordinating crosscutting programs, 
they must undertake the substantive coordination that is needed 
for the effective management of those programs. Another 
critical planning challenge is the need for agencies to have 
the capacity to gather and use sound program performance and 
cost data to successfully measure progress toward their 
intended results. Under the Results Act, agencies are also to 
discuss in their annual performance plans how they will verify 
and validate the performance information that they plan to use 
to show whether goals are being met. Verified and validated 
performance information, in conjunction with augmented program 
evaluation efforts, will help ensure that agencies are able to 
report progress in meeting goals and identify specific 
strategies for improving performance.
11. ``Inspectors General: Efforts to Develop Strategic Plans,'' Letter 
        Report, 06/12/98, GAO/AIMD-98-112
    a. Summary.--Using survey methodology, GAO provided 
information on inspectors general [IG] strategic planning 
efforts, focusing on: (1) which IGs presently prepare strategic 
plans; (2) the extent to which strategic plans were consistent 
with the Government Performance and Results Act requirements; 
(3) additional information IGs included in their strategic 
plans; (4) the extent to which IGs used their respective 
agencies' strategic plans to develop their own plans; (5) the 
extent to which IGs have been involved in developing their 
agencies' strategic plans; (6) the extent to which a strategic 
plan prepared consistent with the requirements of the Results 
Act would be useful to Congress, the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB), and the IG; and (7) the IGs' views on statutorily 
requiring them to prepare strategic plans.
    GAO noted that: (1) the 48 IGs that it surveyed indicated 
that they were all engaged in strategic planning efforts; (2) 
39 IGs reported that they had completed strategic plans, with 
the remaining 9 stating that they planned to complete their 
plans during 1998; (3) most IGs were of the opinion that the 
requirements contained in the Results Act provided an 
appropriate framework for preparing IG strategic plans; (4) 
further, the IGs responded that their plans address many of the 
elements that the Results Act requires for agency plans; (5) 
however, fewer IG plans addressed such elements as the 
relationship between general goals and annual performance goals 
and identification of external factors that could affect 
achievement of goals; (6) in addition, the plans addressed key 
management issues to varying degrees; (7) the IGs GAO surveyed 
generally indicated that these management issues, if not 
included in their strategic plans, were covered in other 
planning documents such as annual audit plans; (8) most IGs 
also indicated that they considered the agency's Results Act 
strategic plan at least to some extent in preparing their own 
plan; (9) in addition, more than half of all the IGs reported 
that they had at least some involvement in preparing the 
agency's strategic plan; (10) a majority believed that a 
strategic plan that satisfies the requirements of the Results 
Act would be useful to Congress, OMB, and the IG in assessing 
IG performance and operations; (11) the IGs were about evenly 
divided on the need for a statutory requirement on strategic 
planning; (12) overall, about 29 percent agreed, 33 percent 
disagreed, 27 percent agreed as much as disagreed, and the 
remaining 10 percent had no opinion; and (13) of the IGs that 
cited a reason for their disagreement, the most frequent 
comment made was that such a mandate was unnecessary because 
IGs recognize the importance of strategic planning as a basic 
part of good management and are already engaged in planning 
efforts.
    b. Benefits.--With passage of the Government Performance 
and Results Act, Congress indicated its support for the 
benefits of strategic and performance planning within an 
organization. GAO's survey provides congress with information 
regarding current attitudes of Inspectors General with regard 
to strategic planning in their own offices. This issue is not 
to be confused with the role for IGs Congress has yet to define 
with regard to assessment or involvement in agency strategic 
planning and performance measurement.
12. ``Bank Supervision: Closure of the Rushville National Bank,'' June 
        15, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-80
    a. Summary.--On August 1, 1997, Chairman Dan Burton sent a 
letter to the General Accounting Office [GAO], requesting a GAO 
investigation of the December 18, 1992, closure of the 
Rushville National Bank, in Rushville, IN, by the Office of the 
Comptroller of the Currency. The manner of the bank's closing 
and several other related issues raised by the former 
management of the bank have raised serious questions about 
whether the OCC's actions were consistent with its normal 
processes for bank examinations and closure of insolvent 
institutions.
    On July 31, 1997, Chairman Burton issued a subpoena to the 
OCC for documents related to the closure of the Rushville 
National Bank. On two previous occasions, the OCC had refused 
to voluntarily provide these documents to Chairman Burton when 
he requested them.
    On June 15, 1998, the GAO issued its final report regarding 
the closure of the Rushville National Bank. The GAO concluded 
that the OCC's closure of the Rushville National Bank was 
consistent with the OCC's normal processes and procedures for 
closing insolvent banks. However, the GAO's review of the 
bank's loan classifications was made more difficult by the lack 
of certain documentation.
    On July 16, 1998, Chairman Burton issued a second subpoena 
to the OCC for documents related to the closure of the 
Rushville National Bank. These documents were received by the 
committee on July 21, 1998, and are currently under review by 
committee staff.
13. ``Managing for Results: An Agenda To Improve the Usefulness of 
        Agencies' Annual Performance Plans,'' Letter Report, 09/08/98, 
        GAO/GGD/AIMD-98-228
    a. Summary.--GAO summarized its reviews of individual 
Federal agency performance plans, focusing on opportunities to 
improve the usefulness of future performance plans for 
decisionmakers. Most of the plans that GAO reviewed contained 
major weaknesses that undermined their usefulness in that they: 
(a) did not consistently provide clear pictures of agencies' 
intended performance; (b) generally did not relate strategies 
and resources to performance; and (c) provided limited 
confidence that agencies' performance data will be sufficiently 
credible.
    GAO believes that Congress, the Office of Management and 
Budget [OMB], and the agencies need to build on the experiences 
of the first round of annual performance planning by working 
together and targeting key performance issues that will help to 
make future plans more useful. Most of the performance plans 
had at least some objective, quantifiable, and measurable 
goals, but few plans consistently included a comprehensive set 
of goals that focused on the results that programs were 
intended to achieve. The plans generally did not go further to 
describe how agencies expected to coordinate their efforts with 
those of other agencies. Most agencies' performance plans did 
not provide clear strategies that described how performance 
goals would be achieved. The performance plans generally 
provided listings of the agencies current array of programs and 
initiatives but provided limited perspective on how these 
programs and initiatives were necessary or helpful for 
achieving results. Most of the plans did not adequately 
describe the resources needed to achieve their agencies' 
performance goals. Most annual performance plans provided only 
superficial descriptions of procedures that agencies intended 
to use to verify and validate performance data. The absence of 
program evaluation capacity is a major concern, because a 
Federal environment that focuses on results depends on program 
evaluation to provide vital information about the contribution 
of the Federal effort.
    b. Benefits.--GAO noted that the agencies' first annual 
performance plans showed the potential for doing performance 
planning and measurement as envisioned by the Government 
Performance and Results Act to provide decisionmakers with 
valuable perspective and useful information for improving 
program performance. However, overall, substantial further 
development is needed for these plans to be useful in a 
significant way to congressional and other decisionmakers, and 
the GAO report details these areas which need further 
development.
14. ``The Results Act: Assessment of the Governmentwide Performance 
        Plan for Fiscal Year 1999,'' Letter Report, 09/08/98, GAO/AIMD/
        GGD-98-159
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed the Federal Government 
performance plan, focusing on whether the plan complies with 
the act's statutory requirements and congressional intent; and 
assessing the plan in the context of GAO's guidance developed 
for agency performance plans and congressional expectations set 
forth in a December 17, 1997, letter to the Director of the 
Office of Management and Budget [OMB].
    GAO noted that the issuance of the Governmentwide 
Performance Plan in February 1998 marked the culmination of the 
first annual performance planning cycle under the Government 
Performance and Results Act. OMB developed and implemented an 
approach and framework for this plan that generally addressed 
the basic requirements of the Results. While the plan's 
framework should ultimately allow for a cohesive presentation 
of governmentwide performance, the specific contents of this 
initial plan did not always deliver an integrated, consistent, 
and results-oriented picture of fiscal year 1999 Federal 
Government performance goals. GAO indicated that future plans 
will need to go beyond the formal requirements of the act if 
they are to more fully address its basic purposes and meet the 
evolving needs of congressional and other users.
    To add value to the government's overall performance 
planning and management efforts, GAO noted that attention is 
needed in two critical areas: (a) addressing observed 
weaknesses of individual agency performance plans that 
necessarily affect the quality of governmentwide performance 
planning; and (b) emphasizing an integrated, governmentwide 
perspective throughout the plan. As GAO noted in its recent 
individual agency and overall assessments, much work remains to 
improve agency performance plans, the building blocks of the 
governmentwide plan, and OMB will need to work with Federal 
agencies to strengthen these plans.
    b. Benefits.--A solid critique of the governmentwide 
performance plan provides OMB with the information it needs to 
improve this plan. By more explicitly emphasizing 
governmentwide perspectives and better integrating the 
performance implications of all Federal strategies within more 
consistent and complete mission-based presentations, the 
governmentwide plan can, in turn, complement and extend agency 
performance planning processes and provide valuable new 
contexts and information for Federal decisionmakers.

                       Subcommittee on the Census

1. ``Decennial Census: Overview of Historical Census Issues,'' May 
        1998, GAO/GGD-98-103
    a. Summary.--This GAO report is a general history and 
overview of the decennial census from its inception in the 
Constitution of the United States of 1787 up to the present 
day. It also discusses the general procedures used in taking 
the census, existing safeguards to ensure confidentiality and 
methods to reduce the costs of taking a census.
    Why take the census? The Constitution has, from its 
inception, required a regular census at 10-year intervals. The 
constitutional mandate of the taking of a census, combined with 
regular reapportionment, was a remarkably innovative approach 
to government. Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution allowed 
the representative political strength of States to change 
relative to one another in the House of Representatives and to 
account for the movement and migratory patterns of individuals 
into the United States and from one State to another. The 
census was carried out in 1790 and, every 10 years thereafter 
was followed (with one exception) by the reallocation of House 
seats between States based on the relative population shares of 
each State.
    In addition to the constitutional purpose of 
reapportionment, census data is also used for other purposes. 
Since the Supreme Court rulings mandating a one-person-one-vote 
approach to redistricting of the early 1960's, census data has 
been invaluable for securing and maintaining equality in 
district size. Census data has also been used extensively to 
ensure full compliance with various Federal statutes, including 
the Voting Rights Act. Federal aid is distributed to cities, 
municipalities, and local governments based on local population 
proportions; census data is also used on the local level for 
city planning. Finally, census data is used extensively by 
private enterprise and business when planning new expansion.
    Taking the census. The first census was carried out by U.S. 
Marshals. Over the course of the next 100 years, the growth and 
mobility of the populace, as well as concerns about census 
privacy, altered the nature of the census operation 
considerably. After 1850, a semi-permanent agency was set up to 
take the census. By 1902, a Census Office was established 
permanently under the aegis of the Commerce Department, where 
it has remained ever since.
    In 1954, Congress delegated all responsibility for 
performing the census to the Secretary of Commerce, while 
maintaining ongoing oversight authority over census 
preparations and performance. The House of Representatives' 
Subcommittee on the Census, under the Government Reform and 
Oversight Committee, and the Senate Governmental Affairs 
Committee, presently has that oversight responsibility.
    The 14th amendment, section 2, abandoned the slavery-era 
reapportionment formula given in the body of the Constitution 
and mandates that ``[r]epresentatives shall be apportioned 
among the several states according to their respective numbers, 
counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding 
Indians not taxed.'' The word ``persons'' here has a 
significant meaning with regard to the conduct of the census: 
all individuals, regardless of citizenship or legality of their 
residence within the United States, are to be enumerated. This 
has presented special challenges in recent censuses since this 
mandates that the homeless, temporary and seasonal workers, and 
even illegal aliens must be counted in the census process. (The 
``Indians not taxed'' clause has been inapplicable since 1940.)
    The census has always been concerned with the question of 
racial and ethnic self-identification. In recent years, this 
issue has become very complex. Congress has directed that the 
2000 census will use five racial categories: ``American Indian 
or Alaska Native,'' ``Asian,'' ``Black or African American,'' 
``Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander,'' or ``White.'' 
Two ethnicities will be counted: ``Hispanic or Latino'' and 
``Not Hispanic or Latino.'' Most significantly, individuals 
will now be allowed to account for any multiracial heritage by 
being allowed to ``check all [categories] that apply.''
    Counting methods have advanced. Originally, enumerators 
were sent to every single household and residence in the United 
States. Since 1970, a mailout-mailback system was instituted 
that replaced the universal interview system of previous 
censuses. This required an elaborate system to associate 
addresses with households to prevent unintended double 
counting. This system was complicated by the fact that each 
census rebuilt its address system from scratch. For the 2000 
census, the Census Bureau intended to build a ``Master Address 
File'' by incorporating information from the 1990 census with 
information from the U.S. Postal Service [USPS]. Attempts to 
coordinate address lists, initiated in 1994 after Congress 
passed a law mandating cooperation between the Bureau and the 
USPS, have not been entirely successful. A 100 percent canvas 
of addresses within all census blocks, initiated in 1997, was 
intended to fill the gaps in the list.
    Another challenge facing the Bureau is the location of 
individuals living in nontraditional housing: those in 
shelters, nursing homes, college dormitories, work camps, 
military installations and remote areas. Special operations, 
such as a ``Street and Shelter Night'' for the homeless and an 
early enumeration program for remote Alaskan villages, will be 
aggressively pursued to find those living in non-traditional 
housing.
    The ``Be Counted'' program will make extra census forms 
available in easily-accessible public areas, such as post 
offices, to allow individuals who may have mislaid their form 
to respond by mail. Finally, an extensive program of public 
outreach is planned to encourage participation.
    The use of sampling techniques to create a more 
``accurate'' census remains the central controversy surrounding 
the 2000 census. The existence of the ``differential 
undercount'', a term that describes the fact that a higher 
proportion of minorities are missed in the census than are 
whites, remains a serious challenge to the Census Bureau. They 
decided that sampling techniques, commonly used in polls and 
surveys, must be incorporated into the census process itself in 
an attempt to reduce the differential undercount.
    If statistical sampling is used it will be incorporated 
into the 2000 census in two ways. First, the process of 
attempting to count every single American will be abandoned. 
Instead, 90 percent of people living in each area will be 
enumerated and a sample will be taken of the remainder of the 
non-respondents. Second, a separate survey, called ``Integrated 
Coverage Measurement'' [ICM], will be used to adjust the 
results of the census so as to account for the individuals not 
enumerated in the census.
    This use of sampling has proven highly controversial. There 
is a serious constitutional question as to whether the ``actual 
Enumeration'' mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the 
Constitution will permit any possible adjustment or sampling. 
Second, 13 U.S.C. 195 explicitly prohibits the use of sampling 
for purposes of apportioning the House of Representatives. 
These issues are at the heart of the dispute between the 
administration and Congress on the 2000 census.
    The Census Bureau attempted to work around this problem in 
1990 through the use of a ``Post Enumeration Survey'' which was 
intended to adjust the census figures. However, in June 1991, 
the Secretary of the Commerce decided the data was unreliable 
and thus not to adjust the figures. The resulting dispute over 
the proper method of performing the census continues to this 
day.
    Protecting Privacy and Controlling Costs Are Persistent 
Census Concerns. The Census Bureau is mandated by statute to 
protect the data it gathers and the privacy of American 
citizens. This is necessary since many people refuse to respond 
to census gathering efforts based on privacy concerns. The 
recognition of the need to respect respondents' privacy grew 
over time. By the turn of the last century, privacy concerns 
about businesses analyzing census data led to the institution 
of the strict regime in place today.
    With the modern expansion of the reach of public knowledge 
of private individuals, many people have become concerned about 
the security of private data provided to the Census Bureau. 
This concern, translated into steadily dropping response rates, 
combined with the near-doubling in the number of housing units 
since 1960, has lead to a fourfold increase in the cost of the 
census in recent decades. However, the Census Bureau has 
responded by increasing the use of technology in the gathering 
and tallying of census information. The census has always been 
on the forefront of the use of electronic data processing 
equipment. Measures have been taken to increase staffing to 
``ensure that all residents of the United States are counted 
and included in the 2000 Census.''
    b. Benefits.--This report furnishes context, background, 
and a historical perspective for Members of Congress, staff, 
and others interested in questions related to the decennial 
census. It also explains some of the concerns surrounding the 
Census Bureau's proposed plan for the 2000 census.
2. ``2000 Census: Preparations for Dress Rehearsal Leave Many 
        Unanswered Questions,'' March 1998 GAO/GGD-98-74
    a. Summary.--At the request of Senator Fred Thompson, the 
chairman of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, and 
Senator John Glenn, ranking minority member, the GAO reviewed 
activities surrounding the 1998 dress rehearsals for the 2000 
census.
    The 1998 dress rehearsals were the final opportunity to 
test many of the procedures and processes that will guide the 
2000 census. The dress rehearsals and the 2000 decennial census 
are both designed to operate within strict time schedules; they 
both rely on a series of common activities spanning an extended 
period of time. Numerous census activities cannot commence 
until preceding steps are completed. The dress rehearsal was 
designed to adequately reflect the difficulties facing the 
Census Bureau when the 2000 census takes place.
    The GAO report has identified four major points of concern. 
Critical areas include: the creation and completion of an 
accurate address list, increasing the mail response rate using 
outreach and promotion, the ability to hire an adequate 
workforce, and the ability to reduce costs and improve 
efficiency through sampling and enumeration.
    First, GAO found that ``[t]he accuracy of the Bureau's 
address lists and maps is uncertain, and local reviews may be 
too sporadic to greatly improve them.'' Two major building 
blocks of any successful census are complete and accurate 
address lists and maps. To create them, the Bureau initially 
planned on using addresses provided by the U.S. Postal Service 
[USPS], and these addresses were to be merged with the address 
file created during the 1990 census. Ultimately, these lists 
are merged to create a database of addresses known as the 
Master Address File [MAF]. Tests of these lists forced the 
Bureau to conclude that reliance on the USPS and the 1990 
census address files would not suffice.
    Accordingly, the Bureau has decided to canvass 
neighborhoods across the Nation to physically verify the 
accuracy of the address file. This reengineered approach will 
cost an additional $108.7 million and will not be tested before 
the 2000 census. Problems associated with the dress rehearsal 
suggest that local participation may be too inconsistent and 
face far too many obstacles to verify and increase the accuracy 
of the address file and maps. Local address review has not 
progressed smoothly at the dress rehearsal sites. Many local 
governments did not participate in the local review, while 
others that did participate cited time and resource constraints 
as well as limited assistance from the Bureau as impediments to 
their reviews.
    Second, in reference to local outreach and promotion, the 
GAO found that ``[t]he Bureau's outreach and promotion efforts 
face obstacles that could impede its ability to achieve its 
mail response rate objective.'' The Census Bureau plans to 
partner with local governments and other community 
organizations to raise public awareness and illustrate the 
importance of the census. If this is successful, the mail 
response rate will increase; this will then reduce the costly 
non-response follow-up workload. (The Census Bureau has set a 
goal of 66.9 percent for their mail response rate, in 
comparison to 65 percent for 1990 and 75 percent for 1980.) 
Also, local community leaders were asked by the Bureau to 
mobilize grassroots promotion and contribute to the Bureau's 
Complete Count Committees. These committees are supposed to be 
responsible for heightening public awareness of the census 
through community outreach activities. The GAO reports that not 
all of the dress rehearsal sites where the Bureau had hoped to 
establish these committees had done so; many local officials 
cited vague guidance and expectations from the Bureau in terms 
of outreach and promotion.
    Third, with regard to staffing, the GAO warned that ``the 
Bureau could encounter difficulties staffing the 2000 Census.'' 
The Census Bureau estimates that it will need to recruit more 
than 2.6 million applicants to fill almost 300,000 jobs for the 
2000 decennial. The sheer volume of workers needed is a 
challenge in itself. Accordingly, given the likely full labor 
market in 2000, the Bureau will target people seeking ``part-
time'' employment. To provide motivation, the Bureau plans to 
base wages on local rates and offer productivity incentives.
    Fourth, GAO found that ``[t]he Bureau's sampling and 
statistical estimation design faces methodological, 
technological, and quality control challenges.'' The Bureau 
intends to use sampling in two different ways. Rather than 
conducting 100 percent nonresponse follow-up [NRFU] by actually 
contacting the remaining households, the Bureau plans to 
follow-up on only a partial sample of NRFU households. The 
Bureau also plans to use Integrated Coverage Measurement [ICM], 
which is designed to measure and adjust for any inaccuracies in 
the population count.
    For the Bureau to achieve its objectives, the GAO notes 
that NRFU sampling and the ICM would need to be appropriately 
and effectively implemented within strict time constraints. The 
GAO states that it is uncertain whether the Bureau will be able 
to complete ICM and NRFU operations in the time allotted. The 
Bureau has given itself less time to perform these functions in 
2000 than was used in 1990, even though the amount of work has 
almost certainly increased.
    Software development also continues to present serious 
challenges. Software that compares census data to the later ICM 
has ``limitations'' and ``could preclude a match between 
individuals counted'' in the census. This may seriously impact 
the accuracy of the adjusted population counts. GAO is also 
concerned about ICM selection criteria. In the dress 
rehearsals, many inappropriate (non-housing) addresses were 
selected for participation in the ICM. Repeating this in 2000 
could impact the ability of the Bureau to complete this phase 
of the census in a timely manner.
    b. Benefits.--Plans for the dress rehearsals were completed 
before the publication of the report. Accordingly, the GAO made 
no recommendations to improve the dress rehearsals themselves. 
Nevertheless, the report drew attention to several areas of 
census preparation which will require continued review. 
Furthermore, the report pointed out several risks facing the 
Bureau in their plans to implement sampling and statistical 
adjustment of the final outcome of the census. The report 
proved a useful source of information for the Census Bureau and 
the Congress in assessing the readiness of the Bureau's plans 
for the 2000 census.

                   Subcommittee on the Civil Service

1. ``Tax Administration: Lessons Learned From IRS' Initial Experience 
        in Redeploying Employees,'' January 9, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-24)
    a. Summary.--Thousands of Federal employees faced the 
possibility of losing their positions with the Internal Revenue 
Service [IRS] as a result of the agency's efforts to modernize 
its operations. The IRS developed a ``Redeployment 
Understanding'' in November 1993 after extensive negotiations 
with the National Treasury Employees Union [NTEU]. This 
agreement described procedures for filling vacancies through 
voluntary reassignments and seniority. Although this 
redeployment strategy was intended to facilitate the movement 
of employees whose positions were considered at risk, GAO found 
that, in the early stages, the redeployment strategy was used 
to move thousands of employees whose jobs were not in immediate 
jeopardy into positions that were expected to be needed in the 
new environment. GAO concluded that the ``Redeployment 
Understanding'' exacerbated the normal inefficiencies 
associated with such transitions by making many employees 
eligible for redeployment years before their jobs were expected 
to be eliminated and by not allowing IRS to fill jobs with 
people with related experience before bringing in volunteers 
from unrelated areas. Many employees cited concerns about the 
assistance provided to help employees find jobs.
    b. Benefits.--This report demonstrates the inefficiencies 
associated with premature redeployment strategies and documents 
ineffective operations with regard to IRS' personnel management 
practices. The costs associated with this premature and 
inefficient redeployment effort were exacerbated in November 
1997, when the IRS--after hearings in both chambers addressed 
major human resource management problems at the agency--
canceled the reduction in force that the redeployment strategy 
was designed to address. The report and subsequent events 
reinforce previous Federal and private experience that 
emphasize the importance of accomplishing significant 
organizational changes as quickly as possible in order to 
prevent expensive and inefficient coping strategies.
2. ``U.S. Customs Service: Varied Reaction to the Labor-Management 
        Partnership Concept,'' March 11, 1997 (GAO/T-GGD-97-54)
    a. Summary.--Both the Customs Service and the National 
Treasury Employees Union [NTEU] claimed that labor-management 
relations have improved at the agency since the institution of 
Executive Order 12871, creating ``partnership councils'' in 
Federal agencies. This testimony before the Committee on Ways 
and Means Subcommittee on Trade indicates that Customs had only 
begun to evaluate the results of the new relationship, and 
expected that 5 years would be necessary to make the 
partnership concept the agency's normal operating environment. 
The agency is still in the process of developing performance 
measures and an evaluation schedule for this major change in 
approach to human resource management during the agency's 
restructuring.
    b. Benefits.--This testimony reflects the length of time 
and intensity of planning commonly recognized as required to 
effect extensive organizational change. It confirms the 
challenges involved in implementing major initiatives, and is 
consistent with studies assessing the impact of corporate 
culture changes in the private sector.
3. ``Privatization: Lessons Learned By State and Local Governments,'' 
        March 14, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-48)
    a. Summary.--This report to the House Republican Task Force 
discussed privatization efforts in Georgia, Massachusetts, 
Michigan, New York, and Virginia and the city of Indianapolis, 
IN. Governments in each of those jurisdictions had made 
extensive, recent use of privatization, primarily by increasing 
reliance on competition and contracting, rather than government 
employees. Each of the governments had tailored their 
approaches to privatization to local requirements, but GAO 
identified six lessons from their experiences. First, 
successful privatization requires effective political 
leadership. To be successful, privatization requires an 
effective organization that is committed to solid analysis of 
the conversion. Frequently, the changes will require 
legislative support. Those changes also need reliable cost data 
to support informed privatization. In approaching the 
transition, government organizations need to develop workforce 
transition strategies. GAO also contended that an agency needs 
to perform more sophisticated monitoring and oversight when its 
role in service delivery is reduced through privatization.
    b. Benefits.--This report provides a framework that can 
assist the subcommittee in examining any privatization plans 
and transition strategies that might be advanced by Federal 
agencies. It observed the important role that competition has 
played in successful State and local efforts to provide 
government employees continued opportunities to pursue their 
careers and highlighted the importance of effective transition 
planning for both the agencies and their affected employees.
4. ``GPRA: Managerial accountability and Flexibility Pilot Did Not Work 
        As Intended,'' April 10, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-36)
    a. Summary.--Through the Government Performance and Results 
Act (Result Act), Congress intended to shift agencies' 
perspectives from procedures and regulations to performance and 
results as they assess their operations. This report assessed 
pilot projects to evaluate whether managerial accountability 
and flexibility worked as intended in the pilot programs, and 
to identify lessons learned from these experiences with an eye 
toward government-wide application. These flexibilities did not 
work as intended in the seven departments and one independent 
agency that submitted 61 waiver proposals to the Office of 
Management and Budget [OMB]. OMB found that the waivers 
requested were not allowable for statutory or other reasons. 
For example, the Federal Workforce Restructuring Act, enacted 
after the Results Act, enacted new personnel ceilings for 
agencies that limited requests to waive those ceilings. Other 
waivers, however, were approved through the National 
Performance Review or other executive channels, resulting in a 
multitude of avenues to implement changes in organizations and 
limiting the extent to which changes could be attributed to the 
Results Act. Easier procedures, for example, facilitated the 
creation of 185 ``reinvention labs'' outside of the Results Act 
procedures. OMB was found to be slow in responding to waiver 
requests filed through Results Act procedures, thus favoring 
those organizations that used other channels. Agencies found 
that most benefits derived from preparing waiver requests under 
the Results Act resulted from recognizing that many of the 
burdensome requirements were imposed internally, rather than by 
oversight agencies or by statute. This assessment proved useful 
in developing flexibilities internally rather than through 
Results Act procedures.
    b. Benefits.--This report highlighted several of the 
internal factors that tend to limit organizational flexibility. 
It demonstrated that agencies can work toward improvements in 
their procedures through a variety of channels, and indicated 
that OMB was pursuing most changes through administrative 
mechanisms rather than the statutory waivers available under 
the Results Act.
5. ``Federal Retirement: Federal And Private Sector Retirement Programs 
        Vary,'' April 7, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-40)
    a. Summary.--This report describes the comparative features 
of the retirement benefit programs available to Federal 
employees and their private sector counterparts. Bureau of 
Labor Statistics' Data report thousands of retirement plans 
covering over 75 percent of full time employees in private 
firms with more than 100 employees. Although all private sector 
programs build on a Social Security base, employers offer 
varieties of defined benefit and defined contribution programs. 
Both GAO and the Congressional Budget Office [CBO] contracted 
with Watson Wyatt Worldwide, which has surveyed retirement 
programs at Fortune magazine's list of the 1,000 largest 
employers. Those data indicate that 70 percent of these 
employers combined defined benefit and defined contribution 
features in their retirement programs, comparable to the 
structure of the Federal Employees Retirement System [FERS]. 
However, few private sector plans are structured to provide for 
an unreduced benefit at the completion of a 30-year career as 
early as age 55, a hallmark of most public sector retirement 
systems. When Federal employees retire at age 62, with 30 
years' service, their benefits are comparable with private 
sector retirees' total packages. Civil Service Retirement 
System [CSRS] employees who retire at 62 with 20 years of 
service receive annuities equal to approximately 36 percent of 
final salaries. This assumes no Thrift Savings Plan 
participation for these [CSRS] employees and no earned Social 
Security benefit from prior employment. This CSRS benefit is 
smaller than available to 63 percent of private programs with 
defined benefit and defined contribution components to their 
pension systems. It is also less than benefits available under 
the FERS package. FERS employees who retire after 20 years of 
service at age 62 receive about 66 percent of final salary, 
made up of a Social Security component, FERS defined benefit 
component, and withdrawals from a Thrift Savings Plan account. 
FERS employees retiring at 62 with 30 years of service receive 
annuities totaling approximately 81 percent of pre-retirement 
income. These projections, of course, differ with variable 
rates of participation in the Thrift Savings Plan and with 
salary levels.
    b. Benefits.--This report demonstrates that Federal 
retirement programs remain very attractive in comparison with 
those available to private sector employees. This report, 
however, did not provide a full and accurate portrayal of the 
level of benefits available to Federal employees. Its primary 
bases of comparison centered on people who retire at age 62, 
rather than those who retire at age 55, and the methodology 
section reflects that the private sector data base used for 
comparison did not include average age of retirement for 
private sector employees. Where Federal employees are eligible 
for full pensions at age 55 with 30 years service, those 
benefits did not get calculated in developing the comparison. 
Private sector retirees who leave their employers before age 62 
are not eligible for either Social Security benefits or other 
offsetting compensation comparable to that provided to FERS 
retirees until they reach age 62. The report, as a result, 
tends to understate the relative strength of the benefits of 
Federal employees in comparison with private sector 
counterparts.
6. ``Farm Service Agency: Additional Actions Needed to Address Employee 
        Conflict-of-Interest Issues,'' April 25, 1997 (GAO/RCED-97-104)
    a. Summary.--The creation of the Farm Service Agency [FSA] 
in 1994 consolidated programs of the Farmers Home 
Administration, many functions of the former Agricultural 
Stabilization and Conservation Service, and other agencies 
created the potential for conflicts of interest because it 
incorporated as Federal employees many people who had been 
participants in the Department of Agriculture's loan programs. 
FSA has been working to review cases where its employees have 
gained eligibility for loan programs and to identify cases 
requiring attention to avoid conflict of interest problems. As 
of September 30, 1996, about 414 of 16,300 FSA Federal and non-
Federal employees and about 1,209 of 8,150 county employees had 
4,089 FSA loans, with an outstanding principal that amounted to 
$265 million of the FSA's $16.9 billion portfolio. GAO 
recognized that FSA had made progress in identifying these 
situations, but concluded that it had not provided State 
offices with clear and consistent guidance to identify and 
resolve conflict of interest situations.
    b. Benefits.--This report is useful in describing potential 
vulnerabilities associated with the consolidation of agencies, 
especially in situations where responsibilities might result in 
conflicts of interest.
7. ``Federal Retirement: Comparison of High-3, 4, and 5 Salary 
        Factors,'' April 25, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-84R)
    a. Summary.--Until 1969, Federal employees' annuities were 
calculated on the basis of earnings in the 5 highest years of 
service (``high-5''). That year, the pension calculation 
formula was shifted to a ``high-3'' basis, and some analysts 
have speculated about the effects of reverting to the earlier 
standard. In an effort to assess the impact of modifying the 
high-3 salary factor currently used to calculate Federal 
pensions, the subcommittee chairman asked GAO to compare the 
pension calculations of current law with options involving a 
``high-4'' and a ``high-5'' factor. GAO created a variety of 
scenarios reflecting different age and service requirements 
applicable to CSRS and FERS employees at different grade and 
step levels. CSRS employees with 30 years service would have to 
work an additional 4 to 5 months to earn a comparable pension 
if a ``high-4'' calculation were adopted, and 7 to 9 additional 
months with a ``high-5'' formula in effect. For most employees, 
the ``high-4'' formula would result in a need to work an 
additional 3 to 4 months to earn an equivalent pension. These 
same employees would have to work an additional 5 to 8 months 
to gain an equivalent pension under a ``high-5'' standard.
    b. Benefits.--This report demonstrated that should the 
``high-3'' salary factor used in computing retirement benefits 
be changed, Federal employees could acquire identical 
retirement benefits with comparatively little additional 
service. Although no such change was included in the fiscal 
year 1998 Budget Reconciliation, this report provides a 
foundation for evaluating such proposals for consideration in 
the future.
8. ``The Excepted Service: A Research Profile,'' May 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-
        72)
    a. Summary.--Efforts to reinvent government and to respond 
to the Government Performance and Results Act, the Federal 
Workforce Restructuring Act, and other reform initiatives have 
frequently raised criticisms that cumbersome civil service 
procedures are leading obstacles in the path toward more 
effective and efficient government. This report documents that 
only 52 percent of Federal employees remain in the competitive 
civil service. The remaining 48 percent of Federal employees 
are in some variety of ``excepted service.'' GAO, however, 
could not provide a coherent framework for the ``exceptions'' 
that define this component of the Federal service. More than 
100 agencies employ some segments of excepted employees, but no 
accurate catalog of the exceptions has been compiled. Some 
agencies, such as the Federal Aviation Administration, have had 
all employees excepted from major portions of title 5, while 
other agencies have only a few employees in such positions. GAO 
also was unable to develop a coherent rationale for the variety 
of exceptions that it found, and described most of them as 
responses to particular conditions defined by agencies. The 
staff study identified additional research that would be needed 
to clarify concerns about the variety of exceptions in Federal 
service.
    b. Benefits.--This staff study begins to define some of the 
criteria of the excepted service and to identify the extent of 
flexibilities already inherent in Federal management of 
personnel. The report falls short in not defining the range of 
exceptions nor the rationale for the exceptions that exist.
9. ``Federal Civilian Personnel: Cost of Lump-Sum Annual Payments to 
        Employees Separating From Government,'' May 29, 1997 (GAO/GGD-
        97-100)
    a. Summary.--The Committee on the Budget requested GAO to 
review recent trends in Federal expenditures associated with 
paying lump-sum amounts reflecting the current value of accrued 
annual leave to Federal employees who separate from Government. 
Between 1985 and 1996, these payments averaged $595 million per 
year (in constant dollars), with a high of $700 million in 1992 
and a low of $355 million in 1991. GAO reported that OPM has 
not provided consistent guidance to agencies for paying these 
sums. Although Congress in 1992 granted OPM authority to issue 
regulations to promote consistency in these payments, those 
regulations remain in draft form. GAO reported a CBO estimate 
that agencies could realize $18 million in savings over 5 years 
by paying this leave at its value when the employee separates, 
rather than extending the payment period so that the employee 
benefits, for example, from a raise in pay at the start of the 
calendar year.
    b. Benefits.--This report highlighted another area of 
inefficient operations at OPM. It provides a basis for 
considering legislation to address reforms that might enhance 
savings and promote consistent administration where OPM has 
been unable to issue regulations over a period of 5 years after 
legislative authority was granted.
10. ``Federal Pensions: Judicial Survivors' Annuities System Costs and 
        Benefit Levels,'' June 27, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-87)
    a. Summary.--The Judicial Survivors' Annuities System 
provides annuities to surviving spouses and dependent children 
of deceased Federal judges and other participants in the 
system. In 1992, Congress enacted legislation increasing the 
benefits available through the system and reducing the 
contributions required of Federal judges to participate in it. 
That legislation required GAO to compare benefits available to 
judicial survivors to other Federal survivors' benefits and to 
determine the level of contributions that would be necessary to 
ensure that contributions provide one-half of the program's 
costs. Under current program requirements, participating judges 
contribute about 36 percent of the full normal cost of these 
benefits. Achieving the 50 percent level would require an 
increase of 0.9 percent to the 2.5 percent of pay currently 
contributed by active judges and the 3.5 percent of pay 
contributed by judges in senior status. GAO cautioned, however, 
that such increases could reduce participation rates, thus 
countering the legislative objective of increasing 
participation. This participation had declined from 90 percent 
in 1976 to 40 percent overall (and only 25 percent of new 
judges) in 1991. By 1995, participation rates had increased to 
67 percent of all judges and 73 percent of new appointees. GAO 
confirmed that these benefits are greater than those available 
to the majority of Federal employees.
    b. Benefits.--This report demonstrates the difficulties of 
designing benefit systems for people who enter Federal 
employment at advanced stages of their careers. The report 
confirms the obvious, that by making the benefit more 
attractive, the courts succeeded in increasing judges' 
participation rates. The attractiveness of the benefit, 
however, made it more difficult to maintain the system's 
financial reliance on the payroll tax base.
11. ``Federal Downsizing: Effective Buyout Practices and Their Use in 
        Fiscal Year-1997,'' June 30, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-124)
    a. Summary.--The Civil Service Subcommittee conducted 
hearings in 1995 and 1996, that demonstrated that the buyout 
program authorized by the Federal Workforce Restructuring Act 
of 1994, had been administered in a poorly-planned and 
inconsistent manner. In a June 6, 1996, hearing the 
subcommittee learned that OMB had allowed agencies to extend 
``reoffers of unused buyouts'' in a manner that violated the 
March 31, 1995 date terminating the program. As part of the 
reauthorization of buyouts written into the Omnibus Continuing 
Resolution of 1996, the Congress required a series of 
management controls intended to curb such abuses of the program 
in the future. In response to a request for oversight of these 
practices, GAO developed an inventory of 13 sound management 
practices, 10 of which were incorporated in the legislation 
extending buyouts for most non-Defense agencies to December 30, 
1997. GAO concluded that these management practices had 
resulted in better planning and implementation of the buyouts 
used by six agencies during fiscal year 1997 than had been the 
case in the previous 2 years.
    b. Benefits.--This report demonstrates the effectiveness of 
the subcommittee's oversight of this program in identifying 
weaknesses in the management of the first round of buyout 
programs, and in developing management criteria by which to 
evaluate subsequent activities in this area.
12. ``Federal Law Enforcement: Investigative Authority and Personnel at 
        32 Organizations,'' July 22, 1993 (GAO/GGD-97-93)
    a. Summary.--This report completes a series that the 
Judiciary Committee requested to ascertain the extent of law 
enforcement personnel at various agencies that perform an 
increasing variety of investigative and police functions. This 
report summarizes the personnel of 32 agencies employing 
between 25 and 699 law enforcement investigative personnel. The 
report identifies the range of authorities exercised by these 
individuals, including many in Inspectors General offices in 
these agencies. At the end of fiscal year 1996, these agencies 
employed 4,262 investigative personnel, a 70 percent increase 
since 1987.
    b. Benefits.--This report assists the subcommittee's 
efforts to monitor the growth of law enforcement personnel in 
Federal agencies and to assess the consequences for related 
Federal workforce planning.
13. ``Federal Downsizing: Buyouts at the Farm Service Agency,'' July 
        23, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-133)
    a. Summary.--The Farm Service Agency was slated to reduce 
its workforce by 1,339 to accommodate staffing changes 
resulting from farm reform legislation. The agency conducted a 
cost-benefit analysis to demonstrate its perception that 
buyouts are a cheaper method of workforce reductions than RIFs, 
over a 5-year period, then used 926 buyouts for these 
separations. GAO observed, however, that buyouts were not 
necessary to separate retirement-eligible employees who were in 
offices that were scheduled to be closed. GAO also reported 
that 697 buyouts were paid to non-Federal county employees, 
less than anticipated because some overstaffed county offices 
did not receive enough applications. GAO could not confirm that 
the funds used for these buyouts had been diverted improperly 
from funds dedicated to conservation programs by law. The 
agency admitted that, with future buyout amounts reducing each 
year, the lower incentives were likely to make buyouts less 
attractive in the future.
    b. Benefits.--This report contributes to the subcommittee's 
efforts to monitor the workforce reduction strategies used by 
different agencies.
14. ``Federal Workforce: Agencies' Policies and Views on Flexiplace in 
        the Federal Government,'' July 3, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-116)
    a. Summary.--This report reviewed Federal efforts to 
promote flexiplace, including agencies' policies on flexiplace, 
to determine the extent to which Federal employees took 
advantage of this flexibility, ascertain whether agencies and 
unions identified barriers to the implementation of flexiplace, 
and determine whether agencies have witnessed difficulties 
implementing flexiplace. GAO reviewed 21 agency policies 
adopted consistent with the National Telecommuting Initiative 
Action Plan of 1996. Those plans covered nearly half of the 
employees that GAO visited, but found that about one-fourth of 
the personnel at these agencies were excluded from the 
flexiplace initiative for a variety of reasons. It reported 
that use of flexiplace has increased since 1993, with employee 
organizations identifying management resistance as the one 
barrier to expansion of the program. Agencies reported no 
difficulties implementing the program, but one manager noted a 
drop in productivity where it was used.
    b. Benefits.--This report provides a general oversight 
review of the operation of flexiplace so that the subcommittee 
can consider these effects as it addresses reauthorizing 
legislation in 1998.
15. ``Personnel Practices: Improper Personnel Actions on Selected CPSC 
        Appointments,'' June 27, 1997 (GAO/GGD-97-131)
    a. Summary.--At the request of Subcommittee Chairman Mica, 
GAO investigated allegations of ``burrowing in'' at the 
Consumer Products Safety Commission [CPSC] received by the 
subcommittee. GAO found there was no ``burrowing in'' in the 
six instances covered by the allegations because the 
individuals involved did not convert from noncareer political 
appointments to career appointments. However, GAO did find 
irregular or improper personnel practices in each of the six 
instances. These improprieties included violations of veterans' 
preference, questionable awards of higher starting pay than 
usually allowed by law, and the questionable use of term 
appointments. GAO also investigated 20 other instances 
involving advanced rates of pay. Of those, it could only 
examine the Official Personnel Folders in 18. Its examination 
of those 18 revealed that advanced pay rates in 8 cases were 
based upon previous salary levels, 9 were based upon alleged 
superior qualifications, and the basis could not be determined 
in one instance. GAO could not find supporting documentation in 
four of the cases based upon superior qualifications.
    b. Benefits.--As a result of this investigation, OPM 
ordered the CPSC to take corrective actions. However, the 
inadequacy of the remedy directed for violations of veterans' 
preference rules--priority consideration for the next available 
similar position--highlights the need for the more effective 
redress mechanism for veterans contained in H.R. 240. Since 
CPSC received delegated hiring authority in 1996, this study 
also highlights the importance of increased oversight activity 
by OPM. As hiring and other personnel matters are 
decentralized, OPM must increase oversight governmentwide in 
order to ensure compliance with merit principles.
16. ``Pharmacy Benefit Managers: FEHBP Plans Satisfied With Savings and 
        Services, but Retail Pharmacies Have Concerns,'' February 21, 
        1997 (GAO/HEHS-97-47)
    a. Summary.--GAO examined the use by FEHBP plans of 
pharmacy benefit managers [PBM], which manage pharmacy benefits 
on behalf of plan sponsors. OPM estimates that about 9 million 
Federal employees, retirees, and their dependents are covered 
by the FEHBP, and approximately 58 percent of these enrollees 
were covered by a PBM. To conduct its investigation, GAO 
examined 3 FEHBP plans covering about 50 percent of all FEHBP 
employees and retirees that contract with one of the 6 largest 
PBMs. According to GAO, these plans estimate that PBMs saved 
them over $600 million in 1995, reducing the pharmacy benefit 
costs they otherwise would have incurred by 20-27 percent. The 
PBMs met most of their 1995 contract performance standards, and 
between 93 percent and 98 percent of those who responded to 
plans' customer satisfaction surveys were satisfied with their 
pharmacy benefits. Retail pharmacists, however, are concerned 
about the loss of business. GAO reports that Blue Cross/Blue 
Shield's 1996 benefit change, which encouraged the use of a 
mail order pharmacy, reduced affected enrollees' payments to 
retail pharmacies by 36 percent, or about $95 million. Total 
payments to retail pharmacies for all enrollees declined by 7 
percent, or about $34 million. Officials of PBMs and 
participating plans, as well as other industry experts, did 
agree that future efforts to impose additional controls on 
pharmacy costs could require more restrictive cost-containment 
procedures, limit enrollees' access to drugs and pharmacy 
services, and lessen enrollees' satisfaction with their 
pharmacy benefits.
    b. Benefits.--This report, as well as previous GAO studies, 
provide a useful framework for analyzing the role and impact of 
mail order pharmacies in the FEHBP.
17. ``Federal Pensions: Relationship Between Retiree Pensions and Final 
        Salaries,'' GAO/GGD-97-156 (August 11, 1997)
    a. Summary.--In fiscal year 1996, civilian employee pension 
benefits were one of the largest mandatory spending programs, 
excluding interest on the public debt. Nearly $40 billion in 
payments were made to 2.3 million retirees and survivors. Based 
upon its examination of data on a sample of Federal retirees, 
GAO estimated that about 27 percent of the 1.7 million retirees 
on the rolls as of October 1, 1995 receive pensions that exceed 
their final salaries. However, when the retirees' final 
salaries were adjusted for inflation, no retiree was receiving 
a pension greater than his final salary. GAO maintained that 
the use of constant dollars yields more meaningful results 
because it corrects for the effects of inflation or deflation. 
According to GAO, three factors played an important role in 
explaining why retirees' pensions grew to exceed their final 
salaries: the number and size of cost of living adjustments 
[COLAs] that retirees received, the number of years they had 
been retired, and their years of Federal service. The longer 
annuitants have been retired, explains GAO, the more COLAs they 
would have received and the more likely their annuity would 
exceed their final salary. Likewise, the longer an annuitant 
worked for the Federal Government the more likely his pension 
will exceed his final salary. This is because the initial 
pension of a retiree with many years of service would have 
equaled a higher percentage of his final salary than one with 
few years of service. Thus, it would take fewer years to close 
the gap. GAO also concluded that COLA policies have had an 
important impact on the size of Federal pensions, but that the 
effects cannot be summarized easily because of numerous changes 
in COLA policies over the past 35 years. GAO did conclude, 
however, that, other things being equal, a majority of those 
who retired before 1970, when COLA policies overcompensated for 
inflation, would have smaller pensions if current COLA policy 
had been in effect over the entire period of time. But about 90 
percent of those who retired after 1970 would have received 
larger pensions. GAO also points out that COLAs, which compound 
over time, permanently affect the size of an individual's 
annuity.
    b. Benefits.--This report will be useful in comparing the 
generosity of the Federal retirement systems with private 
sector pension plans, particularly considering automatic COLA 
provisions. Private pension plans do not typically provide 
annual, automatic COLAs.
18. ``Federal Pensions: Relationship Between Pensions and Final 
        Salaries for Retired Members of Congress,'' (GAO/GGD-97-156)
    a. Summary.--The research for this report was performed in 
connection with the previous study described in section 17 
above, and much of the analysis parallels that study's. 
However, the results were reported separately. GAO found that 
76, or roughly 19 percent, of the former Members of Congress on 
the rolls as of October 1, 1995, received pensions greater than 
their final salaries. When final salaries were adjusted for 
inflation, however, only one former Member's pension exceeded 
his final salary. That Member had an unusual salary history. 
GAO identified the same factors described in the previous study 
to explain why these pensions were higher than final salaries. 
In addition, GAO identified an additional factor: whether the 
former Member elected survivor annuity benefits, which reduces 
the amount of the principle annuity. The percentage of former 
Members whose pensions exceed their final salaries would have 
increased by two points if current COLA policy had been in 
effect during the entire period.
    b. Benefits.--This report, in connection with the previous 
report, will be useful in comparing the generosity of the 
Federal retirement systems with private sector pension plans.
19. ``Alternative Dispute Resolution: Employer's Experiences With ADR 
        in the Workplace,'' GAO/GGD-97-157 (August 12, 1997)
    a. Summary.--GAO examined the use of Alternative Dispute 
Resolution [ADR] procedures by private companies and Federal 
agencies. GAO determined that many private companies and 
Federal agencies have used ADR to avoid more formal processes, 
such as lawsuits and the administrative procedures available to 
Federal employees. Several factors contributed to the use of 
ADR. Traditional processes have become increasingly costly, in 
both time and money, especially since the number of 
discrimination complaints rose sharply in the early 1990s. New 
laws and regulatory changes also have encouraged use of ADR. In 
addition, ADR often focuses on disputant's underlying interests 
rather than on the legal validity of their positions in a 
specific matter.
    GAO identified 5 main ADR techniques available in both 
private and Federal sectors: ombudsmen; mediation; peer panels; 
management review and dispute resolution boards; and 
arbitration. In 1994, about 52 percent of private companies 
reported having some form of ADR for discrimination complaints 
in place. But, according to EEOC surveys, only 31 percent of 75 
Federal agencies covered made ADR available, a figure that had 
grown to 49 percent of 87 agencies covered in a 1996 survey. 
However, GAO determined that ADR use was not pervasive, or even 
widespread, in agencies that reported having some ADR 
capability.
    Private companies generally reported employing a wider 
variety of ADR methods than did Federal agencies. About 80 
percent of private firms using ADR used mediation, 39 percent 
used peer review panels, and about 19 percent used arbitration. 
Most Federal agencies used only mediation.
    No comprehensive data were available on ADR results in the 
private and Federal sectors. However, experts and officials at 
organizations using ADR generally considered it to be 
successful in resolving workplace disputes without resorting to 
more formal procedures. They also believed that avoiding 
litigation or more formal redress processes produced savings.
    With one exception, the five companies and five agencies 
GAO studied as case illustrations reported varied but generally 
positive experiences with ADR. The Department of Agriculture 
was the only one finding serious flaws with its ADR program. 
Officials with 9 of these 10 organizations said they had made 
efforts to involve employees in developing their ADR programs, 
to train key participants, and to publicize their ADR programs 
throughout their organizations. Private companies had more 
flexibility than Federal agencies in adopting ADR practices, 
especially arbitration, not available to the Federal workforce.
    Most of the organizations studied did not comprehensively 
evaluate the results of their ADR programs or the time and cost 
savings they may have generated. However, the data available 
appeared to show that all forms of ADR contributed to resolving 
workplace disputes. Mediation appeared to be particularly 
successful, resolving a high percentage of disputes in all but 
one organization. No companies and only two agencies reported 
data on time savings. Both agencies indicated that ADR lowered 
the time necessary to resolve disputes by one-third to one-
half. Only one company and one agency had evaluated cost 
savings. The company reported that the overall cost of dealing 
with employment disputes, including the cost of ADR, was less 
than half what the company had spent on legal fees for 
employment-related lawsuits. The agency concluded it was not 
clear whether ADR was less costly than the traditional EEO 
process when settlements were factored in.
    GAO reported the following lessons from its study: the 
importance of top management commitment in establishing and 
maintaining the program, the importance of involving employees 
in developing the program, the advantages of intervening in the 
early stages of disputes, the necessity to balance the desire 
to settle and close cases with the need for fairness to all 
concerned, and that ADR can help managers improve their 
understanding of the roots of conflict in their organizations.
    b. Benefits.--This study will greatly assist the 
subcommittee as it continues to examine ways to encourage the 
use of ADR to simplify and streamline the appellate procedures 
available to Federal employees.
20. ``Personnel Practices: Career Appointments of Former Political and 
        Congressional Employees,'' GAO/GGD-97-165 (September 2, 1997)
    a. Summary.--GAO examined appointments of former political 
appointees and legislative branch employees to career positions 
in the executive branch at or above GS-13 between January 1996 
and March 1997. GAO was asked to determine whether agencies 
used appropriate authorities and followed proper procedures in 
making such appointments and whether, the circumstances 
surrounding such appointments created the appearance of 
favoritism or preferential treatment. According to this report, 
18 agencies appointed a total of 36 former political appointees 
and legislative branch employees during this period. In all 
cases, GAO found the agencies used appropriate authorities and 
complied with proper procedures. However, GAO also determined 
that six appointments could create the appearance of favoritism 
or preferential treatment. In two of these cases, the agencies 
appeared to tailor the qualifications required of applicants to 
fit the political appointees selected. In two other cases, 
political appointees obtained career positions to which they 
had been reassigned shortly after receiving their political 
appointments, raising questions as to whether their initial 
political appointments were mere subterfuges. In the fifth 
case, the then-Chief of Staff to the OPM Director obtained a 
career SES appointment to the position of Director, Partnership 
Center. The Chief of Staff had been instrumental in 
establishing the position, and he was selected for the position 
by the OPM Director. His appointment surprised high ranking 
agency officials because of its potential for creating negative 
public perceptions. The sixth case involved a Schedule C 
political appointee, who had served as a GS-15 Special 
Assistant to the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs, who secured an 
appointment to a career SES appointment as Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Congressional Affairs. This position was 
advertised three times. The political appointee did not apply 
under the first two announcements. Rather, he served on the 
panels that rated the applications received under those 
announcements. The political appointee applied under the third 
announcement and was selected.
    b. Benefits.--The high-level conversions revealed by this 
report illustrate the need for legislative restrictions on the 
ability of political appointees to secure career appointments. 
Currently, political appointees are not barred from ``burrowing 
in'' to career positions during the administration in which 
they were appointed. When political appointees convert to 
career status under these circumstances, both the public and 
the Federal workforce often reasonably conclude that 
favoritism, not merit, is behind the selection, thus 
undercutting the merit system. In addition, the appointment of 
political appointees who owe their jobs to political allegiance 
to a particular administration into career positions is 
incompatible with the very idea of a permanent, apolitical 
career workforce. The subcommittee intends to consider 
legislation to curb the practice of converting political 
appointees to career status.
21. ``Federal Labor Relations: Survey of Official Time Used for Union 
        Activities,'' GAO/GGD-97-182R (September 30, 1997)
    a. Summary.--This study was undertaken in order to 
determine the extent to which Federal employee unions use 
Federal resources to conduct union business. During the 104th 
Congress, the Subcommittee on the Civil Service held hearings 
on taxpayer subsidies for Federal unions, examining selected 
agencies. That hearing revealed that Federal agencies typically 
provide taxpayer-provided resources (e.g., as paid time for 
union work, office space, office equipment, and supplies) to 
unions and that the amount of this subsidy has increased 
dramatically under the current administration. In an effort to 
develop a more complete picture, GAO surveyed 34 agencies that 
employed approximately 87 percent of Federal employees 
represented by a union. Agencies were asked to provide the 
following information for fiscal years 1989 through 1996: the 
amount of official time used by employees for union activities, 
the number of employees using official time, the number of 
employees who spent all of their time on union activities, the 
dollar value of time used for union activities, the dollar 
value of travel used for union activities, the dollar value of 
office space and related items, and the benefits and 
disadvantages, according to the agencies, of using official 
time for union activities. Most of the agencies responding to 
the survey did not provide comprehensive data on resources used 
for union activities. None provided data for all 8 of the 
fiscal years covered by the survey. In some cases, agencies 
provided data for only portions of fiscal years or on a 
calendar-year basis. Fifteen agencies provided information on 
official time during at least 1 of the fiscal years covered. 
Twelve reported a total of 1,028,544 hours of official time for 
fiscal year 1996. Overall, GAO concluded, the data received 
were insufficient to portray the total amount of resources 
these agencies used for union activities. Some of the Federal 
agencies said that use of official time (1) improved labor-
management relations, (2) decreased the number of grievances, 
and (3) helped with the implementation of organizational 
changes. However, the disadvantage cited by some agencies was 
that use of official time caused employees to set aside their 
regular work.
    b. Benefits.--GAO's work demonstrated the need for greater 
control and accountability in the use of official time and 
other Federal resources for union activities. It also provides 
useful information for evaluating H.R. 986, the Workplace 
Integrity Act, and other legislative proposals for controlling 
expenditures for official time. This study, and previous 
investigations by this subcommittee and the Social Security 
Subcommittee of the Committee on Ways and Means, indicate that 
tens of millions of taxpayer dollars are being used to 
subsidize Federal unions. (Assuming that individuals on 
official time in 1996 earned the average pay rate for that 
year, the dollar value of the official time reported by only 12 
agencies was $20,795,119.) However, because agencies are not 
required to accurately record or report the use of official 
time and other resources provided to unions, it is difficult to 
quantify the full extent of this subsidy. Since these costs are 
unknown it becomes impossible to determine whether the 
purported benefits of official time and other union subsidies 
outweigh the costs. At the request of this subcommittee, GAO is 
developing more detailed estimates of the total costs of 
Federal resources used by unions. At the same time, the House 
report on the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1998 directed OPM to collect detailed information on the 
use of Federal resources to subsidize unions during the first 6 
months of 1998.
22. ``Private Pensions: Plan Features Provided By Employers That 
        Sponsor Only Defined Contribution Plans,'' GAO/GGD-98-23, 
        (December 1, 1997)
    a. Summary.--This report describes patterns in private 
sector defined contribution plans' (1) eligibility requirements 
for employee participation, (2) arrangements for employer and 
participant contributions, (3) eligibility requirements for 
employee rights to accrued benefits, (4) employee investment 
options, (5) loan and other provisions for participant access 
to plan assets while still employed, and (6) options for 
withdrawal of benefits upon separation or retirement. It also 
compares features of these private plans with the Thrift 
Savings Plan [TSP] available to Federal employees. GAO 
concluded that the designs of the 3,297 employers with 100 or 
more employees that sponsored only single-employer plans varied 
so greatly that no single design could be identified as a 
``typical'' defined contribution plan.
    Eligibility requirements: Employers generally established 
requirements employees must meet before participating in their 
plans. In 1993, 51 percent of employers required their 
employees to meet a combination of age and service 
requirements--usually age 21 and 1 year of service. Of the 100 
larger employers with 10,000 or more employees, 55 percent 
reported that employees must meet length of service 
requirements, generally 1 year of service, with no age 
requirement. Under the TSP, newly hired employees covered by 
FERS must have from 6 to 12 months of Federal service to be 
eligible.
    Contribution arrangements: Almost all of the employers 
provided for employer contributions to the plan rather than 
require participants to fully fund their own pensions. Most 
commonly, employers made automatic, or nonmatching, 
contributions to the plan with no participant contributions 
required or permitted. Larger employers were more likely to 
allow participants to contribute to their plans on a pretax 
basis, generally in an arrangement similar to the TSP, in which 
the employer makes both nonmatching and matching contributions, 
and employees are able to make pretax contributions. Slightly 
more than half of employers that permit employees' pretax 
contributions (and 60 percent of larger employers) allowed 
employees to contribute more than 10 percent of their salaries. 
Federal employee contributions to the TSP are limited to 10 
percent of their basic pay. GAO was unable to determine the 
maximum employer contribution for the vast majority of private 
plans. However, where GAO could make that determination, the 
maximum contribution ranged from 5 percent to 6 percent of 
participants' pay. The government's maximum contribution under 
the TSP is 5 percent, which matches the participant's first 5 
percent of contributions.
    Vesting requirements: By law, participants own their own 
contributions (and earnings on those contributions). But 
employers generally establish minimum service requirements 
employees must satisfy to obtain title to employer 
contributions. Employees usually must work longer to vest in 
nonmatching contributions than in matching contributions. 
However, about one-third of the employers provided for 
immediate vesting of matching contributions, and one-eighth 
provide immediate vesting of nonmatching contributions. Larger 
employers were more likely to use immediate vesting for 
matching and nonmatching contributions. Under the TSP, Federal 
employees vest immediately in matching contributions and after 
3 years of service in the 1 percent nonmatching contribution.
    Investment options: A majority of employers who described 
the investment options available provided at least 4 investment 
options. These frequently included: employer stock, stock 
mutual funds, and bond mutual funds. Federal employees in the 
TSP may currently choose from 3 options--a nonmarketable 
government securities fund, a common stock index fund, and a 
diversified bond fund. Within 2 to 3 years, two additional 
options will be added, an international fund and a small 
company stock fund.
    Loans and withdrawals: Nearly two-thirds of the employers 
permitted employees to access a portion of their accounts 
before separation from employment. Half allowed participants to 
borrow from their accounts up to certain legal limits, and some 
allowed participants to withdraw some or all of their own 
contributions, usually in the event of a personal financial 
hardship. Larger employers were somewhat more likely to allow 
participants to borrow from their accounts or make financial 
hardship withdrawals. But they were less likely to allow 
withdrawals in the absence of financial hardship. The TSP 
includes a loan program and allows participants to make 
hardship withdrawals and a one-time withdrawal at age 59\1/2\ 
or later without separating from Federal service.
    Withdrawal options upon separation or retirement: Nearly 
all employers permitted employees to take their account 
balances as a lump-sum distribution when they retire. Two 
thirds permit withdrawals in even installments over a specified 
period, and about half provide the option of a lifetime 
annuity. Larger employers were less likely to permit 
installment or annuity options. The same options were generally 
available to employees who separated for reasons other than 
retirement, but most of these employees could also elect to 
defer withdrawals. The TSP allows employees to choose lump-sum 
distributions, installment payments, or an annuity. Federal 
employees may also defer withdrawal until the year after they 
turn 70\1/2\ years old.
    About 12 percent of the approximately 490,000 employers 
with 2 or more employees that sponsored only single-employer 
defined contribution plans also sponsored more than one such 
plan for the same groups of employees. Employers with less than 
100 employees were more likely to sponsor multiple plans. 
Experts GAO consulted suggested that smaller employers might be 
better able to sponsor multiple plans than larger employers. 
But larger employers might be more likely to sponsor additional 
plans in order to compete with other employers.
    GAO concluded that private employers design their pension 
programs to control costs, maximize Federal tax incentives, and 
comply with ERISA, while structuring their compensation and 
benefits to support their overall business and financial goals.
    b. Benefits.--The information in this study will be useful 
as the subcommittee reviews potential changes to the structure 
of Federal employee retirement plans.
23. ``Federal Downsizing: Controls Needed to Ensure Compliance With 
        Buyout Repayment Provisions,'' January 26, 1998 (GAO/GGD-98-12)
    a. Summary.--The Department of Defense was not restricted 
from rehiring employees who accepted separation incentives 
(buyouts) in the initial round (1993-1994), but the Federal 
Workforce Restructuring Act of 1994 required that any Federal 
employees who returned to the Federal workforce--either as 
employees or under the terms of personal services contracts--
would have to repay the amount of their buyouts. These 
repayment provisions affect only employees who return to the 
Federal workforce within 5 years of accepting the buyout. After 
more than 100,000 Department of Defense employees had accepted 
buyouts, GAO's review of the records found 23 cases that 
appeared to be in conflict with repayment requirements. Further 
investigation demonstrated that 12 of these cases involved 
recordkeeping errors that included no violations of the law's 
repayment requirements. Two of the cases indicated that 
repayment requirements were met, and agency inspectors general 
confirmed that nine of the incidents involved failures to repay 
as required. Repayment programs were initiated for six of the 
cases, where employees were still working for Federal agencies. 
One agency billed a former employee for the repayment, and 
responsible agencies took no action against the other two 
employees.
    The report noted the difficulties that agencies encounter 
because applicants to rejoin the Federal workforce do not 
always report that they previously accepted a buyout, and the 
Central Personnel Data File records do not always accurately 
report information about previous buyouts. GAO placed primary 
responsibility for compliance with the repayment requirements 
on the agencies, and most agencies accepted the requirement to 
develop systems of controls to ensure repayment.
    b. Benefits.--This extensive review of records to confirm 
that nine people might have been reemployed by Federal agencies 
without repaying buyouts probably cost a great deal more than 
the amounts of the repayments that have been recouped. From 
OPM's reports, it would appear that the agency rarely approves 
waivers of the repayment requirements, and employees, 
therefore, usually seek private sector employment to supplement 
the pensions that 92 percent are collecting after taking the 
buyouts. GAO's report confirms that abuses are rare, and that 
agencies usually have effective means of securing repayment 
when violations are detected.
24. ``Managing for Results: Agencies' Annual Performance Plans Can Help 
        Address Strategic Planning Challenges,'' January 30, 1998 (GAO/
        GGD-98-44)
    a. Summary.--Under the Government Performance and Results 
Act of 1993 (Results Act), agencies were required to submit 5-
year strategic plans to the Congress no later than September 
30, 1997, and to provide initial performance plans to implement 
those strategic plans in conjunction with the President's 
fiscal year 1999 budget. As part of the congressional oversight 
of the Results Act, congressional leadership requested GAO to 
review the strategic plans and to provide a basis for assessing 
the performance plans that would follow. GAO concluded that the 
agencies' plans ``appear to provide a workable foundation for 
Congress to use in helping to fulfill its appropriations, 
budget authorization, and oversight responsibilities and for 
agencies to use in setting a general direction for their 
efforts.'' Nonetheless, GAO added, these plans are very much 
works in progress, and agencies faced significant challenges 
setting strategic directions, coordinating cross-cutting 
programs, and developing capacities to gather and use cost 
data. GAO emphasized, ``many of the strategic goals . . . did 
not focus on results to the extent feasible and were not always 
expressed in a manner conducive to assessing progress in terms 
of actual performance.'' The Office of Personnel Management had 
not included two statutory requirements in advancing its draft 
strategic plan for congressional consultation, and had amended 
the submitted strategic plan to incorporate discussion of 
methods of achieving strategic goals and relating performance 
goals to its strategic objectives. The plan also failed to 
resolve relationships between cross-cutting programs. Although 
OPM faces management challenges in ensuring that the government 
is adequately competitive in recruiting future employees, 
determining the appropriateness of Federal pay and benefits, 
and ensuring the adequacy of developing information systems to 
discharge their responsibilities. Although OPM revised its 
strategic plan to include some results-oriented performance 
objectives, its objectives remain process-oriented. In general, 
OPM's specific strategies did not include descriptions of the 
processes and assessments of the human, capital, and 
information resources that would be necessary to achieve their 
objectives. Many of these performance objectives continue to be 
expressed in terms that is not susceptible to measurement, 
making it difficult to assess progress. GAO also believes that 
OPM's discussion of external factors could be improved by 
addressing more directly the effects of some of the changes 
that it forecast on its strategic objectives.
    b. Benefits.--This report assisted in the assessment and 
oversight of OPM's process of developing and refining its 
strategic and performance plans. The recommendations assisted 
the agency in improving its strategic plans between the initial 
draft and final submission and helped to provide a better 
framework for the performance goals submitted in the 
performance plan.
25. ``Retirement Eligibility of Customs and INS Employees on the 
        Southwest Border,'' Letter Report to Senator Charles E. 
        Grassley, March 13, 1998 (GAO/GGD-98-70R)
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed statistics of the workforces of 
the Customs Service and the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service operating on the Southwest Border to ascertain whether 
these agencies might be losing substantial numbers of employees 
as a result of pending retirement opportunities. Within the 
Customs Service, the review concentrated on inspectors, 
criminal investigators, and canine enforcement officers. Among 
the INS, the study reviewed Border Patrol agents, criminal 
investigators, and immigration inspectors. As of January 1, 
2000, the study indicated that as much as 20 to 23 percent of 
the criminal investigators at both agencies could be eligible 
for retirement. However, among inspectors at both agencies, 
Border Patrol agents, and canine enforcement officers, expected 
retirements by that date would be no more than 8 percent of 
these workforces. GAO attributed the relatively low eligibility 
for retirement to the high portion of recent hires as these 
agencies have expanded and the relatively recent increases in 
funding to support additional personnel. As a result, these 
workforces have small portions of their employees who are 
eligible to separate in the coming few years.
    b. Benefits.--This report provides a good indication of the 
workforce demographics of these growing sectors of the 
agencies. As a result, agencies have relatively extended 
periods during which they should be able to rely on the skills 
and experience of these personnel, and have limited needs for 
extensive planning for immediate workforce turnover. In both 
instances, GAO noted that stable hiring plans provide for the 
replacement of any employees who would become eligible for 
retirement.
26. ``Vacancies Act: Executive Branch Noncompliance,'' March 18, 1998 
        (GAO/T-OGC-98-39)
    a. Summary.--GAO initiated this review in response to 
Senate concerns about the President filling positions requiring 
confirmation through the use of acting appointments or other 
interim actions that do not provide for Senate confirmation. 
Although the President and the Department of Justice have 
asserted that authorizing statutes of some agencies provide 
sufficient authority for persons to act in these positions for 
more than 120 days, the Comptroller General has testified that 
GAO disagrees with the administration's position.
    b. Benefits.--This testimony establishes the legal position 
that the Congress could adopt in finding the administration in 
violation of the Vacancies Act. Such violations would undercut 
the Senate's ability to ``advise and consent'' on appointments 
to high Federal office, potentially reshaping the balance of 
powers developed in the Constitution.
27. ``Federal Downsizing: Agency Officials' Views on Maintaining 
        Performance During Downsizing at Selected Agencies,'' March 24, 
        1998 (GAO/GGD-98-46)
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed the strategies used by six 
different agencies to ascertain the effects of workforce 
reductions on the ability of agencies to perform their 
missions. At the subcommittee's request, GAO focussed this 
study on programs within agencies where workforce reductions 
had gone beyond the government-wide average of 12 percent, 
seeking to examine closely places where larger workforce 
reductions might have resulted from elimination of particular 
activities or where those reductions might be anticipated to 
have disabling effects on the missions in question. The study 
also sought to discover if there were any lessons to be learned 
about effective workforce reductions that might be applied to 
other agencies. The study assessed the Office of Housing in the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of 
the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation, the General Services 
Administration's Public Buildings Service, the Kennedy Space 
Center of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 
and the Office of Personnel Management's Investigations 
Service.
    The OPM Investigations Service was privatized in July 1996, 
when OPM reduced the organization by 96 percent from its 1993 
levels and awarded a sole-source contract to U.S. 
Investigations Services, Inc., an employee-owned company that 
made pre-arranged employment offers to the OPM staff that was 
being reduced. The other organizations studied each reduced 
their workforces by 16 to 21 percent, and officials claimed 
that they were able to maintain performance and fulfill mission 
requirements. Agency managers, however, told GAO that they 
believed that they could not absorb additional reductions and 
maintain their authorized functions. GAO also reviewed customer 
satisfaction data provided by HUD's Office of Housing and GSA's 
Public Buildings Service, and these data confirmed that the 
customers' satisfaction was mixed after the workforce 
reductions. HUD has initiated a Department-wide reorganization 
that is projected to reduce its workforce by another 25 
percent. The Bureau of Reclamation encountered customer 
dissatisfaction, but it was not directly linked to downsizing. 
Kennedy Space Center officials acknowledged some concern about 
operational safety, but believe that appropriate safeguards 
have not been impaired by workforce reductions. Some 
modification of business processes has taken place at each of 
the agencies, and the report indicates some savings resulting 
from the efforts. GAO conceded, however, that most of the 
agencies lack solid baseline measures to provide an objective 
assessment about whether the customers should have remained 
satisfied because services were sustained at steady levels 
during the reductions.
    b. Benefits.--This report provides more detailed 
examination than other sources of particular workforce 
reductions within Federal agencies. Although it acknowledges 
that information technologies sustained some of the service 
levels, the report confirms that reinvention has been much less 
extensive than expected. The research found that employees and 
managers at each of the agencies encouraged ``open 
communications'' as one factor that might have reduced anxiety 
and uncertainties during the workforce reductions, but the 
report provides no example of an agency where such 
communications were actually sustained. Rather than in the 
planning stages, these experiences demonstrate that 
communications about workforce reduction measures tend to take 
place after the reductions have been made, and with an eye 
toward orienting employees to their altered responsibilities 
after downsizing.
28. ``The Public Service: Veterans' Preference in Hiring and 
        Reductions-in-Force,'' March 24, 1998 (GAO/T-GGD-98-88)
    a. Summary.--This testimony before the Senate Committee on 
Governmental Affairs summarized GAO's recent studies regarding 
the extent to which agencies work around veterans' preference 
in their hiring practices and the extent to which veterans have 
been affected by reductions-in-force [RIFs] at Federal 
agencies. GAO reported that veterans constituted a larger 
portion of the Federal workforce than of the civilian labor 
force, and 21 percent of all new career appointments to the 
Federal service since 1993 have been veterans. However, GAO 
admitted that agencies more frequently returned unused the 
hiring certificates that were headed by preference-eligible 
veterans. GAO also noted that, when agencies conduct RIFs, 
employees lacking veterans' preference were 2 to 7 times more 
likely to be affected. Even in the U.S. Geological Survey's 
1995 RIF, where nearly all employees were placed in single-
person competitive levels, employees with veterans' preference 
consistently gained higher retention ratings than non-
preference eligible employees. Although nonveterans were 2 to 4 
times more likely to lose their jobs in a RIF, veterans also 
tended to be affected, but more often in being moved to another 
position or reassigned rather than terminated.
    b. Benefits.--This testimony confirmed that veterans are a 
declining portion of the Federal workforce and that agencies 
will at times leave positions open rather than hire preference-
eligible veterans. The testimony provided data confirming the 
need for several provisions of the Veterans Employment 
Opportunities Act (H.R. 240 as passed by the House).
29. ``Equal Employment Opportunity: Administrative Judges' Recommended 
        Decisions and Agencies' Actions,'' June 10, 1998, (GAO/GGD-98-
        122R)
    a. Summary.--At the request of the ranking member of the 
Civil Service Subcommittee and Representative Albert Wynn (D-
MD), GAO reviewed the recommendations of the EEOC's 
administrative judges to analyze trends in the findings. 
Although the number of filings alleging discrimination had 
increased between 1991 and 1997, the portion of cases where 
discrimination is found had declined from 14.8 percent to 10.8 
percent of the cases. GAO found no clear trend in the rate at 
which agencies rejected these discrimination findings, but 
reported that those rates varied between 38.7 percent and 62.7 
percent during the 6 years. In most years, the number of 
discrimination claims validated by administrative judges 
amounted to fewer than 300 cases, with nearly half of those 
findings rejected by the agencies. However, in cases where no 
discrimination is found, agencies either modified or rejected 
the findings in an average of more than 3 percent of cases. 
Outright rejection of the findings of no discrimination was 
rare, but agencies modified more than 50 such decisions in most 
years. GAO did not have data adequate to assess any patterns in 
the acceptance or rejection of administrative judges' findings 
in these cases.
    b. Benefits.--This report served to highlight several 
deficiencies in the manner in which official data regarding 
discrimination claims are recorded and maintained. As a result 
of GAO's inquiries, the EEOC reviewed some of its published 
data and provided more accurate reports to the oversight 
agency. Nonetheless, additional data would have been required 
to identify the basis of discrimination alleged in each of the 
cases, and the official records maintained by the EEOC provide 
no information that would differentiate between discrimination 
based on race, gender, or religion, and therefore allow for no 
method of identifying any trends in the types of cases where 
findings of discrimination are accepted or rejected. For 
example, although the number of discrimination claims filed by 
white men has increased substantially during the past 5 years, 
there is no method of linking this increase to the increase in 
the rate at which administrative judges reject discrimination 
claims.
30. ``Budget Issues: An Overview of Federal Debt,'' Statement of Paul 
        Posner, Director, Budget Issues, Before the Committee on Ways 
        and Means, June 24, 1998 (GAO/T-AIMD-98-221)
    a. Summary.--This overview of public debt includes a 
consideration of the operations of accounts--such as Social 
Security and Federal pension accounts--that are invested in 
Treasury special securities. When these accounts are in 
surplus, the income that they receive from payroll deductions 
and employer matching contributions generate funds to support 
government operations while reducing government's demand for 
borrowing funds on other markets. When these accounts are in 
deficit, however, the government must draw down on Treasury 
balances to meet the obligations, including interest on these 
accounts. Government must obtain these funds from other 
borrowing, spending reductions in other programs, or revenue 
increases. GAO noted that the level of public debt--47 percent 
of Gross Domestic Product at the start of the current fiscal 
year--is historically high, and the Federal income, revenue, 
and spending structure is such that Federal debt would increase 
automatically in the event of recession. GAO notes that, under 
current fiscal circumstances, balancing the budget would not 
reduce the Federal debt because the government pays only the 
interest on its obligations, unlike a home mortgage where the 
payments are apportioned between principle and interest. In 
light of the demographic effects of the pending retirement of 
the Baby Boom generation, GAO noted that economic growth is 
essential to the economy's capacity to fund the future 
obligations that have already been incurred.
    b. Benefits.--This overview of the Federal debt structure 
is important to the committee because it assists efforts to 
monitor the role that civil service retirement accounts play in 
the Federal debt structure. As of May 31, 1998, GAO graphs 
indicate that the Civil Service Retirement Systems account for 
23.3 percent of the public debt held by government accounts.
31. ``Defense Infrastructure: Central Training Funding Projected to 
        Remain Stable During 1997-2003,'' June 30, 1998 (GAO/NSIAD-98-
        168)
    a. Summary.--The House Committee on the Budget asked GAO to 
review the Department of Defense's $20.1 billion request for 
training funds. This expenditure constitutes the third largest 
of the Department's eight infrastructure accounts, and amounts 
to 14.4 percent of the Department's infrastructure budget. The 
size of the infrastructure obligation is important to the 
Department because, since the ``Bottom-Up Review'' of 1993, the 
Department has planned to fund future weapons system 
development by reducing its annual infrastructure obligations. 
To date, however, those changes have not been made. Instead, 
funding increases for future weapons systems have been deferred 
further into the future. Central training, as defined in this 
report, differs from the ``mission unit training'' for combat 
readiness or support functions. It is limited to the training 
of individual military members in formal courses. This account 
includes the service academies, basic training and advanced 
training, officer training, and course development costs for 
all such programs. Although DOD central training funds declined 
by $4.5 billion between fiscal year 1992 and fiscal year 1997--
largely as a result of reduced accessions to meet lower 
personnel ceilings, base closures and other workforce reduction 
tactics, the services projected no further declines in their 
central training budgets. Nearly two-thirds of these reductions 
took place in the first year of the current administration. 
Funds are projected to remain at $21.5 billion annually from 
fiscal year 1998 through 2003. While the services projected 
continued declines in accession training, professional and 
skill training, installation support, and the training of new 
personnel, they projected increases in command managed training 
and aviation and flight training. The services proposed to 
transfer funds from different training accounts to achieve the 
new workload mix. The Department is also developing a series of 
computerized instruction programs that would facilitate 
standardized training that could be delivered nearly anywhere, 
but these developments require up-front capitalization that 
would limit the ability to reduce costs in the short term. The 
Department estimated that investments in ``distance learning'' 
could total $2 billion in the current fiscal year, and the Army 
estimates that its savings from these investments will amount 
to $900 million by 2007.
    b. Benefits.--Effective training is a critical component of 
future workforce management, but the Congress has, in recent 
years, had difficulty gaining information from the Office of 
Personnel Management that would indicate the amount of money 
being spent by Federal agencies on training their employees. 
Instead, the central personnel management agency has resisted 
bipartisan efforts to legislate a requirement to report 
accurate information about agencies' training activities. This 
report demonstrates that these expenditures are substantial at 
the Department of Defense, and that the services view the work 
as an important component of workforce development. This report 
would provide a basis for comparing the workforce training 
expenditures of other Federal agencies.
32. ``Equal Employment Opportunity: Rising Trends in EEO Complaint 
        Caseloads in the Federal Sector,'' July 24, 1998 (GAO/GGD-98-
        157BR)
    a. Summary.--Representative Cummings and Representative 
Wynn requested GAO to review the backlogs of unresolved 
complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission to assess the implications of the increasing numbers 
of cases filed since 1991. GAO also reviewed the unique 
characteristics of complaints filed by employees of the Postal 
Service. In addition to the EEOC remedies available to all 
Federal employees, Postal Service employees are allowed to have 
complaints reviewed through the Postal Service's mediation 
procedures. GAO confirmed that, in many cases, these employees 
file the same complaints using both channels, even if the 
complaints filed with the EEOC are not necessarily 
discrimination complaints. GAO found that the inventory of 
unresolved complaints at agencies had increased by 102 percent 
since 1991, reaching a total of 34,267 unresolved complaints by 
the end of 1997. During the same period, the number of hearing 
requests filed by complainants had increased 218 percent--to 
10,016 cases--and the number of appeals increased by 581 
percent, resulting in an inventory of 9,980 cases. The 
inventories of backlogged cases had predictable impact on 
increasing the average processing time for cases. In 1991, 
cases were completed in an average of 341 days. By 1997, that 
processing time increased to 379 days. By 1996, a case that 
went unresolved through the appeals process required 613 days 
to reach a decision. When this report was written more than 
half of the cases at every stage of the appeals process had 
been in the inventory for longer than the prescribed period. 
Agencies do not make final decisions until the appellate 
process is completed by the EEOC. Even if the Congress were to 
appropriate the full amount of additional resources that the 
President requested for the EEOC, GAO predicts that the 
projected case inventory growth resulting from current filing 
rates would result in an appeals inventory growing to nearly 
19,000 cases by 2002, with appeals requiring an average of 900 
days--30 months--to process. Federal employees have filed 
complaints in increasing numbers, from 17,696 in 1991 to 27,587 
in 1997. Although Postal employees constituted 23.5 percent of 
the Federal workforce, they filed 38 percent of complaints in 
1993. By 1997, the Postal Service comprised 31.2 percent of the 
Federal workforce, but filed 50 percent of complaints, 43 
percent of hearing requests, and 44 percent of appeals.
    b. Benefits.--This thorough study describes the extent of 
the growing backlog in the appeals processes available to 
Federal employees who seek redress of discrimination claims. 
The size of the workload demonstrates clearly that merely 
increasing resources to sustain current procedures is an 
inadequate response to the challenges. As reflected in the data 
related to the Postal Service, a growing portion of the claims 
in the EEOC's Federal sector workload are already capable of 
being handled in labor-management channels, and there is 
considerable duplication in the caseload in both channels. 
Other work done by GAO documents that nearly 90 percent of 
discrimination claims are rejected by the EEOC. With the 
backlogs so heavily weighted toward duplicative and 
unsustainable claims, this report strengthens the case for 
basic reform of these appeals procedures.
33. ``Results Act: Observations on the Office of Personnel Management's 
        Annual Performance Plan,'' July 28, 1998 (GAO/GGD-98-130)
    a. Summary.--As part of its effort to assist the Congress 
with the oversight and implementation of the Government 
Performance and Results Act (Results Act), GAO reviewed the 
performance plan submitted to the Congress with the 
administration's fiscal year 1999 budget request for OPM. This 
performance plan reflected objectives outlined in OPM's 
strategic plan and followed the procedures generally consistent 
with Results Act requirements. GAO observed that the 
performance plan contained all of the elements required by the 
Results Act, and GAO believes that OPM provided an achievable 
set of performance goals for fiscal years 1998 and 1999. 
However, GAO noted that OPM has not articulated a set of 
objectives that would serve as tangible results. As a result, 
OPM could achieve each of its performance measures without 
discernible effects on the character and performance of the 
Federal workforce. GAO noted inconsistencies between the 
objectives described in the strategic plan and performance 
indicators outlined in the performance plans, and indicated 
insufficient linkage between the functions to be performed and 
the results intended. In other areas, such as improvements in 
the adjudications of appeals, GAO noted that OPM has limited 
authority to take actions that would move toward the expressed 
objectives. GAO noted that, at many points, OPM has either 
insufficient or inadequate measures of the intended results. 
Some of these deficiencies result from the ambiguous character 
of the objectives, but other elements reflect needs for 
improvement in the Central Personnel Data File (which OPM 
acknowledges) or the inadequacy of survey instruments to 
evaluate actual results. GAO also noted that OPM had 
encountered numerous difficulties linking its strategies and 
resources to the results that it intended to achieve.
    b. Benefits.--This review provided an extensive assessment 
of the OPM Results Act planning process that confirmed issues 
raised during the congressional review of these plans. It 
provided elaboration on several key managerial and measurement 
concerns, and corroborated areas of improvement for OPM's 
future attention. This report summarizes many management 
difficulties in OPM's operations, and highlights difficulties 
conceded by OPM as it faces current workforce challenges.
34. ``Federal Employees' Compensation Act: Percentages of Take-Home Pay 
        Replaced by Compensation Benefits,'' August 17, 1998 (GAO/GGD-
        98-174)
    a. Summary.--The Subcommittee requested that the General 
Accounting Office review claims approved under the Federal 
Employees' Compensation Act [FECA] to provide information about 
the percentages of take-home pay that long-term FECA benefits 
replaced, to compare the career patterns of employees in 
employment classifications with high rates of FECA claims, and 
to compare a variety of demographic characteristics of the 
population of injured Federal employees. On average, FECA 
beneficiaries receive 95 percent of their preinjury take home 
pay in compensation, with more than 29 percent of the 23,250 
beneficiaries whose cases were reviewed receiving more than 100 
percent of pre-injury take home pay as compensation. In 1972, 
the National Commission on State Workmen's Compensation Laws 
had established a standard that compensatory benefits should 
provide at least 80 percent of an employee's spendable 
earnings. Federal beneficiaries ranged between 76 percent and 
136 percent of their preinjury take home pay, with employees 
who were injured before 1975 benefiting most from long-term 
cost-of-living increases. More than 70 percent of the 
beneficiaries were over 40 years old when injured, and their 
average adjusted pay at the time of their injuries was 
consistent with other active employees. As of June 1997, about 
65 percent of FECA beneficiaries were more than 55 years old. 
The occupations surveyed for this study indicated that many 
FECA beneficiaries had been blue collar employees. GAO also 
obtained career pattern information on some occupations most 
frequently included among FECA beneficiaries. They analyzed 
these career patterns by comparing current employees with the 
injured cohort to determine if injury patterns had changed in 
these occupations--for example as a result of new equipment or 
procedures. These career patterns included air traffic 
controllers, postal employees, nurses in Department of Veterans 
Affairs hospitals, and GAO was unable to determine any clear 
career pattern differentiating injured employees from their 
counterparts.
    b. Benefits.--This report provides extensive data 
demonstrating that FECA beneficiaries are well-compensated in 
comparison with both pre-established standards for workers' 
compensation and in terms of the expected earnings of others in 
the same occupations. It documents the benefits that accrue 
from the long-term accumulation of cost-of-living adjustments, 
and reaffirms the importance of effective case management in 
developing rehabilitation and retraining opportunities so that 
injured employees can return to productive positions as quickly 
as possible.
35. ``Performance Management: Aligning Employee Performance With Agency 
        Goals at Six Results Act Pilots,'' September 4, 1998 (GAO/GGD-
        98-162)
    a. Summary.--Because effective implementation of the 
Results Act is expected to require a linkage between individual 
performance measures and agencies' performance objectives, the 
subcommittee asked the GAO to assess performance measures at a 
selected sample of pilot programs initiated under the National 
Performance Review. The subcommittee particularly sought 
information about the primary approaches taken in these 
projects to align employee performance management with 
organizational missions and goals and to identify any issues or 
challenges that these pilot projects confronted while 
developing and implementing these approaches. Although these 
pilot projects were selected because they included conditions 
where performance management initiatives were part of the pilot 
program design, none of the pilots had conducted a formal 
evaluation of the performance management dimension of its 
activities. The pilot projects took a variety of approaches 
toward their performance management initiatives, with four of 
the six programs limiting their Results Act related performance 
assessment to managerial levels, while the other two projects 
attempted to extend the performance management initiative 
throughout the organization. Five of the six pilot programs 
reported requesting waivers of human resource management rules, 
but those requests generally did not gain approval from higher 
levels in their organizations. Even without the waivers, 
managers in these agencies found sufficient flexibility under 
current rules to accomplish their initiatives. In four of the 
six programs, managers attempted to ``cascade'' their own 
performance standards to lower levels in the organization. The 
other two projects designed performance standards tailored to 
individual functions that attempted to measure contributions to 
team goals. In implementing the pilot project, each 
organization found a need to change organizational culture to 
develop a new understanding among employees of the 
organization's mission and/or method of operations. Most 
organizations conceded that these cultural changes had not been 
fully implemented. Each organization had encountered employees' 
efforts to ``game the system,'' by manipulating measures to 
make performance look better than it actually was, but managers 
claimed generally to have been aggressive in countering such 
approaches. Each of the programs reported beneficial aspects of 
their performance management innovations, some claiming 
improvements in teamwork and communications and others noting 
better customer satisfaction and service delivery. Each of the 
programs saw positive results in their performance management 
initiatives, and continued them beyond the pilot phases of 
their programs. The initiative at the Department of Veterans 
Affairs' New York Benefits Administration Office had been 
expanded into a full-scale Chapter 47 demonstration project 
slated for implementation in 1999. Several of these performance 
management initiatives required more direct customer 
information about employees' performance. One included a ``360 
degree'' evaluation by supervisors, peers, and subordinates, 
and the DVA's New York Regional Office established a ``balanced 
scorecard'' to assess speed, accuracy, costs, customer 
satisfaction, and employee development. At the Office of Air 
Research in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, the program had to identify milestones because 
of the long-term character of many program goals. At the 
Department of Energy's Federal Energy Technology Center, 
managers had to intervene when one team attempted to skew its 
internal ratings in a ``360 degree'' system, in part by 
modifying performance standards to include additional 
measurable objectives. Although managers at all six facilities 
believed that they experienced improvements under these 
initiatives, all concluded that their performance management 
reforms were still works in progress.
    b. Benefits.--This set of case studies provided a broad 
perspective on the challenges facing agencies in developing 
meaningful individual performance assessments in light of the 
efforts to ``reinvent'' government and consistent with the 
standards being developed to implement the Results Act. In all 
of these cases, more complex and creative approaches to 
performance measures and organizational change were necessary 
to provide better assessments of the employees. This report 
provides better context for understanding the difficulties that 
result from simplified, or two-tier, endeavors at performance 
management and highlight the necessity of frequent monitoring 
and system modification if performance measures are to spur 
continuous improvement in agencies.
36. ``OPM'S Central Personnel Data File: Data Appear Sufficiently 
        Reliable to Meet Most Customer Needs,'' September 30, 1998 
        (GAO/GGD-98-199)
    a. Summary.--After receiving several reports and 
testimonies from GAO indicating that the data contained in the 
OPM Central Personnel Data File [CPDF] were inadequate to 
address emergent policy questions, the subcommittee requested 
GAO to review the adequacy of this system for monitoring 
Federal workforce characteristics. In reviewing CPDF data, GAO 
attempted to assess the accuracy of major CPDF data elements 
(e.g., salary, grade, education levels), with an emphasis on 
information needed for OPM's Office of Actuaries to estimate 
the future liabilities of the Civil Service Retirement and 
Disability Fund, whether selected users of the data believed 
that CPDF information met their needs, and whether OPM has 
documented system changes and verified the system's acceptance 
of them. OPM does not have an official standard for the 
accuracy of individual data elements in the CPDF, but 
periodically compares information found in samples of 
individuals' official personnel folders to the information in 
the CPDF. In reviewing these data, GAO found that more than 
two-thirds of the data elements were 99 percent accurate, 
including most data elements used in the Office of Actuaries' 
estimates. However, adjusted basic pay was found to be only 94 
percent accurate. GAO had previously confirmed that CPDF 
accuracy varies by the agency entering the information. GAO's 
survey confirmed that most CPDF users consider the information 
current, accurate, and complete enough for their needs. OPM 
maintains a list of 28 caution factors that users should 
understand in using the data, but GAO found that not all of 
these limitations are routinely provided to users. Information 
about Federal employees' education, for example, is routinely 
collected at the time of appointment, but not regularly 
upgraded to reflect changes during a career. Some users 
reported that they would have used the information differently 
if they had been aware of all caution factors. GAO also found 
that OPM did not document changes that it made during a major 
redesign of the system in 1986, and testing of those changes 
was not done by an independent reviewer. OPM asserted that, for 
the most part, the system processes information as intended, a 
claim that appeared to be consistent with GAO's testing.
    b. Benefits.--This report confirmed that the data included 
in the OPM CPDF is generally reliable for most analytical 
needs. However, the subcommittee has received several reports 
indicating a substantial time lag in obtaining data, and 
previous GAO reports had not been able to provide timely 
information about agencies' use of buyouts, that the multiple 
methods of counting employees in the system made it difficult 
to assess the administration's claims about workforce 
reductions, and that delays in data entry routinely result in 
publication of outdated information in volumes such as the 
quadrennial report on Policy and Supporting Positions (The Plum 
Book). OPM incorporated its plans to make major improvements in 
the CPDF among the upgrades to be implemented as part of the 
performance plan submitted under the Government Performance and 
Results Act.
37. ``Year 2000 Computing Crisis: Status of Efforts to Deal with 
        Personnel Issues,'' October 22, 1998, (GAOAIMD/GGD-99-14)
    a. Summary.--At the request of the chairman of the 
Committee on Banking and Financial Services, GAO endeavored to 
determine the nature and extent of personnel issues being 
reported by Federal agencies related to the year 2000 computer 
problems and to identify government's responses to personnel 
shortages attributed to the year 2000 problem. More than half 
of the 24 large agencies and 10 of the 41 small agencies 
reported to OMB that personnel needed to resolve the year 2000 
problem would not be available. Their concerns included finding 
and retaining qualified government personnel and difficulties 
in obtaining qualified contractors. OPM has provided agencies 
some flexibility with regard to year 2000 personnel needs, 
including the ability to rehire annuitants with important 
computer programming skills. For the most part, however, 
agencies had conducted no systematic assessment of year 2000 
personnel requirements, so preliminary actions to address these 
concerns lack a substantial information base. Agencies reported 
that they had lost skilled people through increased retirements 
(the impact of buyouts on these decisions was not reported) and 
to increased recruitment by private firms also addressing these 
concerns. Some agencies claimed to be particularly hard hit by 
relevant personnel separations. For example, the Farm Services 
Agency had lost 28 of its 403 information technology staff in 
the first 6 months of fiscal year 1998. Although such attrition 
exceeds standard government experience, most private 
corporations seek normal turnover levels only slightly below 
this 7 percent level. In light of private sector competition 
(for example, the Department of Veterans Affairs reported that 
its computer programs were being lured by executive recruiters 
offering attractive finders' fees), agencies might need 
additional incentives to attract key personnel to resolve year 
2000 computer needs. However, the Department of State reported 
that, even with lucrative incentives, it was requiring longer 
to replace contractors' personnel in key positions. The 
administration has established several ``Councils'' operating 
under the coordination of an Assistant to the President, and 
that these Councils have begun to report on the personnel 
dimension of year 2000 issues. GAO recommended that the 
Director of OMB should determine if recent personnel 
flexibilities provided by OPM are sufficient to meet these 
needs and that OPM work closely with the Chief Information 
Officers' Council to assess the personnel needs of Federal 
agencies as they address these operational concerns. GAO called 
for issuance of year 2000-related recommendations as soon as 
possible.
    b. Benefits.--This report complements other work being 
conducted by GAO to assess Federal agencies' efforts to resolve 
concerns about computer systems' capabilities related to the 
change of century date. This report could have been 
strengthened by including an assessment of recent personnel 
actions of Federal agencies (notably voluntary separation 
incentive payments, or buyouts) in hastening the departure of 
computer programmers with relevant skills. To date, OPM has not 
included waivers of the repayment requirements associated with 
buyouts among the personnel flexibility provided to managers. 
The report also fails to provide an indication of the balance 
between government employees and contractor personnel being 
used to address these concerns.

                   District of Columbia Subcommittee

1. ``District of Columbia Public Schools: Student Enrollment Count 
        Remains Vulnerable to Errors,'' August 1997, GAO/HEHS-97-161
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
received with plans to use for purpose of an oversight hearing.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
2. ``District of Columbia: Status of the Proposed New Convention Center 
        Project,'' September 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-148
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
received with plans to use for purpose of an oversight hearing.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
3. ``District of Columbia Public Schools: Enrollment Count Still 
        Appears Vulnerable to Errors,'' March 1998, GAO/T-EHHS-98-91
    GAO discussed its recent report on the enrollment count 
process that District of Columbia Public Schools [DCPS] used in 
school year 1996-1997. Findings: GAO noted that: (1) in spite 
of some changes in DCPS' enrollment count process in response 
to criticisms, the 1996-1997 count process remained flawed in 
several respects; (2) for example, the Student Information 
System [SIS] continued to have errors, such as multiple 
enrollment records for a single student and weaknesses in the 
system's ability to track students; (3) in addition, 
verification of student residency remained problematic; (4) 
although DCPS made some changes in its enrollment count process 
for the 1997-1998 school year in response to GAO's 
recommendations and plans to make more, the larger systemic 
issues appear to remain mostly uncorrected; (5) consequently, 
fundamental weaknesses still remain in the enrollment count 
process, making it vulnerable to inaccuracy and weakening its 
credibility; (6) for example, DCPS staff report that although 
an important internal control--duplicate record checks--has 
been implemented for SIS, additional internal controls are 
still lacking; (7) several DCPS enrollment and pupil accounting 
procedures continue to increase the possibility of multiple 
enrollment records for a single student; (8) GAO is concerned 
that duplicate record checks alone may not be sufficient to 
protect the integrity of SIS, given the many possibilities for 
error; (9) furthermore, the enrollment count may still include 
nonresident students; (10) more than half of DCPS' students 
have either failed to provide the residency verification forms 
or have provided no proofs of residency to accompany their 
forms; (11) GAO questions the appropriateness of including 
students who have failed to prove residency in the official 
count, particularly students who have not even provided the 
basic form; (12) in addition, because DCPS has not yet 
monitored and audited residency verification at the school 
level, additional problems may exist that are not yet apparent; 
(13) proposed new rules governing residency will help DCPS deal 
with residency issues; (14) until these issues are fully 
addressed and resolved, however, the accuracy and credibility 
of the enrollment count will remain questionable; (15) in GAO's 
more recent discussions with DCPS officials, they acknowledge 
that more needs to be done to improve the enrollment count 
process, particularly in the areas of further strengthening 
DCPS' automated internal controls and addressing the 
nonresident issue; and (16) they have expressed concern, 
however, that GAO has failed to recognize fully the 
improvements DCPS made in the enrollment count process for 
school year 1997-1998.
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
reviewed by the subcommittee.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
4. ``District of Columbia Public Schools, Availability of funds and the 
        Cost of FY 1997 Roof Projects,'' April 1998, GAO/AIMD-98-82
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
received with plans to use for purpose of an oversight hearing.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
5. ``District of Columbia Taxes and Other Strategies to Reduce Alcohol 
        Abuse,'' May 1998, GAO/AIMD-98-140, B-279037
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--N/A.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
6. ``District of Columbia: Final Status on the Sports Arena,'' July 
        1998, GAO/AIMD-98-223
    Background: GAO reviewed the progress of the sports arena 
project in the District of Columbia, focusing on the project's 
pre-development costs, revenue collections, and bond redemption 
status. Findings: GAO noted that: (1) the District has spent 
$60 million, about 98 percent of the estimated total cost of 
pre-development activities, for the sports arena; (2) as of 
April 30, 1998, the District estimated total pre-development 
costs to be about $61.5 million, a net increase of about $2.9 
million over its October 7, 1997, estimate, as reported in 
GAO's November 1997 report; (3) the increase is largely due to 
the final agreed upon price the District paid for a parcel of 
land included in the arena site; (4) the only known expense not 
under contract or agreement is the District cost for soil 
remediation and the removal of concrete structures below the 
surface for a parcel of land transferred to the Washington 
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; (5) the District's project 
manager for the sports arena has budgeted $700,000 for this 
activity, which is included in the total estimated cost; (6) 
the District's $5 million in remaining available funds for 
predevelopment costs for the sports arena appears to be 
sufficient to meet all estimated remaining expenditures; (7) as 
of April 30, 1998, the District had spent about $60 million and 
an additional $1.5 million was budgeted for the remaining 
predevelopment activities that will soon be completed, leaving 
approximately $3.5 million to pay unanticipated expenses or to 
redeem term bonds prior to their redemption dates; (8) 
collections from the dedicated arena tax have been more than 
sufficient to pay principal and interest of about $5.9 million 
annually on the bonds issued to finance the predevelopment 
expenses; (9) for each of the past 3 years, collections have 
exceeded the $9 million originally forecasted by the District, 
totaling about $1.6 million more than the District's forecast 
for the 3-year period; (10) as of April 30, 1998, the District 
had redeemed $6 million of the serial bonds and $2.5 million of 
the term bonds issued to finance the predevelopment expenses 
prior to their maturity date; (11) GAO's analysis shows that if 
the present level of collections are sustained, and revenues 
from the ground lease of the sports arena and the existing debt 
service reserve funds are used, all of the arena bonds would be 
paid by 2002, about 8 years before the 2010 maturity date; and 
(12) this redemption schedule would save the District about 
$16.4 million in interest costs, and allow about $7.7 million 
to be transferred to the District's General Fund.
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
reviewed by the subcommittee.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
7. ``District of Columbia Status of the New Convention Center 
        Project,'' July 1998, GAO/AIMD/OCE-98-238
    Background: GAO reviewed the Washington Convention Center 
Authority's [WCCA] efforts to arrange for financing and 
constructing a new convention center in the District of 
Columbia, focusing on the: (1) estimated cost of this project, 
including the guaranteed maximum price [GMP] for constructing 
the new convention center, and the risk exposure for both the 
contractor and the District; and (2) financing plan, including 
proposed changes to the revenue base, history of dedicated tax 
collections, projections for future revenues, and sufficiency 
to cover the GMP and other project costs. Findings: GAO noted 
that: (1) WCCA is proceeding with efforts to build a new 
convention center at Mount Vernon Square at a cost WCCA 
officials estimate to be $650 million; (2) this estimate has 
not changed since GAO reported on this project in September 
1997; (3) however, GAO's latest review of the project 
identified an additional $58 million in project costs which--
because WCCA expects them to be funded through Federal grants 
or moved into future operating costs--are not included in 
WCCA's total project costs; (4) these costs raise the project's 
cost estimate to $708 million, excluding reserve requirements 
and financing costs of $138 million; (5) the majority of the 
estimated project costs are covered in a $500.6-million GMP for 
construction; (6) the GMP lays out 22 different cost components 
and sets limits on financial risks to the construction manager, 
Clark/Smoot; (7) areas of risk are not included in the $500.6-
million price; (8) an estimated $207 million in other project-
related activities will be or have been contracted for 
separately; (9) WCCA's current financing plan to cover 
predevelopment, construction, reserves and operation of the 
convention center calls for about $846 million; (10) 73 percent 
of the funds needed to finance the project are expected to be 
derived from revenue bonds supported by dedicated taxes; (11) 
changes from the previous financing plan include increasing the 
term of the bonds as well as the dedicated taxes to allow WCCA 
to borrow more money for the project; (12) WCCA received $44 
million in dedicated taxes in 1997, and WCCA has projected 
collections to increase at 1 percent per year over the next 
several years; (13) these and other factors will be looked at 
by WCCA's consultants, rating agencies, and bond insurers who 
will evaluate the financing package and determine its ability 
to cover the GMP and other project costs; (14) risks associated 
with the financing package could affect the rating of the bonds 
and accordingly, the interest rate; (15) although WCCA plans to 
address an $18-million reduction in its construction budget by 
negotiating arrangements with vendors to provide equipment and 
services, to date there are no executed contracts to cover 
these arrangements; and (16) the site selection process for the 
convention center has a long history and numerous studies have 
consistently identified Mount Vernon Square a preferred site.
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
received with plans to use for purpose of an oversight hearing.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
8. ``District of Columbia: Status of the New Convention Center 
        Project,'' July 1998, GAO/T-AIMD/OCE-98-239
    Background: Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO 
discussed the results of its review of the Washington 
Convention Center Authority's [WCCA] efforts to arrange for 
financing and constructing of a new convention center in the 
District of Columbia, focusing on: (1) the estimated cost of 
this project, including the guaranteed maximum price [GMP] for 
constructing the new convention center, and the risk exposure 
for both the contractor and the District; (2) the financing 
plan, including proposed changes to the revenue base, history 
of dedicated tax collections, projections for future revenues, 
and sufficiency to cover the GMP and other project costs; and 
(3) information on the site selection process, including WCCA's 
analysis of alternative sites, particularly the Northeast No. 1 
site. Findings: GAO noted that: (1) WCCA is proceeding with 
efforts to build a new convention center at Mount Vernon Square 
at a cost WCCA officials estimate to be $650 million; (2) GAO's 
latest review of the project identified an additional $58 
million in project costs which--because WCCA expects these 
costs to be funded through Federal grants or moved into 
operating costs--are not included in WCCA's total project 
costs; (3) these costs raise the project's cost estimate to 
$708 million, excluding reserve requirements and financing 
costs of $138 million; (4) while WCCA has maintained a $650-
million budget, a number of changes have been made among the 
budget components, with some components increasing and some 
decreasing; (5) the majority of the estimated project costs are 
covered in a $500.6-million GMP for construction; (6) the GMP 
lays out 22 different cost components and sets limits on 
financial risks to the construction manager; (7) areas of risk 
are not included in the $500.6-million price; (8) the total 
contingency for the project is down from $75.9 million to $40 
million; (9) WCCA's financing plan to cover predevelopment, 
construction, reserves, and operation of the convention center 
calls for about $846 million; (10) 73 percent of the funds 
needed to finance the project are expected to be derived from 
revenue bonds supported by dedicated taxes; (11) WCCA received 
$44 million in dedicated taxes in 1997, and WCCA has projected 
collections to increase at 1 percent a year over the next 
several years; (12) the financing plan assumes a lower interest 
rate, an increase in the annual dedicated tax revenues to 
support the bond financing, and an increase in the terms of the 
bonds from 30 to 34 years; (13) these changes would allow WCCA 
to borrow more money to finance the project; (14) risks 
associated with the financing package could affect the rating 
of the bonds and accordingly, the interest rate; (15) the site 
selection process for the convention center has a long history 
and numerous studies over the years have consistently 
identified Mount Vernon Square as a preferred site; and (16) 
WCCA's most recent analysis of the Northeast No. 1 site 
indicates that costs would be higher and would likely result in 
opening the convention center at a much later date than 
estimated for the Mount Vernon Square site.
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
received with plans to use for purpose of an oversight hearing.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
9. ``District of Columbia Highway Trust Fund's Fiscal Year 1997 
        Financial Statements,'' September 1998, GAO/AIMD-98-254
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information provided 
was reviewed by the subcommittee.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
10. ``District of Columbia Extent to Which Schools Receive Available 
        Federal Education Grants,'' October 1998, GAO/HEHS-99-1
    Background: GAO discussed the District of Columbia's and 
the District of Columbia Public Schools' [DCPS] efforts to 
apply for and receive grant awards through the Federal 
education grant programs available to them, focusing on: (1) 
what Federal education grant programs are available to the 
District of Columbia; (2) status of its efforts to receive 
Federal education grant programs; and (3) the District of 
Columbia offices responsible for the application process. 
Findings: GAO noted that: (1) DCPS is eligible for 72 of the 
103 fiscal year 1998 Federal education grant programs available 
for preschool, elementary, and secondary education; (2) in 
fiscal year 1998, the District of Columbia applied for 46 of 
the 72 Federal programs; (3) according to DCPS officials, DCPS 
did not apply for the remaining 26 programs because it lacked 
the resources to pursue these grants; (4) for example, 
budgetary constraints precluded its applying for grants 
requiring matching funds, such as Even Start-Migrant Education, 
and DCPS said it had insufficient staff to apply for some 
grants or to implement the grant if received, such as Bilingual 
Education-Professional Development; and (5) the grant 
application process can vary by grant and involves several 
offices in DCPS and the District of Columbia government.
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
reviewed by the subcommittee.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.
11. ``Year 2000 Computing Crisis: The District of Columbia Faces 
        Tremendous Challenges in Ensuring Vital Services Are Not 
        Disrupted,'' October 1998, GAO/T-AIMD-99-4
    Background: GAO discussed the year 2000 risks facing the 
District of Columbia, focusing on: (1) its progress to date in 
fixing its systems; and (2) the District's remediation 
strategy. Findings: GAO noted that: (1) until June 1998, the 
District had made very little progress in addressing the year 
2000 problem; (2) to compensate for its late start, the 
District has hired a new chief technology officer, appointed a 
full-time year 2000 program manager, established a year 2000 
program office, and continued to use its chief technology 
officer council to help coordinate and prioritize efforts; (3) 
the District also contracted with an information technology 
firm to assist in completing the remediation effort; (4) to 
accomplish this in the short time remaining, the District and 
the contractor plan to concurrently: (a) remediate and test 
system applications; (b) assess and fix the information 
technology [IT] infrastructure, including the data centers, 
hardware, operating systems, and telecommunications equipment; 
(c) assess and correct non-information technology assets; and 
(d) develop contingency plans; (5) the District has done the 
following: (a) developed an inventory of information technology 
applications; (b) initiated pilot remediation and test efforts 
with the pension and payroll system; (c) adopted a contingency 
planning methodology which it is now piloting on the 911 
system, the water and sewer system, and the lottery board 
system; and (d) developed a strategy for remediating non-IT 
assets which is now being tested on the water and sewer system; 
(6) the District's recent actions reflect a commitment on the 
part of the city to address the year 2000 problem and to make 
up for the lack of progress; (7) however, the District is still 
significantly behind in addressing the problem; (8) the 
District has not: (a) identified all of its essential business 
functions that must continue to operate; (b) finished assessing 
its IT infrastructure and its non-information technology 
assets; (c) provided guidance to its agencies on testing; and 
(d) identified resources that will be needed to complete 
remediation and testing; (9) until the District completes the 
assessment phase, it will not have reliable estimates on how 
long it will take to renovate and test mission-critical systems 
and processes and to develop business continuity and 
contingency plans; (10) District officials acknowledge that the 
city is not able to provide assurance that all critical systems 
will be remediated on time; and (11) therefore, to minimize 
disruptions to vital city services, it will be essential for 
the District to effectively manage risks over the next 15 
months.
    a. Summary of subcommittee action.--Information was 
received with plans to use for purpose of an oversight hearing.
    b. Benefits.--N/A.

   Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology

1. ``Performance Budgeting: Past Initiatives Offer Insights for GPRA 
        Implementation.'' March 27, 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-46
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee held a hearing to investigate 
the likely effectiveness of the Government Performance and 
Results Act [GPRA] based on input from previous public and 
private sector experiences. Using the lessons learned from 
these experiences, the subcommittee was able to direct the 
Office of Management and Budget and the Federal agencies in 
more profitable directions.
    b. Benefits.--Since 1950, the Federal Government has 
attempted several government-wide initiatives designed to 
better align spending decisions with expected performance, 
commonly known as ``performance budgeting.'' Congress enacted 
the Government Performance and Results Act in 1993 to improve 
the effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability of Federal 
programs by having agencies focus on program results. In this 
way, GPRA can be viewed as the most recent effort to closely 
link resources to performance expectations.
    Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO reviewed the 
implementation of GPRA. Its report compares and contrasts the 
key design elements and approaches of GPRA with those of past 
initiatives to identify past lessons that have been 
incorporated into GPRA and issues that continue to pose 
significant challenges to successful implementation.
    GAO noted that: (1) in its overall structure, focus, and 
approach, GPRA incorporates critical lessons learned from 
previous efforts, but many of the same issues encountered in 
previous initiatives remain and will likely pose significant 
challenges if GPRA is to achieve its aim of better linking 
resource decisions to performance levels; (2) where past 
efforts failed to link executive branch performance planning 
and measurement with congressional resource allocation 
processes, GPRA requires explicit consultation between the 
executive and legislative branches on agency strategic plans; 
(3) past initiatives' experiences suggest that efforts to link 
resources with results must begin in the planning phase with 
some fundamental understanding about program goals; (4) where 
past initiatives devised unique performance information formats 
often unconnected to the structures used in congressional 
budget presentations, GPRA requires agencies to plan and 
measure performance using the ``program activities'' listed in 
their budget submissions; (5) where past initiatives were 
generally unprepared for the difficulties associated with 
measuring the outcomes of Federal programs and often retreated 
to simple output or workload measures, GPRA states a preference 
for outcome measurement while recognizing the need to develop a 
range of measures; (6) GAO's discussions with selected 
legislative staff and agency officials revealed fundamental 
differences in perspectives and expectations that are often a 
necessary consequence of the system of separated powers; (7) 
past initiatives often foundered because no mechanism existed 
to reconcile or even to address these legitimate, but at times 
competing, views; (8) GPRA, through required consultations and 
formal, public documents, is intended to encourage an explicit 
and periodic exchange of views between the branches; (9) GPRA 
differs from prior initiatives in that past performance 
budgeting initiatives were typically implemented governmentwide 
within a single annual budget cycle, while GPRA defines a multi 
year and iterative governmentwide implementation process that 
incorporates pilot tests and formal evaluations of key 
concepts; and (10) GPRA also differs from prior initiatives in 
that it will face an operating environment unknown to its 
predecessors: persistent efforts to constrain spending.
2. ``GPRA: Managerial Accountability and Flexibility Pilot Did Not Work 
        As Intended,'' April 10, 1997, GAO/GGD-97-36
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee held a hearing to investigate 
the success of the Government Performance and Results Act 
authorized pilot tests. GAO was asked to investigate these 
pilots in order for the subcommittee to make recommendations 
regarding the extension of GPRA flexibility provisions to other 
agencies. Based upon the results to date the subcommittee does 
not recommend extension of GPRA flexibility pilots or 
provisions to other agencies.
    b. Benefits.--Congress intended for the Government 
Performance and Results Act to fundamentally shift the focus of 
Federal managers from processes to outcomes and results. In 
crafting GPRA, Congress recognized that if Federal managers 
were to be held accountable for achieving results, they would 
need the authority and flexibility to achieve those results. 
GPRA provides for a series of pilot projects so that Federal 
agencies can gain experience in using the act's provisions and 
provide lessons to other agencies before GPRA's implementation 
governmentwide. One set of these GPRA projects focused on 
managerial accountability and flexibility. This report (1) 
determines whether the managerial accountability and 
flexibility pilot worked as intended and the reasons why it did 
or did not, and (2) identifies the lessons learned from this 
pilot and their possible implications for the governmentwide 
implementation of GPRA.
    GAO noted that: (1) the GPRA managerial accountability and 
flexibility pilot did not work as intended; (2) the Office of 
Management and Budget [OMB] did not designate any of the 7 
departments and 1 independent agency that submitted a total of 
61 waiver proposals as GPRA managerial accountability and 
flexibility pilots; (3) three major factors contributed to the 
failure of GPRA's managerial accountability and flexibility 
pilot phase to work as intended: first, changes in Federal 
management practices and laws that occurred after GPRA was 
enacted affected agencies' need for the GPRA process; second, 
GPRA was not the only means by which agencies could receive 
waivers from administrative requirements, and thereby obtain 
needed managerial flexibility; third, OMB did not work actively 
with agencies that were seeking to take part in the managerial 
accountability and flexibility pilot, in contrast to its more 
proactive posture toward other GPRA requirements, such as the 
pilots for the performance planning and reporting requirements; 
(4) overall, officials in five of the eight agencies that 
submitted a waiver proposal to OMB said that they never 
received feedback from OMB on the status of their waiver 
proposals, notification of specific concerns that OMB may have 
had about the quality and scope of the proposals, or, most 
important, explicit instructions from OMB on how their 
proposals could be improved to better meet OMB's expectations; 
(5) even though the pilot process did not result in any GPRA-
authorized waivers and thus did not work as intended, the 
process provided lessons for agencies and may have important 
implications for governmentwide GPRA implementation; (6) while 
preparing their waiver requests, several participating agencies 
learned that the burdens and constraints that confronted their 
managers often were imposed by the agency itself or its parent 
department and were not the result of requirements imposed by 
central management agencies; (7) the administration's effort to 
develop Federal management ``templates'' that, in part, 
document the range of flexibility agencies have under existing 
central management agency requirements is a promising means for 
disseminating knowledge about available flexibility among 
Federal agencies; and (8) in addition, the pilot experience 
should provide useful information for Congress to consider as 
GPRA is implemented governmentwide.
3. ``Managing for Results: Analytic Challenges in Measuring 
        Performance,'' May 30, 1997, GAO/HEHS/GGD-97-138
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee held a hearing focusing on 
the second phase, performance plans, of the Government 
Performance and Results Act [GPRA]. After agency strategic 
plans are delivered in September 1997, the agencies will 
deliver performance plans in February 1998. The performance 
plans will require the agencies to collect and report on data 
that they had not previously tracked. The subcommittee 
identified problems that agencies will encounter and made 
relevant recommendations. The subcommittee encouraged the 
agencies to take these GPRA requirements quite seriously and to 
develop meaningful performance plans for both agency management 
and congressional oversight.
    b. Benefits.--The Government Performance and Results Act 
requires agencies to identify program goals and report on their 
progress in achieving them. GPRA includes a phase during which 
about 70 programs, ranging from the U.S. Geological Survey's 
National Water Quality Assessment Program to the entire Social 
Security Administration, were designated as GPRA pilot 
projects. These and other Government programs have been gaining 
experience with the act's requirements. GPRA requires GAO to 
review implementation of the pilot phase and to comment on the 
prospects for compliance by Federal agencies when 
governmentwide implementation begins. This report answers the 
following questions: What analytic and technical challenges are 
agencies experiencing as they try to measure program 
performance? What approaches have they taken to address these 
challenges? How have agencies made use of program evaluations 
or evaluation expertise in implementing performance 
measurement?
    GAO noted that: (1) the programs included in GAO's review 
encountered a wide range of serious challenges; (2) 93 percent 
of the officials GAO surveyed reported at least one challenge 
as a great or very great challenge, and some were not very far 
along in implementing the steps required by the Results Act; 
(3) 8 of the 10 tasks rated most challenging emerged in the two 
relatively early stages of the performance measurement process, 
identifying goals and developing performance measures; (4) in 
developing both goals and performance measures, respondents 
found it difficult to move beyond a summary of their program's 
activities, such as the number of clients served, to 
distinguish the desired outcome or result of those activities; 
(5) sometimes selecting an outcome measure was impeded, 
instead, by conflicting stakeholder views of the program's 
intended results or by anticipated data collection problems; 
(6) issues in the data collection stage were rated as less 
serious and revolved around the programs' lack of control over 
data that third parties collected, but programs may have 
avoided some data issues through selection of measures for 
which data already existed; (7) the greatest challenge in the 
analysis and reporting stage was separating a program's impact 
on its objectives from the impact of external factors, 
primarily because many Federal programs' objectives are the 
result of complex systems or phenomena outside the program's 
control; (8) in such cases, it is particularly challenging for 
agencies to confidently attribute changes in outcomes to their 
program, the central task of program impact evaluation; (9) the 
programs GAO reviewed had applied a range of analytic and other 
strategies to address these challenges; (10) because they had 
either volunteered to be GPRA pilots or had already begun 
implementing performance measurement, the programs included in 
GAO's review were likely to be better suited or prepared for 
conducting performance measurement than most Federal programs; 
and (11) the challenges experienced by the projects that are 
pilot testing the act's requirements suggest that: (a) more 
typical Federal programs may find performance measurement to be 
an even greater challenge, particularly if they do not have 
access to program evaluation or other technical resources; and 
(b) full-scale implementation will require several iterations 
to develop valid, reliable, and useful performance reporting 
data systems.
4. ``The Government Performance and Results Act: 1997 Government-wide 
        Implementation Will be Uneven,'' June 2, 1997, GAO/GGD-97-109
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee held a hearing on the 
Government Performance and Results Act [GPRA] to pressure the 
agencies to improve the quality of their strategic plans. Draft 
versions of agency strategic plans are required by GPRA to be 
drafted in consultation with Congress. The subcommittee made 
sure that the agencies fully understood their obligations to 
Congress; that the agencies understood the six legally required 
topics; that agency plans would be considered in appropriations 
and authorizing decisions; and that Congress would look 
unfavorably upon strategic plans that were not both substantive 
and realistic.
    b. Benefits.--GAO found that implementation of the 
Government Performance and Results Act has so far yielded mixed 
results, which will lead to highly uneven government-wide 
implementation in the fall of 1997. Some agencies, such as the 
Social Security Administration and the Veterans Health 
Administration, have already seen significant performance 
improvements after they adopted a disciplined approach to 
setting goals, measuring performance, and using performance 
information to improve effectiveness. In general, however, 
substantial performance improvements at Federal agencies have 
been relatively few, and many agencies seemed ill prepared to 
answer the fundamental question posed by the act: What are we 
accomplishing? Agencies face various challenges to implementing 
the act, some of which will not be resolved quickly. One set of 
challenges arises from the complications of Government 
structure and from program proliferation. Others involve 
methodological difficulties in identifying performance measures 
or the lack of data needed to establish goals and assess 
performance.
    GAO noted that: (1) GPRA's implementation has achieved 
mixed results; (2) while agencies are likely to meet the 
upcoming statutory deadlines for producing initial strategic 
plans and annual performance plans, those documents will not be 
of a consistently high quality or as useful for congressional 
and agency decisionmaking as they could be; (3) the Office of 
Management and Budget selected over 70 performance planning and 
reporting pilots that far exceeded the number required by GPRA 
and that should provide a rich body of experience for agencies 
to draw on in the future; (4) the experiences of some of GPRA's 
pilot agencies and related efforts by nonpilot agencies showed 
that significant performance improvements were possible, even 
in the short term, when an agency adopted a disciplined 
approach to setting results-oriented goals, measuring its 
performance, and using performance information to improve 
effectiveness; (5) however, the reported examples of 
substantial performance improvements were relatively few; (6) 
one set of challenges to effectively implementing GPRA arises 
from the complications of government structure and from program 
proliferation; (7) others involve methodological difficulties 
in identifying performance measures or the lack of data needed 
to establish goals and assess performance; (8) the following 
are among the challenges that GAO observed: (a) overlapping and 
fragmented crosscutting program efforts present the logical 
need to coordinate efforts to ensure that goals are consistent 
and, as appropriate, that programs efforts are mutually 
reinforcing; (b) the often limited or indirect influence that 
the Federal Government has in determining whether a desired 
result is achieved complicates the effort to identify and 
measure the discrete contribution of the Federal initiative to 
a specific program result; (c) the lack of results-oriented 
performance information in many agencies hampers efforts to 
identify appropriate goals and confidently assess performance; 
(d) instilling within agencies an organizational culture that 
focuses on results remains a work in progress across the 
Federal Government; and (e) linking agencies' performance plans 
directly to the budget process may present significant 
difficulties.
    Finally, GAO believes that GPRA's success or failure should 
not be judged on the strategic plans for the first year. 
Rather, it will take several years for Federal agency strategic 
plans to fulfill congressional intent.
5. ``Managing for Results: Regulatory Agencies Identified Significant 
        Barriers to Focusing on Results,'' June 24, 1997, GAO/GGD-97-83
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee held a hearing focusing on 
implementation difficulties of the Government Performance and 
Results Act. GAO was asked to study five regulatory agencies in 
depth and analyze any difficulties they were encountering. The 
subcommittee was able to make these difficulties known so they 
could be addressed early and presumably rectified before agency 
plans were delivered to OMB and Congress. Further, the 
subcommittee made recommendations for OMB and agency management 
actions to overcome these implementation difficulties as soon 
as possible.
    b. Benefits.--The Government Performance and Results Act 
seeks to boost the performance of Federal agencies by focusing 
on program performance and measuring results. Because 
establishing results-oriented goals and performance measures 
will not be easy, GPRA provides for a phased implementation 
period. Beginning in fiscal year 1994 and extending over 
several years, agencies are to develop strategic goals, 
identify performance measures, and by fiscal year 1999 
implement annual results-oriented performance reports linked to 
budget requests. The President has directed regulatory agencies 
to change the way they measure their performance and to focus 
on results. This report focuses on the efforts of five agencies 
to focus on results: the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Food 
and Drug Administration, the Internal Revenue Service, and the 
Environmental Protection Agency. GAO describes the (1) five 
agencies' strategic goals and related program performance 
measures as well as employee performance standards as of 
January 1997; (2) extent to which agency officials and GAO 
believe that these goals, program performance measures, and 
employee performance standards focus on results; and (3) aids 
and barriers that agency officials said that they faced in 
trying to focus on results.
    GAO noted that: (1) as would be expected in the early 
stages of implementing a new and difficult initiative, GAO 
observed that some of the five regulatory agencies were further 
along in the development of strategic goals, program 
performance measures, and employee performance standards than 
others; (2) the agencies also varied in the degree to which 
their goals, associated sets of program performance measures, 
and employee performance standards that were in use as of 
January 1, 1997, focused on results as judged by both agency 
officials and GAO; (3) in this regard, it is important to note 
that although GPRA was intended to encourage agencies to focus 
their goals and measures on results, the act does not require 
that all of an agency's goals or performance measures be 
explicitly results-oriented; (4) similarly, the President's 
directive to orient frontline regulators' performance standards 
toward results does not appear to require that every standard 
be results-oriented; (5) there were differences in the extent 
to which agency officials characterized their goals, program 
performance measures, and employee performance standards as 
``results-oriented'' and the extent to which GAO did; (6) in 
general, agencies frequently concluded that their goals, 
measures, and standards were more results-oriented than GAO 
did; (7) at the broader and more conceptual level of strategic 
goals, there were relatively few differences between agency 
officials' assessments of the extent of results-orientation and 
GAO's; (8) in enacting GPRA, Congress realized that the 
transition to results-oriented management would not be easy; 
(9) for that reason, the act provided for a phased approach to 
implementation, during which time agencies have been able to 
identify the obstacles that need to be overcome and some 
factors they found helpful; (10) the factor that agency 
officials most commonly said aided the establishment of a 
results-orientation in the agencies was the enactment of GPRA; 
(11) although agency officials identified some aids to focusing 
their agencies on results, they cited numerous barriers to 
their efforts to establish results oriented goals and measures; 
(12) these barriers included significant problems in 
identifying and collecting the data they needed to demonstrate 
their agencies' results; and, (13) agencies also cited as a 
barrier the fact that the diverse and complex factors affect 
agencies' results, and their lack of control or influence over 
external events and factors.
6. ``Managing For Results: Using the Results Act to Address Mission 
        Fragmentation and Program Overlap,'' August 29, 1997, GAO/AIMD-
        97-146
    a. Summary.--Congress is particularly interested in 
comparing ``bang for the buck'' for duplicate programs. GAO was 
asked to study how the Government Performance and Results Act 
could be used to address this need. GPRA, if implemented as 
intended by Congress, can deliver the required performance and 
related cost information that Congress needs to compare the 
relative desirability of duplicate and overlapping programs. 
The subcommittee made recommendations to OMB and the Federal 
Departments and agencies that facilitate the correct 
implementation of GPRA. Further, the subcommittee made 
recommendations to congressional authorization and 
appropriation committees to seriously consider the agency 
strategic plans and performance reports when making both 
budgetary and policy decisions.
    b. Benefits.--As the Government searches for ways to do 
more with less, mission fragmentation and program overlap at 
Federal agencies have become increasingly important issues. 
Congress, the administration, and GAO have all cited the 
fragmented nature of many Federal activities, along with the 
need to reduce the deficit, as compelling reasons to undertake 
a fundamental reexamination of Federal programs and structures. 
The Government Performance and Results Act presents an 
opportunity to begin such a reexamination. This report 
summarizes earlier GAO work on mission fragmentation and 
program overlap and describes specific ways in which the 
Results Act can focus attention on these management challenges 
and can help develop strategies to harmonize Federal responses.
    GAO noted that: (1) GAO's work has documented the 
widespread existence of fragmentation and overlap from both the 
broad perspective of Federal missions and from the more 
specific viewpoint of individual Federal programs; (2) GAO's 
work has shown that as the Federal Government has responded 
over time to new needs and problems, many Federal agencies have 
been given responsibilities for addressing the same or similar 
national issues; but GAO's work also suggests that some issues 
will necessarily involve more than one Federal agency or more 
than one approach; (3) taken as a whole, this body of work 
indicates that fragmentation and overlap will present a 
particular and persistent challenge to the successful 
implementation of the Results Act; (4) but at the same time, 
the Results Act should offer a new and structured framework to 
address crosscutting issues; (5) each of its key stages--
defining missions and desired outcomes, measuring performance, 
and using performance information--offers a new opportunity to 
address fragmentation and overlap; (6) for example, the Results 
Act is intended to foster a dialog on strategic goals involving 
the Congress as well as agency and external stakeholders; (7) 
this dialog should help to identify agencies and programs 
addressing similar missions and associated performance 
implications; (8) the act's emphasis on results-based 
performance measures should lead to more explicit discussions 
of contributions and accomplishments within crosscutting 
programs and encourage related programs to develop common 
performance measures; (9) if the Results Act is successfully 
implemented, performance information should become available to 
clarify the consequences of fragmentation and the implications 
of alternative policy and service delivery options, which, in 
turn, can affect future decisions concerning department and 
agency missions and the allocation of resources among those 
missions; (10) emphasizing missions, goals, and objectives, as 
envisioned by the Results Act, should facilitate a broader 
recognition of the nature and extent of fragmentation and 
overlap; and (11) however, past efforts to deal with 
crosscutting Federal activities and recent developments in both 
the executive branch and Congress underscore the need for 
specific institutions and processes to sustain and nurture a 
focus on these issues.
7. ``Managing For Results: Critical Issues for Improving Federal 
        Agencies' Strategic Plans,'' September 16, 1997, GAO/GGD-97-
        180; ``Inspectors General: Efforts to Develop Strategic 
        Plans,'' June 12, 1998, AIMD-98-112
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee held a hearing to review the 
quality of OMB's strategic plan as prepared under the 
Government Performance and Results Act. In preparation the 
subcommittee reviewed OMB's draft GPRA strategic plan and found 
it insufficient. The subcommittee met with key OMB officials to 
provide consultative advice and as a result the final OMB 
strategic plan submitted at fiscal year end was noticeably 
improved. The subcommittee also participated with congressional 
leadership in the review and evaluation of all agency draft 
strategic plans prepared in accordance with GPRA. As a 
consequence the average score of the agency strategic plans 
almost doubled between the drafts provided in August and the 
final GPRA strategic plans delivered at the end of September 
1997.
    b. Benefits.--In part of its effort to introduce 
performance-based management into the Federal Government, the 
Government Performance and Results Act requires agencies to 
develop strategic plans. GAO evaluated the latest available 
versions of the draft strategic plans that agencies submitted 
to Congress and found that many of them were missing key 
elements required by the legislation. For example, the plans 
often did not (1) link required elements, (2) fully develop 
strategies to achieve their results, (3) identify cross-cutting 
issues and programs, (4) gather and use performance 
information, or (5) address program evaluations. This report 
summarizes GAO's reviews of agency draft strategic plans and 
discusses strategic planning issues in need of sustained 
attention.
    GAO noted that: (1) a significant amount of work remained 
to be done by executive branch agencies if their strategic 
plans are to fulfill the requirements of the Results Act, serve 
as a basis for guiding agencies, and help congressional and 
other policymakers make decisions about activities and 
programs; (2) although all 27 of the draft plans included a 
mission statement, 21 plans lacked 1 or more of 5 other 
required elements; (3) overall, one-third of the plans were 
missing two required elements; and just over one-fourth were 
missing three or more of the required elements; (4) GAO's 
reviews of agencies' draft strategic plans also revealed 
several critical strategic planning issues that are in need of 
sustained attention if agencies are to develop the dynamic 
strategic planning processes envisioned by the Results Act; (5) 
most of the draft plans did not adequately link required 
elements in the plans; (6) these linkages are important if 
strategic plans are to drive the agencies' daily activities and 
if agencies are to be held accountable for achieving intended 
results; (7) furthermore, 19 of the 27 draft plans did not 
attempt to describe the linkages between long-term strategic 
goals and annual performance goals; (8) long-term strategic 
goals often tended to have weaknesses; (9) although the Results 
Act does not require that all of an agency's strategic goals be 
results oriented, the intent of the act is to have agencies 
focus their strategic goals on results to the extent feasible; 
(10) many agencies did not fully develop strategies explaining 
how their long-term strategic goals would be achieved; (11) 
most agencies did not reflect in their draft plans the 
identification and planned coordination of activities and 
programs that cut across multiple agencies; (12) the 
questionable capacity of many agencies to gather performance 
information has hampered, and may continue to hamper, efforts 
to identify appropriate goals and confidently assess 
performance; (13) the draft strategic plans did not adequately 
address program evaluations; and (14) evaluations are important 
because they potentially can be critical sources of information 
for ensuring that goals are reasonable, strategies for 
achieving goals are effective, and that corrective actions are 
taken in program implementation.
    In ``Inspectors General: Efforts to Develop Strategic 
Plans,'' GAO provided information on Inspectors General [IG] 
strategic planning efforts, focusing on: (1) which IGs 
presently prepare strategic plans; (2) the extent to which 
strategic plans were consistent with the Government Performance 
and Results Act requirements; (3) additional information IGs 
included in their strategic plans; (4) the extent to which IGs 
used their respective agencies' strategic plans to develop 
their own plans; (5) the extent to which IGs have been involved 
in developing their agencies' strategic plans; (6) the extent 
to which a strategic plan prepared consistent with the 
requirements of the Results Act would be useful to Congress, 
the Office of Management and Budget [OMB], and the IG; and (7) 
IGs' views on statutorily requiring them to prepare strategic 
plans.
    GAO noted that: (1) the 48 IGs that it surveyed indicated 
that they were all engaged in strategic planning efforts; (2) 
39 IGs reported that they had completed strategic plans, with 
the remaining 9 stating that they planned to complete their 
plans during 1998; (3) most IGs were of the opinion that the 
requirements contained in the Results Act provided an 
appropriate framework for preparing IG strategic plans; (4) 
further, the IGs responded that their plans address many of the 
elements that the Results Act requires for agency plans; (5) 
however, fewer IG plans addressed such elements as the 
relationship between general goals and annual performance goals 
and identification of external factors that could affect 
achievement of goals; (6) in addition, the plans addressed key 
management issues to varying degrees; (7) the IGs GAO surveyed 
generally indicated that these management issues, if not 
included in their strategic plans, were covered in other 
planning documents such as annual audit plans; (8) most IGs 
also indicated that they considered the agency's Results Act 
strategic plan at least to some extent in preparing their own 
plan; (9) in addition, more than half of all the IGs reported 
that they had at least some involvement in preparing the 
agency's strategic plan; (10) a majority believed that a 
strategic plan that satisfies the requirements of the Results 
Act would be useful to Congress, OMB, and the IG in assessing 
IG performance and operations; (11) the IGs were about evenly 
divided on the need for a statutory requirement on strategic 
planning; (12) overall, about 29 percent agreed, 33 percent 
disagreed, 27 percent agreed as much as disagreed, and the 
remaining 10 percent had no opinion; and (13) of the IGs that 
cited a reason for their disagreement, the most frequent 
comment made was that such a mandate was unnecessary because 
IGs recognize the importance of strategic planning as a basic 
part of good management and are already engaged in planning 
efforts.
8. ``Defense Computers: LSSC Needs to Confront Significant Year 2000 
        Issues,'' September 26, 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-149
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee has taken the lead in the 
Federal Government in raising the year 2000 issue. The 
subcommittee has applied pressure on the administration--OMB, 
agencies in general, and laggard agencies in particular. The 
subcommittee continued to pressure the various Federal agencies 
to achieve year 2000 compliance before the deadline of January 
1, 2000 by holding a press conference and issuing grades for 
each of the 24 largest agencies based upon their progress to 
date. Over half of the agencies failed to demonstrate 
sufficient progress on this issue. The ``Report Card of Year 
2000 Progress'' received considerable publicity and achieved 
its objective of forcing many agency heads to pay attention to 
this serious problem.
    b. Benefits.--This report focuses on the Logistics Systems 
Support Center's [LSSC] program for solving its year 2000 
computer system problem, which stems from the inability of 
computer programs to interpret the correct century from 
recorded or calculated data having only two digits to indicate 
the year. LSSC's Commodity Command Standard System supports the 
Army's wholesale logistics supply management business effort, 
which buys more than $23 billion worth of supplies and 
equipment each year for troops around the world. Unless LSSC 
overcomes its year 2000 problem, the Commodity Command Standard 
System could malfunction or generate incorrect information, 
potentially jeopardizing military missions. GAO discusses the 
status of LSSC's effort to correct year 2000 problems and the 
appropriateness of LSSC's strategy for addressing year 2000 
problems affecting the Commodity Command Standard System.
    GAO noted that: (1) the year 2000 problem is one of the 
most comprehensive and complex information management projects 
ever faced by LSSC; (2) if not successfully completed, the 
procurement of weapon systems and their spare parts, accounting 
for the sales of Army equipment and services to allies, and the 
financial management of $9 billion of inventory could be 
disrupted; (3) as a result, it could be extremely difficult to 
efficiently and effectively equip and sustain the Army's forces 
around the world; (4) LSSC has completed several actions to 
address the CCSS year 2000 problem; (5) a year 2000 project 
manager and management staff have been designated, a project 
manager charter and schedule were developed, and supplementary 
contractor support was acquired to assist with assessment 
tasks; (6) regularly scheduled quarterly meetings are held by 
the Army Materiel Command [AMC] headquarters to report LSSC 
year 2000 status; (7) these steps are compatible with the 
Department of Defense's [DOD] suggested approach and consistent 
with those found in GAO's five-phased approach for planning, 
managing, and evaluating year 2000 projects; (8) although LSSC 
commenced its year 2000 project over a year ago, there are 
several issues facing LSSC that, if not completely addressed, 
may result in the failure of CCSS to successfully operate at 
the year 2000; (9) LSSC has yet to completely address: (a) 
competing workload priorities and staffing issues; (b) the 
appropriate mix and scheduling of needed testing data and 
expertise as well as the development of test plans; (c) the 
scope and substance of written interface agreements with system 
interface partners to ensure that CCSS subsystems will be 
capable of exchanging data at the year 2000; and (d) 
contingency plan development to help assure that Army missions 
will be accomplished if CCSS is not fully available to users by 
the year 2000; (10) LSSC's risk of failure is increased because 
the agency has not attained the level of software development 
and maintenance maturity that would provide the foundation 
needed for successful management of large-scale projects such 
as the year 2000 initiative; and (11) because CCSS is used to 
support military readiness, these critical elements must be 
resolved and aggressively pursued to enable LSSC to achieve a 
year 2000 compliant environment prior to the year 2000.
9. ``Defense Computers: DFAS Faces Challenges in Solving the Year 2000 
        Problem,'' August 11, 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-117
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee continues to pressure all 
Federal Departments and agencies to reach year 2000 computer 
compliance before the deadline of January 1, 2000. Overall, the 
Department of Defense [DOD] has not achieved a rate of progress 
that will lead to success. The subcommittee continues to 
pressure DOD in general and also to commission GAO studies to 
focus on particular portions of DOD that are both critical and 
behind schedule. This brings the pressure of governmentwide 
year 2000 report cards to bear on particular mission-critical 
systems and conversely provides the specificity to assure the 
subcommittee that its overall perspective is well grounded in 
reality.
    b. Benefits.--The year 2000 problem refers to the inability 
of computer programs to interpret the correct century from a 
recorded or calculated date having only two digits to indicate 
the year. Unless this shortcoming is corrected, the Defense 
Financing and Accounting Service's [DFAS] computer systems 
could malfunction or produce incorrect information. The impact 
of these failures would be widespread, costly, and potentially 
debilitating to the DFAS accounting and financial reporting 
mission. This report discusses (1) the status of DFAS' efforts 
to identify and correct its year 2000 systems problems and (2) 
the appropriateness of DFAS' strategy and actions for ensuring 
that problems will be successfully addressed.
    GAO noted that: (1) DFAS managers have recognized the 
importance of solving the year 2000 problem; (2) to help ensure 
that services are not disrupted, DFAS has developed a year 2000 
strategy based on the generally accepted five-phased Government 
methodology for addressing the year 2000 problem; (3) this 
approach is also consistent with GAO's guidelines for planning, 
managing, and evaluating year 2000 programs; (4) in carrying 
out its year 2000 strategy, DFAS has assigned accountability 
for ensuring that year 2000 efforts are completed, established 
a year 2000 systems inventory, implemented a quarterly tracking 
process to report the status of individual systems, estimated 
the cost of renovating systems, begun assessing its systems to 
determine the extent of the problems, and started to renovate 
and test some applications; (5) DFAS also established a year 
2000 certification program that defines the conditions that 
must be met for automated systems to be considered year 2000 
compliant; (6) while initial progress has been made, there are 
several critical issues facing DFAS, that if left un-addressed, 
may well result in the failure of its systems to successfully 
operate in 2000: (a) DFAS has not identified in its year 2000 
plan all critical tasks for achieving its objectives or 
established milestones for completing all tasks; (b) DFAS has 
not performed formal risk assessments of all systems to be 
renovated or ensured that contingency plans are in place; (c) 
DFAS has not identified all system interfaces and has completed 
written interface agreements with only 230 of 904 interface 
partners; and (d) DFAS has not adequately ensured that testing 
resources will be available when needed to determine if all 
operational systems are compliant before the year 2000; (7) 
risk of failure in these areas is increased due to reliance on 
other DOD components; and, (8) DFAS is also dependent on 
military services and DOD components to ensure that its systems 
are year 2000 compliant.
10. ``Defense Computers: Issues Confronting DLA in Addressing Year 2000 
        Problems,'' August 12, 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-106
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee continues to push for 
attention to the year 2000 computer problem throughout the 
Federal Government. One critical issue that is being ignored by 
many Federal agencies is the ``ripple effect.'' As GAO 
discovered in this commissioned study, the Defense Logistics 
Agency [DLA] systems are connected to each other, to systems in 
other Federal agencies, and to systems outside the Government. 
If one of these systems fails, it can pass contaminated data to 
connected systems and thereby cause them to also fail. This 
failure can be passed from system to system, like ripples in a 
pond. Conversely, even though DLA may have fixed its own 
systems, its computers can still fail because of contaminated 
data received from outside the agency. The subcommittee has 
raised this aspect of the year 2000 issue for the entire 
Government and for DLA in particular.
    b. Benefits.--If the military does not resolve its year 
2000 computer problem in time, computer systems at the Defense 
Logistics Agency, which supplies the military with supply, 
technical, logistics, and contract services, could malfunction 
or produce incorrect information. The impact of these failures 
could be widespread, costly, and debilitating to important 
logistics functions. This report discusses (1) the status of 
DLA's efforts to correct its year 2000 problems, and (2) the 
appropriateness of DLA's strategies and actions for ensuring 
that the problem will be successfully addressed.
    GAO noted that: (1) DLA has recognized that the year 2000 
problem has the potential to be the largest information 
technology dilemma it has encountered to date and that if not 
successfully resolved, the supply, technical, logistics, and 
contract services that DLA provides to the military services 
could be severely disrupted; (2) to its credit, DLA has already 
assessed the year 2000 impact on its operations, inventoried 
its systems, conducted pilot projects to determine year 2000 
effects on some of its major systems, and developed and issued 
policies, guidelines, standards, and recommendations on year 
2000 correction for the agency; (3) these steps are consistent 
with GAO's guidelines and the Department of Defense's five-
phase approach for planning, managing, and evaluating year 2000 
programs; (4) however, DLA has not yet completed several 
critical steps associated with the assessment phase of year 
2000 correction that are designed to ensure the agency is well-
positioned to deal with delays or other problems encountered in 
the remaining phases; (5) DLA has not been working enough with 
its customers and others who have established system 
connections or interfaces to ensure consistency in handling 
date information passed between systems; (6) the agency has not 
included thousands of field-developed, unique programs as part 
of its year 2000 systems inventory or made these programs part 
of its year 2000 program office's responsibility; (7) these 
unique programs can introduce errors into DLA's automated 
information systems just as easily as those systems that have 
external interfaces with DLA systems; (8) in addressing these 
two issues, DLA can help ensure the success of its efforts to 
correct the systems within its control; (9) DLA has not: (a) 
prioritized the 86 automated information systems that it plans 
on being operational in the year 2000 to ensure that the most 
mission critical systems are corrected first; or (b) developed 
contingency plans to establish the course of action that should 
be followed in the event that any of DLA's mission critical 
systems are not corrected on time; and (10) since DLA 
activities are critical to supporting military operations and 
readiness, GAO believes that the agency should begin 
prioritizing its systems and developing contingency plans so 
that logistics operations can continue even if unforeseen 
problems or delays in year 2000 corrective actions arise.
11. ``Veterans Benefits Computer Systems: Risks of VBA's Year-2000 
        Efforts,'' May 30, 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-79
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee has pushed the Federal 
Departments and agencies to make informed decisions about their 
alternatives in rectifying the year 2000 computer problem. Some 
systems are already compliant. Some systems can be retired as 
no longer necessary. However, most systems will need to be 
fixed. There are several alternatives available: the 
programming code within a system can be changed; the entire 
system can be replaced with a new system; or a ``smart-tool'' 
can provide a work-around for lower cost. The best alternative 
for each system will depend on many factors. Each agency must 
assess every system in order to know the total amount of work 
to be done. The Veterans Benefits Agency [VBA] is a good 
example of this situation. The subcommittee has recommended to 
OMB and the Federal agencies that they perform a complete 
assessment on each system; determine the best alternative for 
each system; and then plan their workload and schedule for 
being year 2000 compliant before the deadline.
    b. Benefits.--Unless timely, corrective action is taken, 
the Veterans Benefits Administration, like other Federal 
agencies, could face widespread computer failures at the turn 
of the century because of the year 2000 problem. In many 
computer systems, the year 2000 is undistinguishable from 1900. 
This could make veterans who are due to receive benefits appear 
ineligible, disrupting the issuance of benefits checks. VBA has 
tried to address this problem, but it can do more. First, the 
year 2000 management office's structure and technical 
capabilities are inadequate. Second, key year 2000 readiness 
assessment processes--determining the potential severity of the 
year 2000 impact on VBA operations, inventorying its 
information systems, and developing contingency plans--have not 
been completed. Third, VBA lacks enough information on the 
costs or potential problems associated with its approach to 
making systems year 2000 compliant. As a result, it cannot make 
informed choices about which systems must be funded to avoid 
disruptions in service and which can be deferred. Addressing 
these problems requires top management attention. Contributing 
to the challenges are the loss of key computer personnel, 
difficulties in obtaining information on whether interfaces and 
third-party products are year 2000 compliant, and delays in 
upgrading systems at VBA data centers.
    GAO noted that: (1) correcting the year 2000 problem is 
critical to VBA's mission of providing benefits and services to 
veterans and their dependents; (2) if not corrected, 
calculations based on incorrect dates could result in 
inaccurate and late payment of benefits to veterans, prompting 
financial stress to millions across the country; (3) VBA has 
acted to address the problem, but can do more; (4) the year 
2000 management office structure and technical capabilities are 
insufficient; (5) key year 2000 readiness assessment processes 
have not been completed; (6) both VBA's initial and revised 
strategies are risky in that without sufficient information on 
the costs or potential problems associated with its approach to 
making systems year 2000 compliant, it cannot make informed 
choices as to which systems must be funded to avoid disruptions 
in service, versus which can be deferred; (7) deficiencies in 
these three areas add risk to an already difficult challenge; 
(8) addressing these problems will require close and continual 
top management attention and leadership; (9) contributing to 
the challenge facing VBA are the loss of key computer 
personnel, difficulties in obtaining necessary information from 
external sources on whether interfaces and third-party products 
are year 2000 compliant, and delays in upgrading systems at VBA 
data centers; (10) the issue of whether third-party products 
are year 2000 compliant is being faced by other Federal 
agencies as well; (11) the Department of Veterans Affairs' 
chief information officer told GAO that VBA will: (a) revise 
its year 2000 strategy to focus on converting the existing 
noncompliant benefits payment systems rather than replacing 
them; and (b) acquire contractual support to assist in managing 
the year 2000 effort and in making necessary changes; (12) 
these are positive developments, and GAO looks forward to 
seeing VBA's plans to implement these steps; and (13) the 
implementation of these recommendations will put VBA in a 
better position to avoid these types of problems in the future.
12. ``Air Traffic Control: Improved Cost Information Needed to Make 
        Billion Dollar Modernization Investment Decisions,'' January 
        22, 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-20
    a. Summary.--In 1981, the Federal Aviation Administration 
[FAA] began an air traffic control modernization program that 
the agency now expects will cost more than $34 billion by 2003. 
The vast majority of these air traffic control capital 
investment projects, both in terms of money and number, involve 
software-intensive information acquisition, processing, and 
display systems. GAO found that the program's cost-estimating 
and accounting practices are badly flawed, resulting in an 
absence of reliable cost and financial information needed to 
make informed investment decisions. This report examines the 
cost-estimating and accounting practices that FAA has used for 
its air traffic control project. GAO discusses whether (1) air 
traffic control cost estimates are based on good estimating 
processes and (2) actual air traffic control project costs are 
being properly captured and reported.
    b. Benefits.--The Federal Aviation Administration has had 
perennially troubled procurement. Procurement issues in general 
and information technology procurement in particular are of 
direct, ongoing concern to the taxpayers. The soundness of 
procurement choices is critical to both the size and quality of 
Government services. This report assisted the subcommittee in 
its review of procurement reforms.
13. ``Acquisition Reform: DOD Faces Challenges in Reducing Oversight 
        Costs,'' January 29, 1997, GAO/NSIAD-97-48
    a. Summary.--The Pentagon considers acquisition reform 
(lowering the cost of acquiring weapon systems) to be one of 
its highest priorities. In an era of shrinking military 
budgets, the Department of Defense plans to use the savings 
from acquisition reform to pay for forces modernization. The 
DOD established a reinvention laboratory in September 1994 to 
help reduce nonvalue-added oversight requirements, thereby 
lowering contractors' compliance costs and the Government's 
oversight costs. Overall, the reinvention laboratory has made 
only limited progress in reducing the cost of contractors' 
compliance with Government regulations and oversight 
requirements. In particular, laboratory participants reported 
little success in addressing 9 of the top 10 cost drivers. DOD 
officials said that the reinvention laboratory tended to 
receive little top-level support from elsewhere in DOD. Other 
factors that limited various projects included statutory and 
non-DOD regulatory requirements, disagreements between DOD and 
contractors over the value of some oversight requirements, and 
difficulties coordinating and obtaining approval for proposed 
changes that involved multiple customers. These results, 
however, should not deter DOD from continuing its efforts to 
reduce nonvalue added oversight requirements. Sustained support 
from DOD leadership is essential. From a budgetary perspective, 
the laboratory results underscore the need for caution in 
estimating cost savings from oversight reform.
    b. Benefits.--The Department of Defense faces serious 
challenges in acquisition reform to reduce costs and redirect 
savings to other higher priority areas. This report outlines 
those challenges and describes the major issues for the 
committee's review. Cooperation between Congress and the 
Department of Defense is crucial if these challenges are going 
to be met successfully.
14. ``Privatization: Lessons Learned by State and Local Governments,'' 
        March 14, 1997, GAO/GGD-97-48
    a. Summary.--A number of State and local governments have 
successfully shifted functions or responsibilities to the 
private sector, usually through contracting or managed 
competition. Lessons learned from these experiences may be 
helpful to the Federal Government as it pursues its own 
privatization efforts. This report discusses privatization 
efforts in the States of Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan, New 
York, and Virginia as well as the city of Indianapolis, IN.
    b. Benefits.--The report assisted the subcommittee in its 
review of Government organization and management. Privatization 
within the Federal Government has occurred only in isolated 
instances, so it is important to look to the State and local 
government where the primary activity is occurring for guidance 
and lessons.
15. ``Cooperative Purchasing: Effects Are Likely to Vary Among 
        Governments and Businesses,'' February 10, 1997, GAO/GGD-97-33
    a. Summary.--The National Performance Review reported in 
1993 that consolidating Government purchasing would benefit the 
taxpayer through greater volume discounts and simplified 
administration. The following year, Congress established a 
cooperative purchasing program to allow State and local 
governments, as well as Indian tribes and Puerto Rico, to 
purchase from Federal supply schedules. However, Congress 
suspended the program in 1996 until its impact could be 
assessed. This report assesses the effects of the cooperative 
purchasing program on these non-Federal Governments and Federal 
agencies and on industry, including small businesses and 
dealers. GAO also assesses the preliminary implementation plan 
prepared by GSA. GAO concludes that although there is little 
risk to Federal interests, the benefits for non-Federal 
Governments and the consequences for industry will likely vary.
    b. Benefits.--The report assisted the committee in its 
review of cooperative purchasing, which was repealed by the 
Congress in 1997.
16. ``Telecommunications Management: More Effort Needed by Interior and 
        the Forest Service to Achieve Savings,'' May 8, 1997, GAO/AIMD-
        97-67
    a. Summary.--Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO 
reviewed efforts by the Department of the Interior and the 
Forest Service to reduce costs by consolidating their 
telecommunications services, focusing on whether: (1) the 
Interior Department has consolidated and optimized 
telecommunications services to eliminate unnecessary services 
and maximize savings; and (2) the Interior Department and the 
Forest Service are sharing telecommunications services where 
they can.
    GAO noted that: (1) to its credit, Interior has undertaken 
a number of telecommunications cost-savings initiatives that 
have produced significant financial savings and helped reduce 
the Department's more than $62 million annual 
telecommunications investment; (2) however, Interior is not 
systematically identifying and acting on other opportunities to 
consolidate and optimize telecommunications resources within 
and among its bureaus or its 2,000-plus field locations; (3) 
the cost-savings initiatives that have been undertaken have 
generally been done on an isolated and ad hoc basis, and have 
not been replicated throughout the Department; (4) GAO did not 
review consolidation and sharing opportunities at all of 
Interior's field locations; (5) however, at the four sites GAO 
visited, GAO found that telecommunications resources were often 
not consolidated or shared, and bureaus and offices were paying 
thousands of dollars annually for unnecessary services; (6) 
Interior does not know to what extent similar 
telecommunications savings may exist at its other offices 
because it lacks the basic information necessary to make such 
determinations; (7) Interior and the Department of Agriculture 
[USDA] may also be missing opportunities to save millions of 
dollars by not sharing telecommunications resources; (8) even 
though the Departments have a 2-year old agreement to identify 
and act on sharing opportunities, little has been done to 
implement this agreement and, accordingly, only limited savings 
have been realized; and (9) moreover, while Interior and the 
Forest Service currently plan to collectively spend up to 
several hundred million dollars to acquire separate radio 
systems over the next 8 years, the Departments have not jointly 
determined the extent to which they can reduce these costs by 
sharing radio equipment and services.
    b. Benefits.--The report has assisted the committee in its 
review of Federal telecommunication programs and procurement of 
those services.
17. ``Courthouse Construction: Better Courtroom Use Data Could Enhance 
        Facility Planning and Decisionmaking,'' May 19, 1997, GAO/GGD-
        97-39
    a. Summary.--Trial courtrooms, because of their size and 
configuration, are expensive to build. The judiciary's current 
policy is, whenever possible, to assign a trial courtroom to 
each district judge. GAO's work in seven cities--Dallas, Miami, 
Albuquerque, Sante Fe, Las Cruces, San Diego, and Washington, 
DC--found that courtrooms were idle, on average, about 46 
percent of the days available for courtroom activities. In 
other words, these courtrooms were vacant 115 days out of 250 
Federal workdays in 1995. Courtrooms were used for trials less 
than one-third of the days, and the use of courtrooms for 
trials varied by location. At the six locations with more than 
one trial courtroom, all courtrooms at any one location were 
seldom used for trials the same day. Senior judges--district 
judges who were eligible to retire but chose to continue to 
perform judicial duties, often at reduced caseloads--used the 
courtrooms assigned to them for trials considerably less 
frequently than did active district judges. The judiciary 
recognizes that it has not developed the data or done the 
research to support its practice of providing a separate trial 
courtroom for every district judge. Although it has taken some 
steps to help it better understand courtroom usage, the 
judiciary has yet to develop a plan to gather data on actual 
use of courtrooms for trials or to systematically quantify the 
latent and other usage factors.
    b. Benefits.--The problems of overspending in courthouse 
construction is serious and longstanding. This report helps 
focus agency attention on the issue.
18. ``Debt Collection: Improved Reporting Needed on Billions of Dollars 
        in Delinquent Debt and Agency Collection Performance,'' June 2, 
        1997, GAO/AIMD-97-48
    a. Summary.--Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO 
reviewed debt collection issues for nontax debts, focusing on: 
(1) reported government-wide data on credit receivables and 
delinquencies for loans managed by the Federal Government; (2) 
the status of efforts at four major credit agencies to resolve 
delinquencies; (3) the dollars collected using various 
legislatively-established collection tools; and (4) ways debt 
collection reporting can be enhanced to evaluate progress in 
collecting debt, and thereby assess agency efforts to meet the 
mandates of the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996. GAO 
did not verify the accuracy of the information provided to it 
by the Office of Management and Budget [OMB], the Financial 
Management Service [FMS], or by the four agencies included in 
the review.
    b. Benefits.--The committee originated the Debt Collection 
Improvement Act, which is the most recent effort to provide 
additional tools to collect debts of the Federal Government. 
This report aided the committee's deliberations at the November 
12, 1997 hearing on this issue.
    In the report, GAO noted that: (1) government-wide 
reporting to Congress indicates that the amount of debt Federal 
agencies are directly managing has remained about $200 billion 
for the 5 years ended September 30, 1996; (2) during that time, 
reported delinquencies for these Federal credit receivables 
varied between $31 billion to $38 billion; (3) at September 30, 
1995, the most recent data available on program-level 
collection performance at the time of GAO's field work, the 
housing agencies were dealing with more than half of their 
delinquent debt through various involuntary collection tools 
and, for almost a third of their delinquent debt, were 
attempting to contact borrowers to get them to resume payments 
on the original or revised terms; (4) the Department of 
Education and its agents were attempting to locate and confirm 
or revise repayment agreements associated with about 70 percent 
of Education's delinquent debt; (5) contacting borrowers with 
delinquent student loans is an especially difficult task since 
they tend to be younger and thus more transient; (6) collection 
on such unsecured loans tends to be more difficult because 
there is no collateral to be seized if borrowers do not pay; 
(7) delinquent student loans accounted for 40 cents of every 
dollar of delinquent nontax debt directly managed by the 
Government and over half of the delinquent Federal credit 
receivable debt; (8) GAO identified several enhancements that 
would facilitate valid assessments of agency collection 
efforts; (9) better data and key analyses are crucial aspects 
of Federal efforts to measure success in accomplishing the 
charter for a more business-like credit management environment 
as set out by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996; (10) 
progress in this area will be especially critical to the 
success of FMS as it assumes new debt collection management and 
reporting responsibilities under the act; (11) such data is 
central to effective day-to-day management in terms of 
selecting collection strategies and deploying available staff 
and contract resources; and (12) among the enhancements are: 
(a) developing a reporting framework to identify and assess the 
status of agency efforts to collect delinquent balances; (b) 
providing more information on how actively, successfully, and 
cost-effectively agencies are using individual collection 
tools; reporting actual delinquent amounts that agencies are 
trying to collect.
19. ``Contract Management: Fixing DOD's Payment Problems Is 
        Imperative,'' April 10, 1997, GAO/NSIAD-97-37
    a. Summary.--The Defense Department has made hundreds of 
millions of dollars in overpayments to contractors, many 
undetected for years, because it uses inadequate computer 
systems requiring manual entry of often erroneous or incomplete 
data and a burdensome document-matching process. Improving 
DOD's payment system will take sustained attention and support 
from the highest levels of management for years to come. 
Although DOD is taking some steps to overcome its payment 
problems, it remains to be seen how effective these steps will 
be. Emulating the best practices used by the private sector 
could help DOD re-engineer its payment system.
    b. Benefits.--The problem of inaccurate disbursements at 
the Department of Defense is an ongoing and serious problem. 
Without improvements in this area, the Federal Government will 
be unable to have audited financial statements pursuant to the 
CFO Act.
20. ``Relocation Travel: Numbers and Costs Reported by Federal 
        Organizations for Fiscal Years 1991 Through 1995,'' June 30, 
        1997, GAO/GGD-97-119
    a. Summary.--Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO 
provided information on the number of civilian employees 
relocated during fiscal years (fiscal year) 1991 through 1995 
and the associated costs of these relocations, focusing on: (1) 
the total number of civilian employees who were relocated at 
the Federal Government's expense; (2) the total cost of these 
relocations to the Government; (3) the agencies that had 
rotational policies requiring their civilian employees to 
relocate; and (4) trends for the number and cost of civilian 
employee relocations during this period.
    b. Benefits.--This survey request was conducted pursuant to 
a requirement of a law passed by the committee. The Travel 
Reform and Savings Act of 1996 was designed to save $320 
million when fully implemented. In order to ensure that such 
savings occur, a baseline of such costs was needed. That is the 
purpose of this report.
    GAO noted that, for fiscal year 1991 through 1995: (1) 97 
Federal organizations reported authorizing about 132,800 
relocations, and 23 other organizations reported making about 
40,200 relocations; (2) a small number of organizations 
accounted for the bulk of the relocations authorized or made; 
(3) while the total numbers of relocations authorized and made 
fluctuated yearly across the organizations that provided data 
for all 5 fiscal years, there was moderate change in these 
totals between fiscal year 1991 and 1995; (4) across the 
organizations that provided data for all 5 fiscal years, the 
total number of relocations authorized decreased by less than 1 
percent (89 organizations) and the total number of relocations 
made increased by about 12.5 percent (19 organizations) from 
fiscal year 1991 to 1995; (5) 97 Federal organizations reported 
obligating about $3.4 billion for relocations, and 23 other 
organizations reported expending about $363 million for 
relocations; (6) a small number of organizations accounted for 
the bulk of the relocation obligations or expenditures; (7) 
across the organizations that provided data for all 5 fiscal 
years, total relocation obligations varied and total relocation 
expenditures increased yearly; (8) there was noticeable change 
in these totals between fiscal year 1991 and 1995; (9) in 
constant 1995 dollars, total relocation obligations increased 
about 16 percent (83 organizations) and total relocation 
expenditures increased about 88 percent (22 organizations) from 
fiscal year 1991 to 1995; (10) for the 22 organizations, this 
increase was due to the Department of the Navy's expenditures; 
(11) excluding the Navy's expenditures, the 21 remaining 
organizations' total expenditures decreased by less than 1 
percent during the period; (12) 15 Federal organizations 
reported that they had mandatory rotational policies requiring 
some of their employees to rotate on a prescribed schedule; 
(13) most of these organizations attributed their policies to 
Federal regulations that limit overseas tours of duty; and (14) 
based on data provided by these 15 organizations, GAO estimated 
that these rotational policies accounted for about 19 percent 
of the total relocations reported as authorized and about 7 
percent of the total relocations reported as made during this 
period.
21. ``Federal Advisory Committee Act: General Services Administration's 
        Oversight of Advisory Committees,'' June 15, 1998, GGD-98-124; 
        ``Federal Advisory Committee Act: Views of Committee Members 
        and Agencies on Federal Advisory Committee Issues,'' July 9, 
        1998, GGD-98-147
    a. Summary of Subcommittee Action.--The subcommittee 
examined the effectiveness of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act [FACA], including administration of the act by the General 
Services Administration [GSA]. As part of the subcommittee 
effort in this area, GAO was asked to review administration of 
FACA by GSA and to inquire into compliance with FACA by Federal 
agencies more generally.
    b. Benefits.--In ``Federal Advisory Committee Act: General 
Services Administration's Oversight of Advisory Committees'' 
GAO reviewed whether the General Services Administration, 
through its Committee Management Secretariat, was carrying out 
its oversight responsibilities under the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act [FACA], focusing on whether GSA had: (1) ensured 
that Federal advisory committees were established with complete 
charters and justification letters; (2) comprehensively 
reviewed each advisory committee annually; (3) submitted annual 
reports on advisory committees to the President in a timely 
manner; and (4) ensured that agencies prepared follow-up 
reports to Congress on recommendations by Presidential advisory 
committees.
    GAO noted that: (1) compared to when GAO last reported in 
1988, little had changed during the period it studied on how 
the Secretariat carried out its FACA responsibilities; (2) with 
963 Federal advisory committees, 57 sponsoring agencies, and 
submissions for each committee during fiscal year 1997, GSA's 
Committee Management Secretariat reviewed a large amount of 
paperwork for the purpose of ensuring that sponsoring agencies 
were: (a) following the requirements placed upon them by FACA; 
and (b) implementing GSA regulations; (3) the Secretariat 
conducted these reviews while performing other duties, such as 
providing formal training to Federal employees who were 
directly involved with the operations of advisory committees 
and collaborating with an interagency committee on advisory 
committee management; (4) nevertheless, the Secretariat was 
responsible under FACA and GSA regulations for ensuring that 
those requirements were all fulfilled; (5) GSA, in consultation 
with the agencies, did not ensure that advisory committees were 
established with complete charters and justification letters as 
required by FACA or GSA regulations; (6) 36 percent of the 
charters and 38 percent of the letters GAO reviewed did not 
contain one or more items required by FACA or GSA regulations; 
(7) GSA did not independently assess, as it conducted the 
annual comprehensive reviews required by FACA, whether 
committees should be continued, merged, or terminated; (8) 
although GSA collected the fiscal year 1996 annual reports, GSA 
officials said they accepted the data in them without further 
review; (9) GAO found this acceptance to be the norm even when 
information in a fiscal year 1996 annual report should 
reasonably lead to further inquiries; (10) GSA did not submit 
most of its FACA annual reports to the President in time for 
him to meet the statutory reporting date to Congress nor did it 
ensure that FACA-required follow-up reports on Presidential 
advisory committee recommendations were prepared for Congress; 
(11) Secretariat officials told GAO that agencies must take 
greater responsibility for preparing complete charters and 
justification letters and committee annual reports for sending 
follow-up reports to Congress; and (12) FACA has given the 
Secretariat responsibilities for ensuring that agencies satisfy 
the requirements for forming and operating advisory committees, 
and the Secretariat is not carrying out these responsibilities.
    In ``Federal Advisory Committee Act: Views of Committee 
Members and Agencies on Federal Advisory Committee Issues'' GAO 
provided information on the views of Federal advisory 
committees and Federal agencies on Federal Advisory Committee 
Act requirements.
    GAO noted that: (1) overall, the views presented by both 
the committee members and agencies GAO surveyed provided useful 
insights into the general operation of FACA as Congress 
explores possible improvements to FACA; (2) the responses of 
committee members to a series of questions, when taken 
together, conveyed a generally shared perception that advisory 
committees were providing balanced and independent advice and 
recommendations; (3) although the percentage differed by 
question, 85 percent to 93 percent of the respondents said 
their committees were balanced in membership, had access to the 
information necessary to make informed decisions, and were 
never asked by agency officials to give advice or make 
recommendations based on inadequate data or analysis or 
contrary to the general consensus among committee members; (4) 
FACA requirements were considered to be more useful than 
burdensome by 10 of the 19 agencies; (5) for the other nine 
agencies, the requirements were considered either as burdensome 
as they were useful or somewhat more burdensome than useful; 
(6) the ceilings on discretionary advisory committees imposed 
by Executive Order 12838 did not deter a majority--12 of 19--of 
the agencies from seeking to establish such committees, 
according to their responses; (7) agencies identified a total 
of 26 advisory committees mandated by Congress that they 
believed should be terminated; (8) this number represented 
about 6 percent of congressionally mandated advisory committees 
in existence during fiscal year 1997; (9) the overall responses 
GAO received from committee members on the issue of public 
participation were mixed; (10) about 27 percent of the 
respondents said that all of their committee meetings were open 
to the public, and 37 percent said that all of their committee 
meetings were closed to the public; (11) advisory committee 
meetings can be closed to the public to protect such things as 
trade secrets or information of a personal nature; (12) most of 
the agencies--16 of the 19--did not believe that FACA had 
prohibited them from soliciting or receiving input from the 
public on issues or concerns of the agency independent of the 
FACA process; (13) still, some agencies were reluctant to get 
input from parties that were not chartered as FACA advisory 
committees because of concern that this could lead to possible 
litigation over compliance with FACA requirements; and (14) 
more explicitly, six agencies reported that they decided not to 
obtain outside input at least eight times during fiscal year 
1995 through fiscal year 1997 because of the possibility of 
future litigation over compliance with FACA.
22. ``Year 2000 Computing Crisis: Potential for Widespread Disruption 
        Calls for Strong Leadership and Partnerships,'' April 30, 1998, 
        AIMD-98-85; ``Defense Computers: Year 2000 Computer Problems 
        Threaten DOD Operations,'' April 30, 1998, AIMD-98-72
    a. Summary of Subcommittee Action.--The subcommittee 
examined the most critical aspects of the Federal year 2000 
problem. In addition to a series of hearings (see 
``Investigations Resulting in Formal Reports''), the 
subcommittee requested assistance from the General Accounting 
Office in assessing the most significant Federal problems.
    b. Benefits.--In ``Year 2000 Computing Crisis: Potential 
for Widespread Disruption Calls for Strong Leadership and 
Partnerships,'' GAO reviewed the year 2000 computing crisis 
facing the Nation, focusing on: (1) the year 2000 risks facing 
the government and Nation; (2) the evolution of the Federal 
Government's year 2000 strategy; and (3) additional actions 
that can be taken by the executive branch to prepare the Nation 
for the year 2000.
    GAO noted that: (1) while progress has been made in 
addressing the Federal Government's year 2000 readiness, 
serious vulner-abilities remain; (2) many agencies are behind 
schedule; (3) at the current pace, it is clear that not all 
mission-critical systems will be fixed in time; (4) much more 
action is needed to ensure that Federal agencies satisfactorily 
mitigate year 2000 risks to avoid debilitating consequences; 
(5) vital economic sectors of the Nation likewise remain 
vulnerable to problems that the change of century will bring; 
(6) moreover, a high degree of information and systems 
interdependence exists among various levels of government and 
the private sector in each of these sectors; (7) these 
interdependencies increase the risk that a cascading wave of 
failures or interruptions of essential services could occur; 
(8) as the change of century grows closer and the breadth of 
year 2000 work that remains has become known, the Federal 
Government's response to the crisis has increased; (9) 
originally, the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] expressed 
a high degree of confidence about the Federal Government's 
ability to meet the year 2000 deadline; (10) more recently, as 
many agencies have reported their limited progress in solving 
the year 2000 problem, OMB has become increasingly concerned; 
(11) accordingly, at the urging of key congressional leaders, 
OMB has improved its response to the crisis by issuing much 
needed policies and increasing its monitoring of agencies; (12) 
most encouraging is the President's recent announcement of the 
establishment of a President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion 
to oversee Federal efforts and promote public/private 
relationships; and (13) the establishment of the President's 
Council on Year 2000 Conversion provides an opportunity for the 
executive branch to take further key implementation steps to 
avert disruptions to critical services.
    In ``Defense Computers: Year 2000 Computer Problems 
Threaten DOD Operations,'' GAO reviewed the Department of 
Defense's [DOD] program for solving the year 2000 computer 
systems problem, focusing on the: (1) overall status of DOD's 
effort to identify and correct its date-sensitive systems; and 
(2) appropriateness of DOD's strategy and actions to correct 
its year 2000 problems.
    GAO noted that: (1) DOD relies on computer systems for some 
aspect of all of its operations, including strategic and 
tactical operations, sophisticated weaponry, intelligence, 
surveillance and security efforts, and routine business 
functions, such as financial management, personnel, logistics, 
and contract management; (2) failure to successfully address 
the year 2000 problem in time could severely degrade or disrupt 
any of DOD's mission-critical operations; (3) DOD has taken 
many positive actions to increase awareness, promote sharing of 
information, and encourage components to make year 2000 
remediation efforts a high priority; (4) however, its progress 
in fixing systems has been slow; (5) in addition, DOD lacks key 
management and oversight controls to enforce good management 
practices, direct resources, and establish a complete picture 
of its progress in fixing systems; (6) as a result, DOD lacks 
complete and reliable information on systems, interfaces, other 
equipment needing repair, and the cost of its correction 
efforts; (7) it is spending limited resources fixing 
nonmission-critical systems even though most mission-critical 
systems have not been corrected; (8) it has also increased the 
risk that: (a) year 2000 errors will be propagated from one 
organization's systems to another's; (b) all systems and 
interfaces will not be thoroughly and carefully tested; and (c) 
components will not be prepared should their systems miss the 
year 2000 deadline or fail unexpectedly in operation; (9) each 
one of these problems seriously endangers DOD chances of 
successfully meeting the year 2000 deadline for mission-
critical systems; and (10) together, they make failure of at 
least some mission-critical systems and the operations they 
support almost certain unless corrective actions are taken.
23. ``FAA Computer Systems: Limited Progress on Year 2000 Issue 
        Increases Risk Dramatically,'' January 30, 1998, AIMD-98-45; 
        ``Air Traffic Control: FAA Plans to Replace Its Host Computer 
        System Because Future Availability Cannot Be Assured,'' May 1, 
        1998, AIMD-98-138R
    a. Summary of Subcommittee Action.--The subcommittee 
closely monitored year 2000 efforts at the Federal Aviation 
Administration throughout the 105th Congress and held two 
hearings on the matter (see ``Investigations Resulting in 
Formal Reports''). The General Accounting Office was 
instrumental in the subcommittee's action.
    b. Benefits.--In ``FAA Computer Systems: Limited Progress 
on Year 2000 Issue Increases Risk Dramatically,'' GAO noted 
that: (1) FAA's progress in making its systems ready for the 
year 2000 has been too slow; (2) at its current pace, it will 
not make it in time; (3) the agency has been severely behind 
schedule in completing basic awareness activities, a critical 
first phase in an effective year 2000 program; (4) for example, 
FAA appointed its initial program manager with responsibility 
for the year 2000 only 6 months ago, and its overall year 2000 
strategy is not yet final; (5) FAA also does not know the 
extent of its year 2000 problem because it has not completed 
most key assessment phase activities, the second critical phase 
in an effective year 2000 program; (6) it has yet to analyze 
the impact of systems' not being year 2000 date compliant, 
inventory and assess all of its systems for date dependencies, 
develop plans for addressing identified date dependencies, or 
develop plans for continuing operations in case systems are not 
corrected in time; (7) FAA currently estimates it will complete 
its assessment activities by the end of January 1998; (8) until 
these activities are completed, FAA cannot know the extent to 
which it can trust its systems to operate safely after 1999; 
(9) the potential serious consequences include degraded safety, 
grounded or delayed flights, increased airline costs, and 
customer inconvenience; (10) delays in completing awareness and 
assessment activities also leave FAA little time for critical 
renovation, validation, and implementation activities--the 
final three phases in an effective year 2000 program; (11) with 
2 years left, FAA is quickly running out of time, making 
contingency planning for continuity of operations even more 
critical; (12) FAA's inventory and assessment actions will 
define the scope and magnitude of its year 2000 problem; since 
they are incomplete, FAA lacks the information it needs to 
develop reliable year 2000 cost estimates; and (13) FAA's year 
2000 project manager currently estimates that the entire 
program will cost $246 million based on early estimates from 
managers throughout the agency.
    In ``Air Traffic Control: FAA Plans to Replace Its Host 
Computer System Because Future Availability Cannot Be 
Assured,'' May 1, 1998, AIMD-98-138R, GAO provided an 
assessment of the Federal Aviation Administration's [FAA] Host 
Computer System [HCS], focusing on: (1) whether HCS has been 
meeting availability requirements; and (2) issues that may 
affect FAA's ability to ensure HCS' availability in the future.
    GAO noted that: (1) air traffic controllers in FAA's 20 en 
route centers control aircraft over the continental United 
States in transit and during approaches to some airports; (2) 
HCS is the key information processing system in FAA's en route 
environment; (3) for the last 3 years, HCS has not met its 
availability requirements; (4) FAA has specified a HCS system 
availability requirement of 99.998 percent; (5) HCS did not 
meet this requirement in 1995, 1996, and 1997, with average 
availabilities of 99.972 percent, 99.984 percent, and 99.982 
percent respectively; (6) it also did not meet it in the first 
2 months of 1998, with an average availability of 99.992 
percent; (7) one key issue affecting HCS' future availability 
is the shortage of critical spare parts; (8) given that HCS 
hardware is approaching the end of its expected life cycle, IBM 
calculated end-of-service dates for each HCS subsystem based on 
failure rates, available spares, engineering support, plant 
maintenance, and project demand; (9) IBM identified eight key 
hardware units, including the main processor, that will reach 
their end-of-service dates on or before December 31, 1999; (10) 
to prolong the life of the current inventory of spare parts, in 
December 1997, FAA implemented a more conservative replacement 
policy for Thermal Conduction Module [TCM] parts; (11) under 
this new policy, TCM parts are not automatically replaced after 
experiencing two minor problems, as they were under the prior 
policy; (12) a second key issue that could affect HCS' 
availability is the year 2000 computer problem; (13) while FAA 
officials expressed confidence that they had resolved date 
dependencies in HCS' operating system and application software, 
IBM reported that it has no confidence in the ability of the 
HCS processor's microcode to survive the millennium date change 
because it no longer has the skills or tools to properly assess 
this code; (14) IBM has therefore recommended that FAA purchase 
new HCS hardware; and (15) because of concerns about the 
availability of spare parts and the year 2000 issue, FAA 
initiated the Host and Oceanic Computer System Replacement 
program to replace all HCS processors in its 20 en route 
centers and training and technical support centers by October 
1999.
24. ``Competitive Contracting: Information Related to the Redrafts of 
        the Freedom From Government Competition Act,'' April 27, 1998, 
        GGD/NSIAD-98-167R
    a. Summary of Subcommittee Action.--The subcommittee worked 
throughout the Congress on legislation that would subject 
Federal agencies to competition when they are engaged in 
nongovernmental activities. In this report, GAO addressed 
congressional concerns on various issues concerning the 
redrafts of H.R. 716 and S. 314, the Freedom From Government 
Competition Act.
    b. Benefits.--GAO noted that: (1) it found that savings 
achieved through the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] 
Circular A-76 competitive process were largely personnel 
savings, the result of closely examining the work to be done 
and reengineering the activities in order to perform them with 
fewer personnel, whether in-house or with contractors; (2) 
despite the difficulties and continuing challenges in 
implementing the Chief Financial Officers Act, the efforts have 
already resulted in marked improvements in Federal financial 
management and, once fully implemented, agencies will be able 
to produce reliable financial information; (3) officials from 
most State and local governments said that monitoring 
contractors' performance was the weakest link in their 
privatization process; (4) the government's lack of complete 
cost data has increased the difficulty of carrying out the 
competitive process, because the government is not able to 
accurately determine the cost of the function or activity it 
plans to compete; (5) there are few constitutional and 
statutory restrictions on those activities that may or may not 
be contracted out by the Federal Government, and the courts 
have provided little additional insight; (6) a best value offer 
is the private-sector offer that is considered to be the most 
advantageous to the government, considering past performance 
and other noncost factors as well as cost--it is not 
necessarily the lowest-priced, acceptable offer; (7) GAO has 
not undertaken any work related to the capacity of the Offices 
of the Inspectors General to oversee the implementation of H.R. 
716; (8) the government's downsizing efforts have been driven 
more by lower appropriations levels than by specific full-time 
equivalent ceilings; (9) governmentwide data are not available 
that would identify the differences between compensation and 
benefits of contractors and Federal employees who used to 
perform their work; (10) OMB is not able to provide data on the 
percentage of commercial activities contracting funds: (a) 
competed under A-76; (b) competed under an informal competitive 
framework; and (c) not competed at all; (11) OMB officials said 
that they were aware of some cases where work has been 
contracted-in as a result of poor contractor performance, but 
they do not collect data to quantify the number of cases where 
this has occurred; (12) as the Federal Government does more 
contracting, proper contract oversight becomes more important; 
(13) current drafts of the bill has reduced the role of OMB in 
determining which functions are inherently governmental; and 
(14) instead, they require agencies to make these 
determinations, subject to judicial review.
25. ``Customs Service: Inspectional Personnel and Workloads,'' August 
        14, 1998, GGD-98-170
    a. Summary of Subcommittee Action.--The subcommittee 
investigated staffing at the U.S. Customs Service. This 
investigation included two hearings on this issue: ``Oversight 
of the Management Practices of the U.S. Customs Service,'' held 
in Long Beach, CA on October 16, 1997; and ``Oversight Hearing 
on the U.S. Customs Service,'' held August 14, 1998 in New 
York, NY. It also included requesting a report by the General 
Accounting Office.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO reviewed certain aspects of the 
Customs Service's inspectional personnel and its commercial 
cargo and passenger workloads, focusing on: (1) the 
implications of any differences between the cargo and passenger 
inspectional personnel levels at selected airports and seaports 
around the United States and those determined by Customs to be 
appropriate for these ports (assessed levels); and (2) any 
differences among the cargo and passenger processing workload-
to-inspector ratios at the selected ports and the rationales 
for any significant differences in these ratios.
    GAO noted that: (1) it was not able to perform the 
requested analyses to identify the implications of differences 
between assessed and actual inspectional personnel levels 
because, as GAO reported in April 1998, Customs had not 
assessed the appropriate inspectional personnel levels for its 
ports; (2) in that report, GAO determined that Customs does not 
have a systematic agencywide process for assessing the need for 
inspectional personnel and allocating such personnel to 
commercial cargo ports; (3) Customs also does not have such a 
process for assessing the need for inspectional personnel to 
process land and sea passengers at ports; (4) while Customs 
uses a quantitative model to determine the need for additional 
inspectional personnel to process air passengers, the model is 
not intended to establish the level at which airports should be 
staffed, according to Customs officials; (5) Customs is in the 
early stages of responding to a recommendation in GAO's April 
1998 report that it establish an inspectional personnel needs 
assessment and allocation process; (6) Customs officials GAO 
interviewed at air and sea ports told GAO that the current 
personnel levels, coupled with the use of overtime, enabled the 
ports to process commercial cargo and passengers within 
prescribed performance parameters; (7) the inspectional 
personnel data that GAO obtained for the selected ports showed 
that at the end of fiscal year 1997, the personnel levels at 
these ports were at or near the levels for which funds were 
provided to the ports; (8) GAO was also not able to perform the 
analyses to identify workload-to-inspector ratios and 
rationales for any differences in these ratios because it did 
not have a sufficient level of confidence in the quality of the 
workload data; (9) GAO identified significant discrepancies in 
the workload data it obtained from Customs headquarters, a 
Customs Management Center [CMC] and two ports; (10) data from 
the New York CMC indicated that these airports processed about 
1.5 million formal entries alone, almost 100,000 entries more 
than the number headquarters had for all entries at these 
ports; (11) workload was only one of several factors considered 
by Customs in the few assessments--which focused on its drug 
smuggling initiatives--completed since 1995 to determine its 
needs for additional inspectional personnel and allocate such 
personnel to ports; and (12) Customs also considered factors 
such as the threat of drug smuggling, budgetary constraints, 
and legislative limitations.
26. ``Military Base Closures: Questions Concerning the Proposed Sale of 
        Housing at Mather Air Force Base,'' October 8, 1998, NSIAD-99-
        13
    a. Summary of Subcommittee Action.--The subcommittee 
monitored disposal of Federal property throughout the 105th 
Congress.
    b. Benefits.--GAO reviewed the proposed negotiated sale of 
1,271 surplus family housing units at Mather Air Force Base, 
California, to the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency 
[SHRA], focusing on whether: (1) the Air Force's attempts to 
obtain competition satisfy requirements of section 203(e)(3)(H) 
of the Federal Property Act to obtain such competition as is 
feasible under the circumstances; (2) the disposal at Mather 
meets the test of a public benefit given that SHRA plans to 
transfer ownership immediately to a private developer; (3) the 
Air Force, contrary to General Services Administration [GSA] 
policy and applicable laws, disclosed the appraised value of 
the family housing property to prospective purchasers; (4) the 
Air Force allowed a developer's representatives to participate 
in negotiations between the Air Force and SHRA; and (5) there 
is evidence that the property has a higher fair market value 
than the proposed sale price.
    GAO noted that: (1) the Air Force's decision to pursue a 
negotiated sale with SHRA rather than compete the sale publicly 
was made early on and was documented in the Air Force's 1993 
official record of decision regarding the disposal of the 
Mather property; (2) the SHRA, as the authorized representative 
of Sacramento County, was the only governmental entity 
authorized to deal with the Air Force and to express an 
interest in acquiring the Mather housing; (3) under these 
circumstances, competition was not possible and, therefore, the 
Air Force satisfied the requirement of the Federal Property Act 
to obtain such competition as is feasible under the 
circumstances; (4) applicable law and regulation do not define 
public benefit; (5) in the Mather case, the proposed public 
benefit was the sale of at least 30 percent of the housing 
units to low- or moderate-income families and the creation of a 
stable home ownership community; (6) available documents 
indicate that neither the Air Force nor GSA, which was 
assisting in the sale, questioned this proposed public benefit 
as a reasonable basis for conducting a negotiated sale; (7) 
moreover, SHRA has entered into an agreement with a private 
developer (who was selected competitively and will obtain 
ownership of the property) that establishes conditions designed 
to protect and promote this public benefit; (8) SHRA further 
agreed to accept and require the developer to adhere to both an 
excess profits clause and a windfall profits clause; (9) GSA 
policy, but not law, prohibits the disclosure of the 
government's appraisal because disclosure makes it more 
difficult for the government to negotiate a higher price; (10) 
records and discussions with the parties involved indicate that 
the Air Force disclosed the value of the property in the first 
GSA-approved appraisal; (11) SHRA's appraisal was much lower; 
(12) this difference caused prolonged negotiations and 
disagreements over the value of the property; (13) a 
representative of the developer did participate as a partner of 
SHRA in negotiations with the Air Force; (14) though not 
inconsistent with law or regulation, this action is contrary to 
the policy in GSA's Excess and Surplus Real Property Handbook; 
(15) there is no concrete evidence that the property has a 
higher fair market value than the proposed selling price; (16) 
the proposed selling price matches the appraised value of the 
most recent GSA-approved appraisal; and (17) according to SHRA 
and its developer, the sale price is reasonable because there 
is substantial financial risk in developing the property.

                    Subcommittee on Human Resources

1. ``Medicare Transaction System: Success Depends Upon Correcting 
        Critical Managerial and Technical Weaknesses, May 16, 1997, 
        GAO/AIMD-97-78
    a. Summary.--Operating nine separate automated information 
systems to process Medicare claims, an increasing volume of 
claims, and an outdated operating system, the Health Care 
Financing Administration [HCFA] announced in 1991 they were 
going to spend approximately $200 million to replace their 
existing systems with a single, unified system, the new 
Medicare Transaction System [MTS]. MTS was to be implemented in 
1998, providing improved service, reducing operating costs, 
facilitating better contractor oversight, and ensuring greater 
protection against waste, fraud and abuse, at the same time 
handling the growing volume of managed care and alternative 
payment methodologies. Due to ongoing changes in the planning, 
development and implementation strategy for MTS since its 
inception, at the request of the Subcommittee on Human 
Resources, GAO initiated a review of the initiative to 
determine to what extent HCFA was managing its interim claims 
processing, whether the agency was using required practices to 
assess the proposed MTS initiative on a cost-benefit basis, 
whether the project was being managed as an investment and 
whether HCFA was applying sound systems development practices 
so as to minimize risk. GAO concluded the original projected 
cost of the MTS project had expanded to close to $1 billion and 
that the hoped for benefits of modernizing its management 
information tool and claims processing function would not be 
achieved unless HCFA was able to overcome serious management 
and technical weaknesses in three areas. (1) improvement of the 
interim Medicare processing environment, correcting the year 
2000 computer related problem, consolidation of existing 
processing sites and conversion from the current nine systems 
to two; (2) management of the MTS project as an investment and 
adherence to practices known to be essential in making good 
technology investment decisions, including preparing a valid 
cost-benefit analysis, looking at viable alternatives, and 
identification of how the proposed project would contribute to 
improvements in agency mission performance; and (3) the 
implementation of sound systems-development practices necessary 
to reduce risk and assure success in the development of system 
requirements and software; agency oversight of the contractor's 
software development strategy, management of the project's 
schedule, and implementation of a program to address risk.
    b. Benefits.--Earlier GAO reports on the MTS project 
highlighted subcommittee concerns and called attention to the 
deficiencies in the planning, development and management of the 
project, resulting in HCFA modifying portions of the original 
MTS plan to address the concerns. This report reinforced the 
view of the subcommittee that the project was not well 
conceived, suffered from shifting requirements, was threatened 
by slippage in due dates and had far exceeded initial cost 
estimates. As a result, HCFA made the decision to sever its 
relationship with the contractor at the completion of one phase 
of the project and determined it needed to reassess the project 
before proceeding further. The report reinforces the view that 
HCFA should implement GAOs recommendations to improve the 
management of its modernization effort and increase the 
assurance that the future approach taken will be cost-
effective, of limited risk, and supportive of the agency's 
mission.
2. ``Gulf War Illnesses: Improved Monitoring of Clinical Progress and 
        Re-examination of Research Emphasis Are Needed,'' Report to the 
        Chairmen and Ranking Minority Members of the Senate Committee 
        on Armed Services and the House Committee on National Security, 
        June 1997, GAO/NSIAD-97-163. (Note: This report responds to the 
        mandate of the fiscal year 1997 defense authorization act. The 
        report was also presented in testimony before the House 
        Subcommittee on Human Resources hearing on June 24, 1997, 
        entitled ``Gulf War Illnesses: Enhanced Monitoring of Clinical 
        Progress and of Research Priorities Needed,'' GAO/T-NSIAD-97-
        190)
    a. Summary.--The 1997 defense authorization act mandated 
the General Accounting Office [GAO] to analyze the 
effectiveness of the Government's clinical care and medical 
research programs relating to Gulf War veterans' illnesses. The 
GAO evaluated: (1) DOD and VA efforts to assess the quality of 
treatment and diagnostic services provided to Gulf War veterans 
and their provisions for follow-up of initial examinations; (2) 
the Government's research strategy to study the veterans' 
illnesses and the methodological problems posed in its studies; 
and, (3) the consistency of key official conclusions with 
available data on the causes of veterans' illnesses.
    The report, prepared by GAO's Special Studies and 
Evaluations Group, found that (1) although efforts have been 
made to diagnose veterans' problems and care has been provided 
to many eligible veterans, neither DOD nor VA has 
systematically attempted to determine whether ill Gulf War 
veterans are any better or worse today than when they were 
first examined; (2) while the ongoing epidemiological research 
will provide descriptive data on veterans' illnesses, 
formidable methodological problems are likely to prevent 
researchers from providing precise, accurate, and conclusive 
answers regarding the causes of veterans' illnesses; and (3) 
support for some official [VA and DOD] conclusions regarding 
stress, leishmaniasis, and exposure to chemical agents was weak 
or subject to alternative interpretations.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO report provides important information 
about the VA and DOD response to the Gulf War veterans' 
illnesses. The report points out that the hundreds of millions 
of dollars in research being spent by the Federal Government to 
identify the causes of the illnesses may result in little 
return, that exposure to toxic agents is the likely cause of 
the illnesses not stress, and that medical treatment outcomes 
on sick veterans is unknown. This information, if acted upon, 
could prevent the waste of millions of dollars and improve the 
chances of helping sick veterans return to better health 
sooner.
3. ``Gulf War Illnesses: Public and Private Efforts Relating to 
        Exposures of U.S. Personnel to Chemical Agents,'' Report to the 
        Ranking Minority Member of the House Veterans Affairs 
        Committee, October 1997, GAO/NSIAD-98-27
    a. Summary.--The GAO report reviewed: (1) the potential 
exposure of U.S. military personnel to chemical warfare agents 
before, during and after the Gulf War, and (2) the 
circumstances surrounding the missing Nuclear, Biological and 
Chemical [NBC] logs maintained by the U.S. Central Command 
(CENTCOM) during the war. The report, prepared by the GAO's 
Military Operations and Capabilities Issues Group, concluded 
that 14 Federal and private organizations (8 Federal and 6 
private) have efforts underway examining potential exposure of 
U.S. troops to chemical agents, and 1 Federal organization was 
examining missing NBC logs.
    b. Benefits.--This GAO report provided some new information 
on organizations examining potential chemical agent exposures 
to Gulf War troops and the missing NBC logs. The subcommittee 
has investigated the illnesses since February 1997, including 
11 hearings, and its report on findings and recommendations has 
been approved by the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight. The committee's investigative record and report deal 
extensively with potential exposure of U.S. troops to chemical 
agents and the missing NBC logs, and this GAO report provides a 
brief summary and overview of those same topics.
4. ``Social Service Privatization: Expansion Poses Challenges in 
        Ensuring Accountability for Program Results,'' October 27, 
        1997, GAO/HEHS-98-6
    a. Summary.--Since 1990, more than half the States surveyed 
have begun to redesign the roles that Government plays in 
providing social services through efforts to assign, or 
contract, some or all aspects of service delivery to private 
entities. The GAO concludes this trend will continue as 
political leaders and program managers seek ways to meet the 
demand for high-quality services at reduced cost. Most States 
reported being satisfied with the number of qualified bidders 
for outsourcing projects. However, the GAO reports State and 
local governments often have little experience in developing 
contracts that adequately specify desired program results and 
performance measures. This deficit raises the question how HHS 
will meet GPRA mandates to measure outcomes and hold grantees 
accountable for program results.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO reports that, under the proper 
conditions, privatization of social services may result in 
improved services and increased cost-effectiveness. The report 
provided the subcommittee, the Congress and the public with 
current information on the extent, problems and prospects for 
privatization of social service delivery systems. This 
information will be useful as welfare reform and other 
initiatives are evaluated through continuing oversight.
5. ``Proprietary Schools: Poorer Student Outcomes at Schools That Rely 
        More on Federal Student Aid,'' June 13, 1997, GAO/HEHS-97-103
    a. Summary.--Proprietary schools are private non-profit 
institutions primarily offering vocational training. The 
General Accounting Office [GAO] found proprietary schools that 
rely more heavily on Federal student aid tend to have poorer 
student outcomes. On average, the greater a school's reliance 
on Federal funds, the lower its students' completion and 
placement rates and the higher its students' default rates. 
Requiring proprietary schools to obtain a higher percentage of 
their revenues from other sources could save millions in 
default claims. Achieving this result, however, would require a 
substantial increase to the current 15 percent threshold, which 
requires that proprietary institutions obtain at least 15 
percent of their revenues from sources other than Federal 
student financial aid programs. Yet raising the threshold 
significantly might cause schools to make changes, such as 
admitting fewer poorer students, that might compromise students 
access to post secondary education.
    b. Benefits.--By identifying the relationship between 
Federal student financial aid and poor student outcomes, GAO 
provides important information to help Congress and the 
executive branch evaluate and develop program performance 
standards, and target student aid programs more effectively to 
achieve their congressionally-mandated purposes.
6. ``Proprietary Schools: Millions Spent to Train Students for 
        Oversupplied Occupations,'' June 10, 1997, GAO/HEHS-97-104
    a. Summary.--Proprietary schools are private, non-profit 
institutions primarily offering vocational training. Under the 
Higher Education Act's title IV programs, the Federal 
Government spends billions of dollars each year on job training 
at proprietary schools, which prepare students for such 
occupations as automobile mechanic, electronic technician, and 
cosmetologist. The General Accounting Office [GAO] found that 
the Federal Government is spending millions of dollars to train 
students for occupations that already have an oversupply of 
workers. In the 12 States GAO reviewed, more than 112,000 
proprietary school students received more than $273 million in 
Federal funds to be trained in fields with projected labor 
surpluses. Several major Federal job training programs, such as 
the Job Training Partnership Act, restrict training to fields 
with favorable job prospects. In passing the Student Right-to-
Know Act, Congress recognized the need to improve the quality 
of information that students receive. The act stops short, 
however, of requiring schools to report employment outcomes of 
recent graduates, such as training-related job placements. In 
addition, no mechanism currently exists to ensure that students 
get important information on local labor market conditions.
    b. Benefits.--The report provides Congress with information 
pointing to the need to expand the Student Right-to-Know Act to 
require proprietary schools to report recent graduates' 
training-related job placements and local job market 
conditions. The report also should help Federal and local 
program officials to target student aid programs toward areas 
of greater job opportunities.
7. ``Job Corps: Need for Better Enrollment Guidance and Improved 
        Placement Measures,'' October 21, 1997, GAO/HEHS-98-1
    a. Summary.--The Job Corps is one of the few remaining 
Federal training programs, serving 68,000 disadvantaged youths 
annually at a cost of about $1 billion. However, the program 
still loses a quarter of its participants shortly after 
enrollment. One reason may be ambiguous eligibility 
requirements, which lead recruitment contractors to enroll 
youths who are ill-suited for what the program has to offer. 
The General Accounting Office [GAO] concludes that the Job 
Corps needs to identify participants who have the commitment, 
the attitude, and the motivation to complete the training and 
benefit from Job Corps' comprehensive and intensive services. 
Furthermore, although the Labor Department uses performance 
measures to make decisions about renewing placement 
contractors, GAO found two of the four measures that Labor uses 
do not provide information needed to assess the performance of 
placement contractors. In addition, related measures on overall 
program performance are flawed. Although the Job Corps reported 
that about 65 percent of its participants are placed in jobs 
and that about 46 percent of these placements are linked to Job 
Corps training, GAO questions the accuracy and the relevancy of 
both of these figures.
    b. Benefits.--As the Department of Labor continues efforts 
to comply with the Government Performance and Results Act, this 
report documents the need for better management of contractors 
and for adherence to statutory eligibility and placement 
criteria for Job Corps participants to ensure continued program 
success.
8. ``Medicare: Need to Hold Home Health Agencies More Accountable for 
        Inappropriate Billings,'' June 1997, (GAO/HEHS-97-108)
    a. Summary.--In spite of repeated reports on the weaknesses 
in the rapidly growing home health program, HCFA's review of 
home health claims decreased substantially in the last 8 years. 
HCFA must enhance program scrutiny of home health payments, but 
it also must develop a preventative approach, making providers 
accountable for the accuracy of their claims.
    b. Benefits.--This report was useful to the subcommittee as 
a resource in conducting an oversight review of the home health 
program, in development of the July 22, 1998 hearing on home 
health and anti-fraud measures, and was used as a reference in 
writing the subcommittee's October 1998 report ``Medicare Home 
Health Services: No Surety In the Fight Against Fraud and 
Waste.''
9. ``Social Security Disability Insurance: Multiple Factors Affect 
        Beneficiaries' Ability to Return to Work,'' January 1998, (GAO/
        HEHS-98-39)
    a. Summary.--With increased emphasis on improving return-
to-work outcomes for people with disabilities, and 
consideration of various reforms, GAO looked at the range of 
factors which best facilitate return to work and long-term 
association in the work force.
    b. Benefits.--The report is useful in the subcommittee's 
ongoing look at the disability insurance program, the rising 
costs, and inability of the current program to successfully 
move people from the rolls into long-term employment based on 
ability, training, flexibility and specific needs. Report 
findings were useful in decision to support H.R. 3433, ``The 
Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Act of 1998,'' which 
proposed program refinements.
10. ``VA Health Care: Persian Gulf Dependents' Medical Exam Program 
        Ineffectively Carried Out,'' Report to the Chairman and Ranking 
        Minority Member, Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, March 
        1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-108)
    a. Summary.--The Persian Gulf Spouse and Children 
Examination Program was implemented under Section 107 of the 
Persian Gulf War Veterans' Benefits Act of 1994. The program 
was established to provide diagnostic testing and medical exams 
to spouses and children of Gulf veterans to determine whether 
an association exists between the illnesses of veterans and 
illnesses or disorders of their family members. The program was 
delayed for 17 months because the VA and members of the Senate 
differed over the best approach to implementation. The program 
began in April 1996 and was set to expire in December 1998. In 
response to Senate requesters, the GAO undertook a study to 
determine program results.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO reports that the program has faced 
numerous implementation problems that have limited its 
effectiveness in providing medical examinations, primarily as a 
result of ineffective outreach programs and communications, 
inadequate planning, scheduling problems, and travel distances 
and costs to reach examination centers. Of the 2,802 requests 
for examinations, VA has been able to complete only 872 (31 
percent) as of January 1998. The GAO recommended that the 
examination process be simplified, offer exams in more places 
and reimburse participants for travel, and enhance the capacity 
of VA headquarters to monitor program implementation by field 
personnel. Congress recently extended the program until 
December 1999, and included some of GAO's recommendations, 
including improved outreach and approving a fee basis for exams 
by local private doctors to reduce travel distances by spouses 
and children. The intent of this program is important and if 
executed properly will provide much-needed benefits for 
families of sick Gulf veterans.
11. ``Gulf War Veterans: Incidence of Tumors Cannot be Reliably 
        Determined From Available Data, Report to the Chairman,'' 
        Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee on Government Reform 
        and Oversight, March 1998, (GAO/NSIAD-98-89)
    a. Summary.--The GAO study concerns the capability of 
Federal Government data systems to reliably report the 
incidence of tumors and other illnesses affecting Gulf 
veterans. The 9-month study, requested by the subcommittee, 
rejects government data that suggests veterans deployed to the 
Gulf war are no sicker than non-deployed veterans. The report 
states: ``Existing government data systems are generally 
limited by poor coverage of the Gulf War veteran population and 
problems of reporting accuracy and completeness.'' In a 1996 
subcommittee hearing, the VA testified that 1,691 Gulf veterans 
in VA data bases had neoplasms and 226 were malignant. The GAO 
identified 14,676 neoplasms in VA data bases and 3,126 were 
malignant, and pointed out that their findings did not include 
reported tumors in DOD data bases, or reported tumors among 
Gulf veterans who sought treatment from private medical experts 
and facilities. GAO stated that among the age group that served 
in the 1990-91 Gulf war, only about 700 cancers would be 
expected. Furthermore, because of the long latency period 
associated with cancer originating from environmental causes, 
it is too early to evaluate the eventual cancer risk among Gulf 
veterans, according to the report. In some cases--for example 
when the immune system is compromised--certain cancers may 
appear within a year, GAO stated.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO report provides important information 
about the VA and DOD response to Gulf war veterans' illnesses. 
Accurate diagnosis, treatment, and compensation for service-
connected disabilities depends in great part on accurate 
medical data and tracking of treatment outcomes. Such 
government data is inaccurate, according to GAO, and there is 
currently no system to determine medical treatment outcomes on 
sick Gulf veterans. Such information, if acted upon by VA and 
DOD, could prevent the waste of millions of dollars, improve 
the chances of helping sick veterans return to better health 
sooner and allow them to lead more productive lives.
12. ``Medicaid: Demographics of Nonenrolled Children Suggest State 
        Outreach Strategies,'' March 1998 (GAO/HEHS-98-93)
    a. Summary.--CHIPS was implemented in 1997 to fund State 
expansion of children's health insurance. The program has $20 
billion to allocate over 5 years and is to target uninsured 
Medicaid eligible children, and any uninsured children newly 
eligible through a State's expanded program.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee is monitoring the 
implementation of the 1997 ``Children's Health Insurance 
Program,'' submission of State plans and the allocation of 
Federal resources. The report is a useful resource in the 
subcommittee's oversight of the program's implementation and 
States' efforts to develop outreach programs.
13. ``Medicare: Many HMOs Experience High Rates of Beneficiary 
        Disenrollment,'' April 1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-142)
    a. Summary.--Because comparative information on the rate of 
disenrollment from the various HMOs is required for 
beneficiaries, understanding the reasons for the high versus 
low rates of disenrollment is useful in exploring member 
satisfaction of managed care versus fee-for-service. In 
addition, disenrollment rates may provide insight to other 
important factors, including the plan's marketing practices (a 
concern of the HHS-OIG), less than generous benefits, higher 
beneficiary costs or poor quality service, or a beneficiary's 
decision to seek a new plan to take advantage of a newer drug 
benefit package. Because data is not uniformly collected, it is 
hard to make meaningful comparisons among plans.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee continues to monitor 
evolving health care delivery mechanisms as viable alternatives 
to fee-for-service in light of the long-term future of the 
Medicare Trust Fund. There is increasing concern that managed 
care can't be trusted to provide all of the needed medical care 
given the specific incentives it embodies. The questions the 
subcommittee continues to look at is whether managed care is 
achieving the goals it purports while assuring quality care, 
whether the advertising is an appropriate representation of 
what they offer, and what the disenrollment numbers mean. The 
report is useful in demonstrating disenrollment rates vary, but 
GAO findings indicate high rates may not necessarily mean 
inferior service.
14. ``Medicare Billing: Commercial System Could Save Hundreds of 
        Millions Annually,'' April 1998 (GAO/AIMD-98-91)
    a. Summary.--HHS-OIG findings in 1991 indicated that HCFA 
could have saved money if it implemented commercially available 
claims auditing systems. GAO concurred in their own report 4 
years later. HCFA began to test a commercial system in Iowa and 
concluded they would develop their own claims auditing edits 
rather than acquire commercial edits, a process that could have 
taken several years. In early 1998 HCFA made the decision to 
acquire commercial claims auditing edits.
    b. Benefits.--This report is a valuable follow-on to the 
subcommittee's February 1, 1996 hearing which, among other 
things, concluded that off-the-shelf claims auditing software 
was not only available, but could save the Medicare and 
Medicaid programs millions. In addition, the subcommittee's 
April 9, 1998 hearing on billing problems and inappropriate 
payments due to the complexity of Medicare's voluminous and 
complex billing codes, found that HCFA could be doing more to 
address these issues. The report confirms the subcommittees's 
earlier findings that commercial audit systems can help HCFA 
address the serious problem of inappropriate billings.
15. ``HMO Complaints and Appeals: Most Key Procedures in Place, But 
        Others Valued by Consumers Largely Absent,'' May 1998 (GAO-
        HEHS-98-119)
    a. Summary.--Managed care complaint and appeal procedures 
are not regulated by any coordinated Federal or State laws, 
although States do have laws regulating or affecting HMOs. Many 
States require HMOs to describe their grievance policies when 
applying for State license. This fact generated pressure on 
Congress to mandate health plan complaint and appeal 
procedures, resulting in several legislative proposals in the 
105th Congress. However, in spite of State attention to the 
requirement for an appeals process in managed care plans, GAO 
concluded that a number of other elements important to the 
appeals process, such as timeliness, the decisionmaking process 
and communication are not consistently available to consumers.
    b. Benefits.--The report is useful in the subcommittee's 
oversight of the Medicare and Medicaid managed care programs by 
providing an overview of State-required appeals processes 
available to plan members Nationwide. These issues have been 
the focal point of hearings and a variety of legislative 
proposals in the 105th Congress as a result of consumer, 
regulatory and provider discussions about the quality of 
managed care as a health care delivery option. The debate has 
also focused on whether managed care potentially threatens 
health care quality by allegedly basing treatment decisions on 
cost factors versus medical necessity. The report is a useful 
resource to policymakers as they consider whether the Federal 
Government must mandate additional appeal and legal recourse 
requirements.
16. ``Medicare: Need to Overhaul Costly Payment System for Medical 
        Equipment And Supplies,'' May 1998 (GAO/HEHS-98-102)
    a. Summary.--GAO concluded again that HCFA is paying more 
than it should for certain DME items. However, the current 
system does not indicate what products Medicare is paying for, 
and often the current fee schedule allowances are out of line 
with current market prices, two factors that limit the agency's 
ability to effectively use their new BBA authority to adjust 
the Medicare fee schedule.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee has monitored DME pricing 
issues for 4 years, encouraging HCFA to use their 
administrative authority to implement necessary changes to 
bring Medicare fees for DME more in line with current 
marketplace prices, including wider use of inherent 
reasonableness and competitive bidding. The report reinforces 
the subcommittee's recommendations to HCFA in previous hearings 
and subsequent meetings with staff, that the agency must 
address the DME payment system to ensure Medicare is not paying 
higher than market rates for some items.
17. ``Blood Safety: Recalls And Withdrawals Of Plasma Products,'' May 
        7, 1998, (GAO/T-HEHS-98-166)
    a. Summary.--This report was requested by the subcommittee 
chairman to determine (1) the amount of plasma products, 
especially Intravenous Immune Globulin [IVIG], that was lost to 
removal from the market (a.k.a. ``recall'') and (2) examine the 
impact on the current shortage of IVIG of reducing the number 
of donors for each plasma product.
    b. Benefits.--The study showed that only a small proportion 
of distributed IVIG (about 1.1 percent) has been removed from 
the market as a result of recalls or withdrawals. Changes to 
reduce the number of donors in each product appear unrelated to 
current product shortages.
18. ``Community Development: Information on the Use of Empowerment Zone 
        and Enterprise Community Tax Incentives,'' June 1998, (GAO/
        RCED-98-203)
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee asked GAO to examine the 
extent to which the Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Community 
[EZ/EC] program's tax incentives were working, in preparation 
for a hearing. The subcommittee also asked GAO to visit some of 
the sites to report on their overall progress.
    b. Benefits.--GAO only found information on the use of tax-
exempt facility bonds. Eight enterprise zone facility bonds 
totaling $17.7 million have been issued for a variety of 
projects. No reliable data were available on use of the EZ 
employment and training credit or the additional $20,000 
expense allowance for depreciable business property. GAO also 
visited six sites and will review their overall progress in a 
separate report.
19. ``California Nursing Homes: Care Problems Persist Despite Federal 
        and State Oversight,'' July 1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-202)
    a. Summary.--Even with Federal and State oversight 
regulations and monitoring activities in place, certain 
California nursing homes have not been and are not sufficiently 
scrutinized to ensure the safety and well-being of their 
residents. GAO indicated that their findings are likely 
indicative of systemic survey and enforcement weaknesses in 
nursing facilities Nationwide, requiring a national response 
through strengthened Federal and State oversight.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee held two hearings in 1997 on 
fraud in nursing homes including billing irregularities for 
dual eligible beneficiaries, inappropriate services and quality 
of care issues. A California nursing home consumer advocacy 
group testified that in spite of Federal and State regulations, 
serious problems existed, a finding that propelled the group to 
develop and implement a quality of care rating system for the 
State's nursing homes. The system is made available to 
consumers and beneficiaries in an effort to help them measure 
quality and make informed consumer choices. The GAO reports 
adds to the findings presented at the subcommittee hearing.
20. ``Medicare: Application of the False Claims Act to Hospital Billing 
        Practices,'' July 1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-195)
    a. Summary.--Improper billings to the Medicare program are 
a serious threat to the long-term viability and fiscal 
integrity of the program. The HHS-OIG and DOJ has increased 
their efforts to recover inappropriate payments from providers. 
The False Claims Act [FCA] was originally enacted to combat 
fraud in government contracts in the Civil War. It was amended 
in 1986 to enhance the government's ability to recover payments 
to other Federal programs such as defense and Medicare. The 
number of civil health care fraud cases before DOJ has 
increased; the False Claims Act allows for significant 
penalties for each false claim, plus damages of up to 3 times 
the amount of the erroneous payment. The increased application 
of the FCA has been a concern to health care providers, 
particularly hospitals, who have argued DOJ is applying it too 
zealously when many of the billing problems are the result of 
complex regulations and conflicting instructions from HCFA. 
They further argue that these billing problems should be 
treated as overpayments and not potential FCA cases.
    b. Benefits.--The report details some of the subcommittee's 
findings from testimony received during the subcommittee's 
April 9, 1998 hearing on the complexity of the Medicare 
program, where provider groups argued that due to complexity of 
the Medicare program, inadvertent errors occur and that use of 
the FCA was an overreach for unintentional billing errors. As a 
result of industry pressure, legislation was introduced in the 
105th Congress which proposed to restrict the use of the FCA, 
requiring distinction between fraud and errors, as well as a 
deminimus threshold requiring that the amount of damages in 
dispute be a material amount for action under the FCA, to 
protect against the use of the FCA for ``small, erroneous 
billings which likely result from human error.'' As a result of 
the subcommittee's hearing, other committee hearings and 
industry pressure, the DOJ agreed to implement new civil health 
care fraud investigation guidelines and to endeavor for 
uniformity in the various judicial districts in lieu of 
legislative changes to FCA.
21. ``Medicare: Concerns With Physicians at Teaching Hospitals [PATH] 
        Audits,'' July 1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-174)
    a. Summary.--Concerned that billing and coding problems at 
teaching hospitals were widespread, HHS-OIG initiated a 
Nationwide investigation of teaching physicians' compliance 
with Medicare coding and billing rules in 1996. The PATH 
(physicians at teaching hospitals) initiative has been 
controversial, generating industry concern and congressional 
scrutiny. GAO's report concludes that the OIG had the legal 
basis to initiate such an investigation, and that even though 
the fact that a teaching physician's physical presence 
requirement had not always been consistently communicated or 
enforced by HCFA, the practitioners knew of the need to 
document their personal involvement in services billed to 
Medicare. GAO recommends that OIG focus on teaching facilities 
known to be problem prone in light of limited resources to 
conduct full scale audits at all 1,200 teaching facilities.
    b. Benefits.--The report is a useful resource to the 
subcommittee which has tracked the HHS-OIG's PATH initiative 
for the last 2 years through briefings with the OIG and 
meetings with the affected health care provider community. The 
PATH audit was raised at the subcommittee's April 9, 1998 
hearing on Medicare complexity (resulting coding and billing 
errors) by the industry who felt it was the inappropriate 
threat of possible use of the False Claims Act which pressured 
facilities into settlements. The industry views the initiative 
as controversial and an example of an overzealous OIG 
initiating audits on billing and documentation standards that 
were not clearly or universally communicated by HCFA.
22. ``VA Health Care: Better Integration of Services Could Improve Gulf 
        War Veterans' Care, Report to Congressional Requesters,'' 
        August 1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-197)
    a. Summary.--Almost 700,000 United States troops served in 
Southwest Asia during the Gulf war. Some of these veterans 
subsequently reported an array of symptoms that they attributed 
to their service in the Gulf, including fatigue, skin rashes, 
headaches, muscle and join pain, memory loss, shortness of 
breath, sleep disturbances, gastrointestinal conditions, and 
chest pain. The absence of data on the health status of 
veterans who served in the Gulf war--including both baseline 
information and post-deployment status information--has, 
however, greatly complicated the epidemiological research on 
the causes of Gulf war illnesses. In response to congressional 
requesters, the GAO undertook a study to determine how the VA 
diagnoses, treats, and monitors sick Gulf veterans, and how 
veterans regard the VA's response to their health problems.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO report states that the VA has not 
fully implemented an integrated diagnostic and treatment 
program to meet the health care needs of Gulf war veterans. As 
a result, some veterans may not receive a clearly defined 
diagnosis for their symptoms, and others may be confused by the 
diagnostic process, thus causing frustration and 
dissatisfaction. GAO recommends that the VA uniformly implement 
a health care process that coordinates diagnoses, treatment, 
treatment effectiveness, and periodic reevaluation of veterans 
whose illnesses remain undiagnosed. If these recommendations 
are acted upon by the VA, the results could help contribute to 
improved health care for Gulf veterans and help restore 
confidence among Gulf veterans in the VA health care system.
23. ``Medicare Home Health Benefit: Impact of Interim Payment System 
        and Agency Closures on Access to Services,'' September 1998, 
        (GAO/HEHS-98-238)
    a. Summary.--While the interim payment system [IPS] was 
controversial in the home health industry, GAO concluded it 
nevertheless did not affect the capacity of the home health 
industry to provide services or hinder beneficiary access to 
care. The effect of IPS has been to lower costs. GAO found the 
impact of IPS varies from agency to agency which may make it 
harder for high cost patients to access care as easily. GAO 
stated that given these program changes and agency closures 
(concentrated in four States), there is still a net gain in the 
number of home health agencies Nationwide serving Medicare 
beneficiaries.
    b. Benefits.--The report was an important resource to the 
subcommittee in reviewing relevant information for the 
subcommittee's report ``Medicare Home Health Services: No 
Surety in the Fight Against Fraud and Waste,'' as the interim 
payment system directly affected the ability of some home 
health agencies to acquire surety bonds as required by the BBA, 
a factor that was overlooked by the Health Care Financing 
Administration in the implementation of the surety bond 
regulation.
24. ``Chemical Weapons: DOD Does Not Have a Strategy to Address Low-
        Level Exposures, Report to Congressional Requesters,'' 
        September 1998, (GAO/NSIAD-98-228)
    a. Summary.--The GAO study concerns the possible exposure 
of United States troops to low-levels of chemical warfare 
agents in the Gulf region in the weeks after the Gulf war 
cease-fire, along with chemical warfare prophylaxis, vaccines, 
oil well fire emissions, and other battlefield effluents, is 
suspected to be a contributing factor in the illnesses of many 
Gulf war veterans. Approximately 100,000 or more troops may 
have been exposed to low levels of chemical warfare agents when 
Iraqi munitions bunkers at Khamisiyah were detonated by Army 
engineers resulting in release of nerve agents into the 
atmosphere. Members of the Senate Appropriations, Governmental 
Affairs, and Armed Services committees raised concerns 
regarding the adequacy of DOD policy, doctrine, and technology 
to identify, prepare for, and defend troops against the 
possible adverse effects of exposure to low-level chemical 
warfare agents, and requested the GAO to conduct a study.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO report found that the DOD does not 
have an integrated strategy to address low-level exposures to 
chemical warfare agents. Specifically, it has not stated a 
policy or developed a doctrine on the protection of troops from 
low-level chemical exposures on the battlefield. DOD's current 
doctrine is focused on maximizing the effectiveness of troops 
in a lethal nuclear-biological-chemical environment. Past 
research indicates that low-level exposures to some chemical 
agents may result in adverse short-term performance and long-
term health effects. These are important findings which, if 
acted upon by DOD, could help protect veterans of future wars 
from illnesses such as those now affecting the health and 
productivity of many veterans of the Gulf war.
25. ``Blood Plasma Safety: Plasma Product Risks Are Low If Good 
        Manufacturing Practices Are Followed,'' September 1998, (GAO/
        HEHS-98-205)
    a. Summary.--The subcommittee chairman asked GAO to 
undertake a study to compare (1) the risk of incorporating an 
infectious unit of plasma into further manufacturing from 
volunteer versus paid plasma donors for Human Immunodeficiency 
Virus [HIV], Hepatitis B Virus [HBV] and Hepatitis C Virus 
[HCV]; (2) the impact on frequent and infrequent plasma product 
users when pooling large numbers of plasma donations into 
manufactured plasma products; (3) assess the safety of end 
products from plasma after they have undergone further 
manufacturing and inactivation steps to kill or remove viruses; 
and (4) examine the recent regulatory compliance history of 
plasma manufacturers.
    b. Benefits.--To determine the risks of viral infection 
posed by paid donors of plasma and to determine the extent of 
good manufacturing practice compliance problems in the plasma 
industry.
26. ``JOBS CORPS: Links With Labor Market Improve But Vocational 
        Training Performance Overstated,'' October 1998, (GAO/HEHS-99-
        15) and the related corresponding report ``JOB CORPS: Need for 
        Better Enrollment Guidance and Improved Placement Measures,'' 
        October 21, 1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-1)
    a. Summary.--These reports were requested by the 
subcommittee chairman, and are used as the basis for the 
subcommittee's investigation of the Job Corps operational 
components. The operational components are recruitment, 
vocational training, and job placement.
    b. Benefits.--These reports identified programmatic 
weaknesses including better recruitment criteria, accurate 
reporting of vocational training completers, accurate reporting 
of training related placements, and the need to justify the use 
of sole source contractors for vocational training.
27. ``Elementary and Secondary Education: Flexibility Initiatives Do 
        Not Address Districts' Key Concerns About Federal 
        Requirements,'' September 1998, (GAO/HEHS-98-232)
    a. Summary.--This report was requested by the subcommittee 
chairman, and is used as the basis for the subcommittee's 
investigation of Federal requirements on local school 
districts.
    b. Benefits.--To determine what, if any, flexibility 
provisions are available to local school districts from Federal 
school requirements.
28. ``Medicare Computer Systems: Year 2000 Challenges Put Benefits and 
        Services in Jeopardy,'' September 1998, (GAO/AIMD-98-284)
    a. Summary.--GAO concluded that the Health Care Financing 
Administration and it's multiple contractors are severely 
behind schedule in repairing, testing and implementing their 
mission-critical systems supporting the Medicare program which 
services 35 million beneficiaries and is expected to process 
close to 1 billion claims in 2000. HCFA has not developed their 
overall schedule prioritizing various Y2K tasks. They have not 
scheduled end-to-end testing across the complex range of 
multiple systems, nor has any contingency plan been identified.
    b. Benefits.--The report facilitates the subcommittee's 
continuing oversight of the Health Care Financing 
Administration's attention to and progress with ensuring their 
internal and external systems computer systems are Y2K 
compliant. The subcommittee held hearings on the Health Care 
Financing Administration's information system needs in 1996 and 
1997 and has met with the agency regularly regarding their 
progress in addressing the problem.
29. ``HIV-AIDS Drugs: Funding Implications of New Combination Therapies 
        for Federal and State Programs,'' October 1998 (GAO/HEHS-99-2)
    a. Summary.--While funding for the current combination drug 
therapy has increased, the demand has also risen. Some AIDS 
Drug Assistance Programs [ADAP] have nevertheless had to 
restrict enrollment or limit benefits do to their inability to 
accommodate demand.
    b. Benefits.--The report is a resource to the subcommittee 
in it's continuing oversight and review of the cost and funding 
implications of the new drugs therapies, allocation of Federal 
resources to all populations infected with HIV-AIDS, and 
equitable access to treatment. The subcommittee found in its 
February 20, 1998 hearing that emerging high-risk populations 
of HIV-AIDS infected persons were less successful in accessing 
successful treatments due to high costs, increased demand and 
finite resources.

   Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources, and 
                           Regulatory Affairs

1. ``Air Pollution: Limitations of EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Model 
        and Plans to Address Them,'' September 15, 1997, GAO/RCED-97-
        210
    a. Summary.--The Clean Air Act requires that the 
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] establish national air 
quality standards and that the States develop strategies for 
reaching and maintaining these standards. In order to evaluate 
these strategies, the EPA uses an intricate computer model 
series called the MOBILE series which estimates and predicts 
motor vehicle emissions. Because the data produced by this 
model are erroneous to some degree, and because these data are 
used in determining vital EPA policy, Congressman Joe Barton 
asked the General Accounting Office [GAO] to describe the major 
limitations of the model and the EPA's plans for improving it.
    EPA and a group of stakeholders have identified 14 major 
limitations in the current MOBILE model in use. These include 
the fact that some emissions-producing activities by vehicles 
are not accounted for, and many emissions-producing activities 
may be overestimated or underestimated because of failure to 
account for various new factors. The EPA, however, with only a 
few exceptions, plans to address each of these limitations in 
the next revision to the MOBILE model.
2. ``Department of Energy: DOE Needs to Improve Controls Over Foreign 
        Visitors to Weapons Laboratories,'' September 25, 1997, GAO/
        RCED-97-229
    a. Summary.--Since the end of the cold war, the Department 
of Energy [DOE] has entertained an increasing number of foreign 
visitors interested in its cooperative energy research. As 
directed by the Committee on National Security in House Report 
No. 104-563, GAO studied the DOE's controls over foreign 
visitors to its three nuclear weapons laboratories. GAO 
examined DOE's procedures for reviewing the backgrounds of 
foreign visitors, its security controls for limiting foreign 
visitors' access within its laboratories, and its 
counterintelligence programs for mitigating the potential 
threat posed by foreign visitors.
    GAO found that the procedures for obtaining background 
checks and controlling the dissemination of sensitive 
information are not entirely effective. Procedures for 
effective screening are in place, but they are poorly enforced 
and may overlook the leaking of sensitive information to 
visitors with potential connections to foreign intelligence. 
Although DOE and laboratory officials recognize these problems 
and are taking actions to address them, they have not yet done 
so fully.
3. ``National Weather Service: Modernization Activities Affecting 
        Northwestern Pennsylvania,'' September 26, 1997, GAO/AIMD-97-
        156
    a. Summary.--As requested by Congressmen F. James 
Sensenbrenner, Jr. and Phil English, GAO investigated the 
National Weather Service's [NWS] modernization of the Erie, PA 
weather service office [WSO]. NWS has ``spun down'' the Erie 
WSO, which means that the WSO is ``no longer providing 
operational services to the public.''
    The spin-down--the termination of the Erie WSO's 
operational services--began in August 1994. In 1995, the 
Department of Commerce issued a report on problems in several 
weather service offices. There had been concerns about the Erie 
WSO since June 1994, however, and the spin-down was continued 
after the Department's report because the NWS believed that 
transferring the weather warning system to other stations would 
provide the area with the best service. Since the spin-down, 
services have continued as before at the Erie WSO. Problems 
since the spin-down have mainly concerned NWS' service to 
Erie's airport and the timeliness of small-craft advisories for 
Lake Erie. The spin-down has not had a detrimental effect on 
service in northwestern Pennsylvania, although GAO found that 
there has been a problem with WSO's ability to predict lake-
effect snow. Yet, GAO found that other lake communities receive 
better service than the Erie area does, and NWS Office of 
Meteorology has recommended that the Erie WSO acquire a radar 
to improve its weather service to the area.
4. ``Consumer Product Safety Commission: Better Data Needed to Help 
        Analyze Potential Hazards,'' September 29, 1997, GAO/HEHS-97-
        147
    a. Summary.--Senator John McCain and Congressman Thomas 
Bliley asked GAO to examine the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission's [CPSC] allocation of resources, including the 
selection process for projects, the validity of the risk 
assessment and cost-benefit analysis, and the release of 
manufacturer-specific information prior to its release to the 
public.
    GAO found that the CPSC has established criteria for 
selecting projects based on product-related injuries, 
illnesses, and deaths. But the agency's data on both internal 
agency efforts and external product hazards is insufficient to 
assess the impact and cost of each project. Also, CPSC's risk 
assessment and cost-benefit analysis data is insufficient to 
support thorough application of these techniques. The CPSC, 
according to industry and legal cases, is following statutory 
requirements concerning the release of manufacturer-specific 
information, though industry representative and consumer 
groups, among others, have expressed dissatisfaction with these 
requirements.
5. ``U.S. Agricultural Exports: Strong Growth Likely But U.S. Export 
        Assistance Programs' Contribution Uncertain,'' September 30, 
        1997, GAO/NSIAD-97-260
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congressman John K. Kasich, 
GAO reviewed the potential impact of the 1996 Federal 
Agriculture Improvement and Reform [FAIR] Act on U.S. 
agricultural exports and the continued relevance of U.S. 
agricultural export assistance programs. FAIR reduces much of 
the government regulation involved in the production of bulk 
items, allowing farmers more flexibility in responding to 
domestic and international market conditions.
    GAO found that FAIR will make a small contribution to 
increased U.S. agricultural exports. Much of the increase in 
agricultural exports will likely result from East and Southeast 
Asian countries. Also, the 1994 Uruguay Round trade agreements' 
liberalization of agricultural markets will allow farmers to 
export more to a larger number of nations.
    U.S. agricultural export assistance programs have not 
increased aggregate employment or output, or reduced trade and 
budget deficits. While these programs may contribute income and 
employment benefits, there is little evidence of them doing so.
    GAO evaluated other nations' agricultural export programs 
and reviewed U.S. trade negotiating objectives. However, the 
lack of openness in competitor nations' agricultural assistance 
programs made it difficult to determine how the U.S. programs 
compare to foreign ones. GAO reported that some private and 
public officials have said that the U.S. programs could supply 
leverage in negotiating for the 1999 World Trade Organization 
agricultural talks, but others have questioned their relevance 
for future negotiations. GAO suggests that Congress consider 
not continuing the programs, as well as redefining their focus, 
the next time these programs are up for review.
6. ``401(k) Pension Plans: Loan Provisions Enhance Participation But 
        May Affect Income Security for Some,'' October 1, 1997, GAO/
        HEHS-98-5
    a. Summary.--At the requests of Senators Charles E. 
Grassley and Judd Gregg, GAO examined (1) the effects of 
pension-plan borrowing on participation in and contributions to 
401(k) pension plans, (2) the profiles of those who borrow 
money from their pension accounts, and (3) the potential 
repercussions of borrowing from pension accounts.
    GAO found that employees are more likely to participate in 
pension plans that allow borrowing. Those who have plans that 
allow borrowing contribute 35 percent more to their accounts. 
Those individuals who are more likely to borrow from their 
pension plans include Blacks, Hispanics, lower-income people, 
people who have been turned down for a loan, and employees who 
participate in other pension plans.
    Borrowing provisions in pension plans may lead to lower 
retirement incomes. However, they may also encourage employees 
to save more for their retirement. Borrowing for education or 
training could increase an employee's income and, thus, his/her 
retirement income. Also, the fact that borrowing from a pension 
plan is an option may encourage many to participate, and 
pension accounts--even those having been borrowed from--add 
more to retirement income than no pension savings at all.
7. ``IRS Records: Inconsistencies Between Statutes Affect Records 
        Appraisal,'' October 2, 1997, GAO/GGD-98-4
    a. Summary.--Congressman Bill Archer, chairman of the 
Committee on Ways and Means, and Congresswoman Nancy L. 
Johnson, chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on 
Oversight, asked GAO to evaluate certain aspects of the IRS and 
how it manages its records. The Internal Revenue Code protects 
IRS records containing tax return information from disclosure 
to unauthorized persons. GAO was asked to determine how IRS 
applies these restrictions on unauthorized disclosure when they 
review and take inventory of their records. The Federal Records 
Act [FRA] requires IRS to prepare disposition schedules for its 
records and to submit the schedules to the National Archives 
and Records Administration [NARA] for approval. Therefore, NARA 
is allowed access to IRS records for appraisal purposes. 
Because of this, GAO was asked to evaluate how IRS carries out 
its records management program to see if disclosure protections 
are observed by NARA.
    In 1995, NARA reviewed the IRS records management program 
and found that the IRS met most requirements, but not all. 
Certain management and policy documents protected by the 
Internal Revenue Code were not inventoried or scheduled for 
disposition as required, and some were stored in unsatisfactory 
conditions. GAO's investigation confirmed these problems, but 
also noted considerable progress to correct these deficiencies. 
Some other problems uncovered by NARA's review include NARA's 
inability to appraise certain IRS records for historical value 
because of the disclosure restrictions. GAO reported that this 
issue was still unresolved at the time of their review. 
Afterwards, NARA and IRS worked out a test method to be used 
when appraising the historical value of a document. NARA and 
IRS set up a system of ``blind review'' whereby IRS officials 
describe the nature of a record to NARA so they may decide if 
it has any historical value.
    At the time of GAO's review, they found a large backlog of 
records waiting to be inventoried. At four of the six 
locations, these uninventoried documents were found to be 
stored in an unorganized fashion and under poor conditions.
    IRS recognizes their deficiencies in properly managing the 
inventory and storage conditions of their records. They took 
steps in 1996, along with NARA, to improve their records 
management program. In May 1997, NARA reported that the IRS has 
taken action on 47 of NARA's 58 recommendations. IRS said that 
they are making progress on the other recommendations.
8. ``OTC Derivatives: Additional Oversight Could Reduce Costly Sales 
        Practice Disputes,'' October 2, 1997, GAO/GGD-98-5
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed sales practices for over-the-
counter [OTC] derivatives, mortgage-backed securities, and 
structured notes. Representative Edward J. Markey requested 
that GAO report on the applicable Federal requirements, end-
user satisfaction with dealer sales practices, end-user and 
dealer views on the nature of their relationship, and actions 
taken by market participants and regulators to address sales 
practice issues. Mortgage-backed securities and structured 
notes were included in the review because of the prevalence of 
disputes and concerns in these areas.
    Included in this report are GAO's recommendations to the 
President's Working Group on Financial Markets to develop a 
formal mechanism for collecting data on sales practice issues 
and to assist dealers and end-users in resolving their 
disagreements over OTC derivatives transactions. GAO also 
recommended that the Federal Reserve update its management to 
better address sales practice issues and that the Securities 
and Exchange Commission [SEC] and the Commodity Futures Trading 
Commission [CFTC] examine the extent to which securities firms 
are following the sales practice provisions of voluntary 
guidance related to OTC derivatives.
9. ``Hazardous Waste: Remediation Waste Requirements Can Increase the 
        Time and Cost of Cleanups,'' October 6, 1997, GAO/RCED-98-4
    a. Summary.--The Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] has 
estimated that it will cost hundreds of billions of dollars to 
clean up the tens of thousands of sites that are contaminated 
with hazardous waste from past and current industrial 
activities. At the request of Senators Trent Lott, John Chafee, 
and Robert Smith, GAO examined (1) the effect of the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act's requirements on waste 
generation during cleanups and (2) the actions the EPA has 
taken to address any impediments to cleanups.
    GAO found that three requirements under the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act can have negative effects when 
they are applied to waste from cleanup activities: land 
disposal restrictions, minimum technological requirements, and 
requirements for permits. When these requirements are applied 
to remediation waste such as sludge, debris, and contaminated 
soil or groundwater that is moved during cleanups, the parties 
involved must perform far more stringent cleanups than the EPA, 
the States, industry, or national environmental groups deem 
necessary to address the level of risk. As a result, the time 
and cost of the cleanups are increased, with little or no 
environmental benefit.
10. ``Consumer Price Index: More Frequent Updating of Market Basket 
        Expenditure Weights Is Needed,'' October 9, 1997, GAO/GGD/OCE-
        98-2
    a. Summary.--The most important measure of consumer prices 
and inflation in the United States is the consumer price index 
[CPI], according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS] which 
publishes this index. Since 1940, the BLS has only made 
revisions once a decade to the ``market basket'' of goods and 
services included in the CPI which represent what consumers 
buy. Congressman Henry Gonzales requested that GAO examine the 
possibilities for more frequent revisions. Instead of examining 
the whole process of making major revisions, GAO explored the 
feasibility of conducting more frequent expenditure weight 
adjustments.
    The professional opinion of the 10 individuals consulted 
supported updating the market basket's expenditure weights more 
often than every 10 years. Of these 10 individuals, 2 were 
former BLS officials, 8 others had conducted research on the 
CPI, including 4 who were members of the Advisory Commission to 
Study the CPI (referred to as the Boskin Commission). The 
individuals consulted agreed that 10 years between updates was 
too long to reflect ``current'' consumer spending. How often 
these updates needed to occur, however, was not agreed upon. 
Other major industrial countries update their consumer price 
indexes more often than the United States, supporting the 
opinions of the consulted individuals. These other 
industrialized countries, however, sometimes based their 
updates on national data not directly collected from consumers, 
thus making it incomparable with U.S. data.
    GAO estimated that updating expenditure weights would be 
significantly less costly than conducting major revisions. GAO 
also projected changes in the CPI of between zero and 0.2 
percentage point as a result. BLS, however, listed several 
reasons for not updating the expenditure weights between major 
CPI revisions, including lack of empirical evidence to support 
more frequent updates, lack of guidance on how often to conduct 
the updates, and lack of funds. Recent statements from the BLS 
Commissioner, however, suggest that the BLS will be willing to 
conduct more frequent revisions in the near future.
11. ``U.S. Department of Agriculture: Information on the Condition of 
        the National Plant Germplasm System,'' October 16, 1997, GAO/
        RCED-98-20
    a. Summary.--GAO reported on the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's [USDA] National Plant Germplasm System's [NPGS] 
germplasm \16\ collection and surveyed the members of the 40 
Crop Germplasm Committees [CGC] to determine whether the 
collection is sufficient to keep the Nation's agricultural 
productivity high.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Germplasm is ``the material in seeds or other plant parts that 
controls heredity.'' Germplasm with diverse genetic characteristics is 
needed for high levels of agricultural productivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    GAO found that while over half of those surveyed from the 
CGCs believed the genetic diversity contained in the NPGS' 
collections of germplasm is enough to reduce crop 
vulnerability, the acquisition of more germplasm should be a 
priority when more funding becomes available. Either 
information on plant traits that is important for the use of 
germplasm is not collected frequently enough, or it has not 
been developed yet. The preservation needs of the NPGS' 
germplasm collection have not been fully met, and only a small 
amount of testing has occurred at half of the major germplasm 
locations.
12. ``Aviation Safety: FAA Oversight of Repair Stations Needs 
        Improvement,'' October 24, 1997, GAO/RCED-98-21
    a. Summary.--In response to an inquiry made by Senators 
Wendell H. Ford and Ron Wyden, GAO conducted an examination of 
the Federal Aviation Administration's [FAA] oversight of the 
aviation repair station industry. The following questions were 
addressed in their report: (1) What is the nature and depth of 
oversight which FAA personnel have on repair stations? (2) Once 
deficiencies are recognized in repair stations, how well does 
the FAA follow up on inspections to make sure that these 
deficiencies are corrected? (3) What steps have been taken to 
improve their oversight of repair stations? Also contained in 
GAO's report are their recommendations to the Secretary of 
Transportation for improving FAA's oversight over repair 
stations.
    The results of GAO's report found that FAA has been meeting 
its inspection goals and requirements on repair stations. Most 
inspectors surveyed agreed that their compliance with 
inspection standards was either good or excellent. However, 
over half of those inspectors agreed that there are areas where 
they could improve. FAA relies on individual inspectors at most 
domestic repair stations, but in more complex facilities they 
depend on teams to assess compliance. FAA has realized that 
group inspections have proven to be more thorough, therefore 
they are moving toward a system that would include this type of 
inspection at other facilities.
    GAO found that it was impossible to assess how well FAA 
corrects the problems uncovered in routine investigations. The 
investigators are not instructed to keep documentation, 
therefore, GAO had nothing to evaluate. Documentation is 
important because FAA is currently spending $30 million on a 
reporting system that is designed to use documentation. This 
system will use documentation to make inspection decisions that 
will help allot resources to deal with the areas that pose the 
greatest risk to aviation safety.
    FAA currently has three efforts under way to improve its 
oversight over repair stations. The first effort includes 
revising regulations governing repair station operations. 
Another involves revision of regulations governing the 
qualifications of repair station personnel. However, the 
revision of regulations pertaining to repair station operations 
have been repeatedly delayed since 1989. The third effort that 
has been taken by FAA includes the addition of more FAA 
inspectors, which also includes dedicating more resources to 
the inspection repair stations.
    GAO made the following recommendations to the Secretary of 
Transportation: (1) expand the use of teams in repair station 
inspections; (2) specify what documentation should be kept on 
file to record complete inspection results and follow-up 
actions; (3) monitor the implementation of the strategy for 
improving the quality of the data to be used in FAA's new 
management information system; and (4) expedite the efforts to 
update regulations and set deadlines by which the updates must 
be completed.
13. ``Inspectors General: Contracting Actions By Treasury Office of 
        Inspector General,'' October 31, 1997, GAO/OSI-98-1
    a. Summary.--Senator Susan Collins requested that GAO 
investigate the circumstances surrounding the Department of the 
Treasury's award of sole-source contracts--one to Sato & 
Associates, for a management study of the Treasury's Office of 
Inspector General [OIG], and one to Kathie M. Libby (KLS). 
Senator Collins also asked that GAO determine the nature and 
purpose of trips to California made by Treasury Inspector 
General [IG] Valerie Lau since her appointment to the position.
    GAO found that Ms. Lau requested the sole-source contracts 
on the basis of unusual and compelling urgency because the 
management study would assist her as a new appointee to quickly 
make reassignments in her senior executive ranks and to marshal 
resources under her control. Although there is some support for 
her position, GAO concluded that there was insufficient urgency 
to warrant limited competition. There is evidence that suggests 
that the proposal from Sato & Associates was artificially high. 
The primary reason advanced by Ms. Lau for the urgency in 
granting the KLS contract was the need to have the consultant 
provide a briefing at an OIG management conference to be held a 
few days after contract award. GAO concluded that the Office of 
the Inspector General was irresponsible in its awarding of 
contracts, as well as in its management of the procurement 
process and in its oversight of performance under the contract. 
GAO also found that although it was alleged that Ms. Lau's 
government-funded trips to California were taken for personal 
reasons, all five trips were scheduled for work-related 
reasons.
14. ``Department of Energy: Information on the Tritium Leak and 
        Contractor Dismissal at the Brookhaven National Laboratory,'' 
        November 4, 1997, GAO/RCED-98-26
    a. Summary.--As requested by Congressmen F. James 
Sensenbrenner, Jr., and George E. Brown, Jr., GAO investigated 
the leak of tritium--a radioactive element--from the Brookhaven 
National Laboratory [BNL], and the termination of BNL's 
operating corporation, Associated Universities, Inc [AUI], 
which was owned by the Department of Energy [DOE]. GAO examined 
the events leading up to the tritium leak, why they occurred, 
and why the Secretary of Energy terminated DOE's contract with 
AUI.
    GAO found that Brookhaven employees relied on incomplete 
data analyses of the water supply in the years leading up to 
the discovery of the leak. DOE agreed to install monitoring 
wells in the Brookhaven area in 1994, though Brookhaven 
officials delayed the installation because other activities 
were deemed more important at the time. Once the wells were 
completed in 1996, high tritium levels were found in the water. 
BNL determined that tritium had been leaking for as long as 12 
years by that time.
    DOE admits that it failed to properly oversee BNL's 
operations. It is planning to focus more attention on its 
management structure so that an effective system can be 
established and situations such as the tritium leak can be 
avoided.
    The leak did not pose a great public health hazard. 
However, the fact that the leak continued for so long without 
discovery caused the public to lose faith in AUI. Senior DOE 
officials were also frustrated with AUI's performance. Both of 
these problems led the Secretary to terminate AUI's contract.
15. ``Tax Administration: IRS' Efforts to Place More Emphasis on 
        Criminal Tax Investigations,'' November 6, 1997, GAO/GGD-98-16
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed the action the Internal Revenue 
Service's [IRS] Criminal Investigation Division [CID] has taken 
to increase time and resources spent on tax investigations. GAO 
found that, between fiscal years 1990 and 1992, CID's 
investigations into non-tax issues were conducted to the 
detriment of its tax investigations.
    In October 1993, CID restructured its administrative duties 
and operations to focus on better resource allocation. It also 
reorganized its program areas to better track investigations. 
As of fiscal year 1996, CID had assigned a certain percentage 
of time to each of its investigations. The percentage of time 
allocated for tax gap investigations has increased since then. 
The percent of referrals to U.S. Attorneys for prosecution 
based on tax gap cases has increased as well, along with the 
number of court sentences based on tax gap cases. However, none 
of these increases, all found from 1996 data, matched the 
levels from 1990.
16. ``Automated Export System: Prospects for Improving Data Collection 
        and Enforcement Are Unclear,'' November 14, 1997, GAO/NSIAD-98-
        5
    a. Summary.--GAO reported on the problems experienced by 
Federal agencies responsible for collecting U.S. trade 
statistics and enforcing U.S. export laws in acquiring accurate 
data on exports from the U.S. Customs Service and the Census 
Bureau's Automated Export System (AS), which is designed to 
eliminate these problems. GAO found that it is likely that AS 
will realize its goal of improving export data, intensifying 
enforcement efforts, and streamlining export data compilation. 
GAO also surveyed opinions of the effectiveness of AS.
    GAO found that while AS has the potential to improve export 
reporting and enhance enforcement efforts, only a small number 
of companies use AS, and less than 1 percent of all data 
utilized is obtained through AS. Many companies are unlikely to 
use AS in the next 3 years, and a quarter of U.S. ocean freight 
shippers had never even heard of AS. Those companies which do 
use AS reported that automated filing was the chief benefit. 
Some members of the trading community cited that any benefits 
AS produces are overshadowed by the costs and burdens of AS' 
predeparture filing requirement.
    GAO found that AS' usefulness is limited because it is not 
linked with the databases of other law enforcement agencies 
which monitor exports. Also, GAO is concerned that the Customs 
Service's plans to allow export data filing after shipment 
could lead to more illegal goods entering the country without 
early detection. Already, the Shipper's Export Declaration, 
which is filed in AS, may be issued only hours before a 
shipment's departure, allowing insufficient time for inspectors 
to discover illegal exports. AS has not met its goal of having 
a single information collection and processing center for 
electronic filing. The Customs Service and the Census Bureau 
will have to address these issues and develop a cost-benefit 
analysis of AS before they commit to the future implementation 
of AS.
17. ``Financial Management: DOD's Liability for Aircraft Disposal Can 
        Be Estimated,'' November 20, 1997, GAO/AIMD-98-9
    a. Summary.--Recent legislative requirements have made 
implementation of new accounting standards and audited 
financial statements a priority for the Federal agencies. This 
report by the GAO to the Secretary of Defense discusses one 
such new requirement for information related to the disposal of 
Federal agencies' property, plant and equipment [PP&E]. This 
report, focusing on moving aircraft from active service to 
disposal/salvage, is the second in a series of reports on the 
Department of Defense's [DOD] implementation of this 
requirement.
    DOD has not yet implemented the Federal accounting standard 
that requires reporting liabilities such as those associated 
with the disposal of aircraft, nor has it provided any guidance 
to the military services. Aircraft disposal is an ongoing 
process that can be used to formulate cost estimates. Congress 
has recognized the importance of considering disposal cost 
information, and since 1995, defense acquisition programs have 
been required to consider life-cycle environmental costs 
including demilitarization and disposal costs.
18. ``Transportation Infrastructure: Highway Pavement Design Guide Is 
        Outdated,'' November 21, 1997, GAO/RCED-98-9
    a. Summary.--The National Highway System encompasses about 
4 percent of the Nation's 4 million miles of public roads. 
Billions of dollars were invested in these roads when they were 
built and the Department of Transportation [DOT] anticipates 
spending billions more to maintain them in the future. An 
initial pavement design guide was formulated in 1961 after road 
tests had been conducted to obtain pavement performance data, 
and it has been periodically updated since then. GAO studied 
the role of the Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] in 
developing and updating the pavement design guide, and also 
examined the use and potential of a computer analysis method 
known as the nonlinear Three Dimensional-Finite Element Method 
[3D-FEM] for improving the design and analysis of highway 
pavement structures.
    The FHWA has worked cooperatively with the American 
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in 
developing and updating the pavement design guide that is 
slated to be complete by the year 2002. The updated guide will 
emphasize the rehabilitation of the Nation's highways instead 
of the construction of new highways. It is expected to 
incorporate the use of analytical methods to predict pavement 
performance under various loading and climatic conditions. GAO 
concluded that the 3D-FEM is a promising analytical method that 
could potentially improve the design of highway pavements. 
While GAO determined that this is a promising method, it found 
no evidence that it was being considered for inclusion in the 
FHWA's current design guide update.
19. ``Defense Inventory: Inadequate Controls Over Air Force Suspended 
        Stocks,'' December 22, 1997, GAO/NSIAD-98-29
    a. Summary.--This report by the GAO on the Department of 
Defense's [DOD] secondary inventory management, as requested by 
Congressmen J. Dennis Hastert and Thomas Barrett, assesses 
selected aspects of the Air Force's logistics system for 
managing inventory in a suspended status, which is inventory 
that cannot be issued because its condition is unknown or in 
dispute. More specifically, this report addresses the reported 
quantity of this inventory, the weaknesses in managing 
suspended inventory, and the reasons why suspended inventory is 
not well managed.
    GAO found that management controls are not being 
implemented effectively or are nonexistent in the Air Force's 
suspended inventory. As a result of these management 
weaknesses, the Air Force may incur unnecessary repair and 
storage costs and avoidable unit readiness problems. The Air 
Force has the largest amount of suspended inventory of the 
armed services, at 70 percent of DOD's total. The vast majority 
of the items reviewed by the Air Force were not reviewed in a 
timely manner. Air Force Material Command guidance does not 
comply with DOD policy or safeguard against lengthy 
suspensions. Material Command and Warner Robbins oversight of 
inventory management has generally been nonexistent.
20. ``Tax Administration: IRS' 1997 Tax Filing Season,'' December 29, 
        1997, GAO/GGD-98-33
    a. Summary.--GAO conducted an examination of the Internal 
Revenue Service's [IRS] performance during the 1997 tax filing 
period. This report was completed at the request of 
Representative Nancy L. Johnson, chairman of the Subcommittee 
on Oversight, Committee on Ways and Means. The report 
highlights five different areas of the IRS's filing system that 
have been problematic in the past: (1) telephone access for 
taxpayers with questions; (2) returns filed in non-traditional 
ways; (3) returns filed with incorrect or missing Social 
Security Numbers [SSN]; (4) the use of lock boxes to process 
tax returns; and (5) performance of the imaging system used to 
process some tax returns.
    GAO found that the IRS either met or exceeded most of its 
1997 filing season performance goals. They made considerable 
improvement in the areas of telephone accessibility and the use 
of alternate filing methods. Telephone accessibility increased 
from 20 percent during the 1996 filing season to 51 percent 
during the 1997 filing season. The use of nontraditional tax 
filing methods increased 25 percent in 1997 due to a revised 
tax package that made it easier for people to use alternate 
methods.
    The revised tax packages that led to the increase in 
alternate filing methods also led to a decrease in the 
performance of the imaging system that the IRS uses to process 
certain tax returns. In some instances, the new tax package 
caused individuals to choose to write out their names, 
addresses, and SSNs. This resulted in decreased productivity of 
this document imaging and optical character recognition system, 
because of the elevated necessity of operator intervention that 
was needed to process those returns through this system.
    As a result of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, missing or 
incorrect SSNs are treated as math errors instead of issues 
that have to be resolved through a lengthy notice process. If 
individuals file their taxes with missing or incorrect SSNs, 
they are not allowed to claim the dependent exemption, earned 
income credit, or child care credit associated with the missing 
or incorrect SSN. In 1997, the IRS protected about $1.46 
billion in revenue as a result of these new procedures. This is 
more than double the amount protected in 1996.
    GAO continues to be concerned about the cost effectiveness 
of IRS's use of lock boxes to process Form 1040 tax payments. 
They have called into question a key assumption IRS and the 
Department of the Treasury's Financial Management Service [FMS] 
have used to calculate the interest cost savings associated 
with this use of lock boxes. FMS has planned a study to assess 
interest cost savings, but those plans have been deferred and 
it is unclear when the study will be completed.
21. ``Tax Administration: More Criteria Needed on IRS' Use of Financial 
        Status Audit Techniques,'' December 30, 1997, GAO/GGD-98-38
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congresspersons Bill Archer 
and Nancy L. Johnson, GAO reviewed Internal Revenue Service 
[IRS] financial status techniques. Specifically, GAO looked 
into how often IRS utilized financial status techniques before 
and after the establishment of a 1994 training program; how 
IRS' need for additional taxpayer information imposes on the 
taxpayers; what the audit results were from the financial 
status techniques; and how IRS applied its audit standards, 
quality controls, and measurement of audit quality to the use 
of financial status techniques.
    GAO found that the financial status techniques were used 
equally before and after the 1994 initiative. Twenty-three 
percent of 1995 and 1996 audits were done using a Cash-T, in 
which no additional contact with the taxpayer is necessary. IRS 
has no measure of how much audits imposed on taxpayers for the 
remaining 77 percent of audits. GAO found that imposition 
occurs before and during the audit interview, though the 
intrusive questions taxpayers cited occurred in fewer than 5 
percent of all audits and these questions were all asked during 
the initial interview.
    Reported income adjustments were made in 17 percent of all 
audit cases. Over the 1995 and 1996 period, $300 million in 
under-reported income was identified using the financial status 
techniques.
    For oversight of financial status techniques, IRS provides 
audit standards to auditors; reviews the extent to which 
auditors adhere to these standards; and measures this 
adherence.
22. ``Tax Administration: Potential Impact of Alternative Taxes on 
        Taxpayers and Administrators,'' January 14, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-37
    a. Summary.--At the request of Senators William V. Roth, 
Jr., and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Congressmen Bill Archer 
and Charles B. Rangel, GAO reviewed differences between five 
alternative tax systems, as well as how these alternatives 
would affect taxpayers' compliance with the tax laws and the 
government's responsibilities in administering the laws 
themselves.
    National retail sales tax [RST], value-added taxes [VAT], a 
flat tax, and a personal consumption tax were among the 
alternatives studied by GAO. All of the aforementioned 
alternatives would tax the same base (consumption). The 
national RST and VAT would only tax businesses, and GAO 
mentioned that an income tax could be levied for individuals, 
businesses, or both. Each of the options could include tax 
preferences--such as exemptions, special deductions, credits, 
or multiple rates on goods and services--although the type of 
preference would differ from alternative to alternative. Under 
income and consumption tax systems, individuals could be taxed 
at different rates.
    Consumption-based taxes, such as the national RST, VAT, 
flat tax and personal consumption tax, would alleviate the 
burden on taxpayers, as well as reduce tax administration 
activities. Tax systems that taxed only businesses (all but the 
personal consumption tax) would also reduce the burden of 
taxation of individuals. The personal consumption tax would 
increase the burden on taxpayers, because borrowings and 
savings would have to be reported. Each tax system would have a 
different effect on taxpayers' compliance burden and tax 
administrators' responsibilities. In some respects, the tax 
systems that are easier for taxpayers to comply with are also 
the ones that are easier to manage and administer. While the 
Internal Revenue Service's [IRS] administration costs are 
known, taxpayer compliance costs are hard to measure for the 
alternative tax systems, and even under the current tax system 
the costs are only approximate.
    The IRS has many responsibilities under the current tax 
system because the system is complex. With the national RST and 
VAT, individual tax filing requirements would be eliminated, 
and IRS would have less to review. A flat tax or a reformed 
income tax would eliminate tax returns altogether. The personal 
consumption tax would require taxpayers to include more 
information in their tax returns, thus placing more 
responsibilities on IRS.
    Tax preferences increase the burden by requiring 
recordkeeping, more time for determining and reporting of tax 
liability, and more tax planning by taxpayers. The burden on 
taxpayers would later transfer into more audits from tax 
administrators. Even in a return-free tax system, taxpayers 
would require assistance. However, because the number of 
taxpayers would be reduced, the burden on IRS and the 
government would decrease.
23. ``Electronic Banking: Experiences Reported by Banks in Implementing 
        On-line Banking,'' January 15, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-34
    a. Summary.--At the request of the Honorable James A. 
Leach, chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Financial 
Services, GAO examined the magnitude of on-line banking and 
problems posed by the vulnerability of on-line banking for the 
security of Fedwire (the Nation's primary electronic fund 
transfer system).
    GAO's report identified (1) the number of banks (and 
thrifts) that offer on-line banking and the types of services 
they offer, and (2) the number of banks offering specific types 
of on-line banking services. GAO surveyed 349 banks. They found 
that 185 of them offered on-line banking services. Many of the 
banks found to offer on-line services were affiliated with a 
single official that was able to provide on-line banking 
information on more than one bank in the survey. Therefore, 93 
bank officials provided GAO with the information necessary to 
determine (1) the channels used to render these services, (2) 
the reason for on-line banking implementation, (3) whether on-
line banking met or surpassed expectations, and (4) the 
electronic links between banks and other payment systems. 
Specifically, GAO collected data from 93 banks on (1) problems 
experienced, (2) risks identified, and (3) risk reduction 
efforts.
    GAO held interviews with information security experts and 
Federal agency and banking regulatory officials to recognize 
potential risks and problems associated with on-line banking 
and to identify basic security features that could help 
anticipate such problems. They also reviewed technical 
literature pertaining to these issues.
    The results of GAO's inquiries found that an estimated 7 
percent of banks offered on-line banking services. Most of 
these allow customers to access account information and 
transfer funds between their accounts. GAO projects rapid 
growth in on-line banking over the next year and a half. The 
number of banks implementing on-line systems is expected to 
increase about fivefold Nationwide. The reasons why bank 
officials decided to offer these services were to keep existing 
customers, to remain competitive, and to attract new customers. 
Ninety two percent of surveyed bank officials that offered on-
line services said that their on-line banking systems had met 
or exceeded their expectations.
    Of the 93 banks surveyed by GAO, 70 percent had performed 
risk assessments, 13 percent had not, and 12 percent did not 
know if their organizations had completed a risk assessment.
    Many of the banks contacted by GAO said that they had 
implemented controls to prevent unauthorized access to their 
on-line systems. But 10 percent of those surveyed said that 
they do not have firewalls to restrict access between computer 
networks and 11 percent reported that they do not possess basic 
detection software for computer viruses. Problems reported by 
the 93 banks included lapses in service (38 percent), security 
problems (30 percent), or system operation difficulties (36 
percent). GAO concluded that it is important for banks to 
implement the necessary safety precautions considering the 
projected rapid growth in on-line services.
24. ``Rural Utilities Service: Opportunities to Operate Electricity and 
        Telecommunications Loan Programs More Effectively,'' January 
        21, 1998, GAO/RCED-98-42
    a. Summary.--At the request of Senators Richard G. Lugar 
and Tom Harkin, GAO conducted a follow-up study on the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture's [USDA] Rural Utilities Service 
[RUS] program operations. In April 1997, GAO found that RUS, 
which uses loan programs to fund electricity and 
telecommunications development in rural areas with low 
populations, was not being repaid all of its money by its 
borrowers. GAO's objectives were to identify ways to make RUS 
loan programs more effective and less costly to the government, 
and to minimize RUS' susceptibility to loan losses. In 
addition, GAO was to collect information on commercial lenders 
which lend a significant amount to rural areas for electricity 
and telecommunications purposes.
    To more effectively use RUS loan programs, GAO suggests 
that loans be directed to borrowers which provide services to 
sparsely populated areas, thus financing the areas RUS is 
supposed to target. GAO also suggested that subsidized direct 
loans be targeted to borrowers who need the money to finance 
their own utility projects, excluding borrowers who often 
receive direct loans even though they have the capacity to fund 
their own projects. In addition, borrowers without financial 
problems could be given commercial credit rather than direct 
loans to lower program costs.
    Loan and indebtedness limits could be set to reduce the 
likelihood of loan losses. Repayment guarantees that RUS makes 
could be lowered so that borrowers can also carry part of the 
financial risk from the loans. In addition, lending policies 
should be strengthened so that slack or indebted borrowers do 
not receive loans.
25. ``Air Pollution: Estimated Benefits and Costs of the Navajo 
        Generating Station's Emissions Limit,'' January 27, 1998, GAO/
        RCED-98-28
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congressman John T. 
Doolittle, GAO reviewed the Environmental Protection Agency's 
[EPA] rule on the reduction of visual impairment-causing 
emissions in the Grand Canyon National Park area. Sulfur 
Dioxide emissions from the Navajo Generating Station, located 
12 miles from the Park's northern boundary, causes reduced 
visibility in the Park, especially during winter weather 
conditions. EPA, which initially proposed that 70 percent of 
the emissions be cleared, has required that 90 percent of the 
emissions from the Station be eliminated. GAO was to determine: 
(1) the effects of EPA's rule how the costs of emissions-
reduction from the first proposal compare to the one now 
instated; (2) the visibility improvements the Agency estimated 
and how these improvements are ascertained; and (3) ``how 
contingent valuation was used to estimate the monetary value of 
visibility improvements.''
    GAO has determined that the second proposal will both 
decrease overall associated costs and result in a greater 
reduction of emissions. A project engineer for the Salt River 
Project has also determined that the plant can operate at a 
rate greater than necessary to reach the 90 percent reduction 
goal to make up for days when the equipment to control 
emissions are not operational. Under this proposal, visibility 
during winter weather conditions will improve approximately 7 
percent, from 124 to 133 miles visual range. In addition, EPA, 
using contingent valuation, estimated the monetary value of 
this visibility improvement at $90-$200 million. In their own 
(uncompleted) study, Station owners determined that the 
Nationwide value was $2.3 million. Neither EPA nor the 
Station's study results were used by GAO, as project costs were 
below $100 million, the threshold for requiring such figures.
26. ``Unfunded Mandates: Reform Act Has Had Little Effect on Agencies' 
        Rulemaking Actions,'' February 4, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-30
    a. Summary.--GAO, at the request of Senators Fred Thompson 
and John Glenn, reviewed Federal agencies' implementation of 
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 [UMRA]. GAO's 
objective in this report was to determine what effect Title II, 
which consists of measures to amend the way Federal agencies 
create and issue regulations, has had on these agencies' 
rulemaking operations. To accomplish this, GAO reviewed 
agencies' enaction of the key provisions from Title II to find 
``economically significant'' regulations published in the 
Federal Register between March 22, 1995 (when the President 
signed UMRA) and March 22, 1997.
    GAO found that UMRA's Title II has not had a substantial 
impact on Federal agencies' rulemaking actions because most of 
the costly Federal regulations are not bound to Title II's 
requirements. Title II also allows agencies to take only the 
actions UMRA stipulates which they deem feasible or that are 
not already required, completed, or under way. Thus, agencies 
only take the actions which they consider possible. In 
addition, UMRA did not require written statements for 78 of the 
110 economically significant rules issued since UMRA's 
enactment. Also, only four of the Environmental Protection 
Agency's rules fell under section 204, which requires 
consultation with State, local and tribal governments before 
implementing any regulations, while no other agencies' rules 
have been subject to this section's requirements.
27. ``Tax Administration: IRS' Use of Information Gathering Projects,'' 
        February 5, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-39
    a. Summary.--To determine which tax returns to audit, the 
Internal Revenue Service [IRS] uses Information Gathering 
Projects [IGP] to collect information on those returns with 
audit potential. In its report, GAO listed that the IRS had 
about 1,000 IGPs open across the country in fiscal years 1995 
and 1996. Georgia had 76 IGPs open during fiscal years 1994, 
1995, and 1996. These 76 concentrated on business taxpayers who 
had the potential to understate their tax amount, as well as 
those who did not accurately pay or report taxes, individual 
taxpayers who had the potential to claim earned income tax 
credit or other credits for which they did not qualify, and 
both business and individual taxpayers who would conceivably 
not file the required tax returns. By June 1997, 41 of these 
IGPs had closed, and the results obtained from these IGPs 
varied in terms of money collected and number of returns 
audited.
    IRS requires IGPs to undergo examinations and to be 
approved by Examination Divisions in each district. In each IGP 
district office, units regulate and identify how tax returns 
are selected for audit and whether the results support the 
continuance of such projects.
28. ``Tax Administration: IRS' Use of Random Selection in Choosing Tax 
        Returns for Audit,'' February 5, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-40
    a. Summary.--GAO reported on the Internal Revenue Service's 
[IRS] random auditing of tax returns. GAO determined that in 
1994 there were 1.4 million audits performed, and that this 
number rose to 2.1 million by 1996. During this same period, 
audits in Georgia rose from 45,451 to 55,446. IRS has developed 
six projects for auditing purposes. Those selected for audit 
came from six groups, including those who claimed earned income 
credit [EIC], those who claimed dependent exemptions, those who 
operate eating and drinking establishments in Ohio, those self-
employed individuals who filed questionable Schedule Cs in 
Illinois, those who claimed false business losses to be 
eligible for EIC in Georgia, and those who appeared to not be 
paying self-employment tax in Georgia. Taxpayers from Georgia 
were included in three of these projects.
    The two projects that resulted in over 200 audited returns 
were those from the EIC subpopulation and the eating and 
drinking project subpopulation. Forty-six percent of the former 
group and 80 percent of the latter group found to owe 
additional taxes. For the former, $1,653 was the recommended 
amount owed per audit, with $12,711 recommended for the second 
group. IRS recognizes the burdens of audits on taxpayers, and 
is looking for ways to measure them. GAO also found that IRS 
has no alternative projects to random auditing.
29. ``Financial Management: Issues to be Considered by DOD in 
        Developing Guidance for Disclosing Deferred Maintenance on 
        Ships,'' February 6, 1998, GAO/AIMD-98-46
    a. Summary.--New Federal financial accounting standards 
require government agencies to show the financial results of 
their actions and provide pertinent information on their 
financial position. GAO issued the third in a series of reports 
concerning the Department of Defense's [DOD] compliance with 
this requirement. GAO addressed issues which are needed to 
advance plans to realize the deferred maintenance standard.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard No. 6 
requires disclosure of deferred maintenance, or ``maintenance that was 
nor performed when it should have been or was scheduled to be and 
which, therefore, is put off or delayed for a future period.'' The 
deferred maintenance standard pertains to all property, plant, and 
equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The issues GAO addressed included what maintenance is 
needed to keep DOD's ships in a permissible operating state and 
when to acknowledge as deferred needed maintenance on ships. To 
address its implementing guidance for deferred maintenance, GAO 
suggests that DOD consider whether the deferred maintenance 
standard should be applied to all or only select groups of 
holdings and whether the reported deferred maintenance should 
distinguish between critical and noncritical maintenance.
30. ``Historic Preservation: Cost to Restore Historic Properties at 
        Historically Black Colleges and Universities,'' February 6, 
        1998, GAO/RCED-98-51
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congresspersons Maxine 
Waters and James Clyburn, GAO collected data on historically 
black colleges and universities' [HBCU] historic properties, 
i.e. how many of them there are and the approximate cost of 
restoring and preserving them. The Department of the Interior 
and the National Park Service cosponsored a 1988 survey on this 
subject, which yielded low results, as only half of the HBCUs 
responded. GAO identified the methods used to calculate the 
costs as well as the reliability of those who prepared the cost 
data for this survey.
    The 103 HBCUs, all of which responded to GAO's survey, 
classified 712 historic school-owned properties. According to 
the schools, an estimated $755 million is required to restore 
and preserve these properties. Depreciation was included in 
this analysis, though schools were asked not to include 
ordinary maintenance costs. Some of the HBCUs listed a total of 
about $60 million already set aside for property restoration 
and preservation. Most schools used an original feasibility 
report, an updates feasibility report, a contractors' quotation 
or proposal, a cost-estimating guidebook, a cost-per-square-
foot calculation, or a consumer price index. Often they used 
more than one of the aforementioned methods. The cost-per-
square-foot method was the most commonly used method. Those who 
prepared the cost estimates were primarily in-house or school 
architects/engineers, outside architect/engineering firms, 
school building/maintenance supervisors, and contractors (other 
than architect/engineering firms). In-house or school 
architects/engineers prepared about a third of the cost 
estimates.
    GAO reported that while the cost estimates the schools gave 
are useful as starting points, some of the methodologies the 
schools used in calculating costs are questionable. GAO sent a 
draft of its report to the Department of the Interior for 
review, and the Department agreed. Thus, not all cost estimates 
included will necessarily be eligible to be covered by 
financial assistance. The Department also added that the costs 
could increase once work begins on the historic properties, 
because the need for certain repairs may not be discovered 
until restorations begin.
31. ``Personal Bankruptcy: The Credit Research Center Report on 
        Debtors' Ability to Pay,'' February 9, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-47
    a. Summary.--At the request of Senators Charles E. Grassley 
and Richard J. Durbin, GAO provided the result of the Credit 
Research Center's (the Center) report on personal bankruptcies. 
GAO determined that, overall, the Center's report is a 
worthwhile primary step in evaluating debtors' ability to pay 
their debts. GAO warned that the results must be ``interpreted 
with caution,'' as variations among the 13 regions evaluated in 
the report make it hard to review the accuracy of them. Also, 
the Center made many assumptions in writing the report. It 
assumed that debtors' schedules of current estimated income, 
current estimated monthly expenditures, and debts, usually 
filed simultaneously with bankruptcy petitions, were precise. 
The Center also forecasted debtors' incomes for a 5-year period 
based on their current estimated income and expenditures. GAO 
does not believe the Center's analysis is reliable enough to 
apply the report's findings to either the annual 1996 filings 
in all 13 locations or the national population of personal 
bankruptcy filings.
32. ``Surface Infrastructure: Costs, Financing and Schedules for Large-
        Dollar Transportation Projects,'' February 12, 1998, GAO/RCED-
        98-64
    a. Summary.--Confronted with the decreasing efficiency and 
deteriorating infrastructure of surface transportation systems 
in many of the Nation's urban areas, many Federal, State, and 
local agencies are improving and upgrading their highways and 
mass transit systems and are assisting the private sector in 
improving transportation facilities. In fiscal year 1998, the 
Federal Government will distribute nearly $26 billion to States 
and localities for the construction and repair of these 
transportation systems. In order to address this transportation 
problem, States and localities are planning several large-
dollar projects to replace or expand deteriorating systems. 
These projects, although they represent a substantial 
investment of Federal, State, and local funds, have begun to be 
funded by the private sector.
    As part of the Committee on Appropriations' ongoing review 
of high-cost transportation projects, Representative Frank R. 
Wolf asked GAO to review eight projects that will play critical 
roles in the infrastructure networks of six metropolitan areas 
of the United States. GAO studied costs, financing, and 
schedules for completing these eight transportation projects: 
the Bay Area Rapid Transit System's extension to the San 
Francisco Airport, Los Angeles' Red Line subway, Pittsburgh's 
airport busway, St. Louis Metrolink's extension, Salt Lake 
City's South Light Rail Transit Line, Boston's Central Artery/
Tunnel, Salt Lake City's I-15 reconstruction, and the Alameda 
Corridor (Los Angeles). The eight projects in total are 
anticipated to cost about $23 billion.
33. ``Forest Service: Barriers to Generating Revenue or Reducing 
        Costs,'' February 13, 1998, GAO/RCED-98-58
    a. Summary.--The House Committee on the Budget is 
interested in the Forest Service's efforts to be more cost-
effective and businesslike in its operations. In order to help 
the Committee in deliberation and oversight, Chairman John 
Kasich asked GAO to identify (1) the lessons that can be 
learned from efforts by non-Federal land managers to generate 
revenue and/or become financially self-sufficient from the sale 
or use of natural resources on their lands, and (2) the legal 
and other barriers that may inhibit the Forest Service's 
implementation of similar efforts on its own lands.
    Per Chairman Kasich's request, GAO reviewed seven non-
Federal land managers located throughout the United States. 
These land managers were selected because they were either 
making a profit from one or more of the resources that the 
Forest Service utilizes, or they were maintaining the long-term 
health of the land and resources by emphasizing environmental 
management and protection. These land managers use a variety of 
innovative approaches and techniques involving the natural 
resources on their lands to generate revenue or reduce costs.
    GAO concluded that the Forest Service is at a disadvantage 
because it is required to continue providing certain goods and 
services at less than fair market value. Certain congressional 
expectations and legislative provisions also serve as 
disincentives to either increasing revenue or decreasing costs. 
Although the agency has been invested with the authority to 
obtain fair market prices by Congress, it has often not done 
so.
34. ``Tax Administration: IRS Faces Challenges in Measuring Customer 
        Service,'' February 23, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-59
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congresswoman Nancy L. 
Johnson, GAO reported on Internal Revenue Service [IRS] 
performance measures, especially those dealing with customer 
service. IRS performance measures have three tiers. The first 
measures overall performance; the second measures IRS' progress 
in achieving strategic objectives (improving customer service 
and increasing compliance and productivity); the third measures 
program performance.
    Challenges IRS faces in creating and executing performance 
measures include developing a dependable measure of taxpayer 
burden, creating measures to compare competence of various 
customer service programs, and cultivating or developing new 
measures to gauge the quality of services rendered.
35. ``Tax Systems Modernization: Blueprint Is a Good Start But Not Yet 
        Sufficiently Complete to Build or Acquire Systems,'' February 
        24, 1998, GAO/AIMD/GGD-98-54
    a. Summary.--GAO reported on the Internal Revenue Service's 
[IRS] tax systems modernization blueprint. GAO found that the 
blueprint is a good and solid primary step and that its systems 
life cycle [SLC] overview provides a technique that is 
consistent with best public and private sector practices for 
life cycle management of information technology investments. 
However, because the blueprint is still uncompleted and IRS 
does not know all the details of the new plans, a disciplined 
life cycle management cannot yet be fully executed. The IRS' 
business requirements, architecture, and sequencing plan are 
all going to include four levels of greater detail. Two were 
completed as of May 15, 1997, certain specifications have not 
yet been added. The IRS' Chief Information Officer [CIO] 
recognizes that these specifications need to be included and is 
taking measures to do so. However, IRS does not have complete 
control of all budgetary matters concerned with the new 
blueprint, and as a result, even when the modernization 
blueprint is completed, IRS may not be able to fully implement 
and enforce it.
36. ``Financial Audit: Examination of the Bureau of the Public Debt's 
        Fiscal Year 1997 Schedule of Federal Debt,'' February 27, 1998, 
        GAO/AIMD-98-65
    a. Summary.--In accordance with the Chief Financial 
Officers [CFO] Act of 1990, as amended by the Government 
Management Reform Act of 1994 [GMRA], GAO conducted an audit of 
the Schedule of Federal Debt Managed by the Bureau of the 
Public Debt [BPD] for the fiscal year which ended September 30, 
1997. The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] designated the 
BPD to issue audited financial statements for the government 
administration of the Federal Debt. The Schedule of Federal 
Debt, issued by BPD, shows beginning balances, increases and 
decreases, and ending balances for (1) Federal debt held by the 
public and Federal debt held by Federal entities, (2) the 
related interest payables, and (3) the related net unamortized 
premiums and discounts, managed by BPD.
    GAO found that the Schedule of Federal Debt was reliable in 
all material respects. The related internal controls in place 
on September 30, 1997 were effective in safeguarding assets 
from material loss, ensuring material compliance with laws 
governing the use of the budget authority and other laws and 
regulations relevant to the Federal debt managed by BPD, and 
ensuring that there were no misstatements in the Schedule of 
Federal Debt. GAO found no instances of reportable 
noncompliance with selected provisions of laws and regulations 
tested and no incidents in which BPD did not substantially 
comply with the requirements of the Federal Financial 
Management Improvement Act of 1996 [FFMIA].
37. ``Budget Function Classifications: Origins, Trends, and 
        Implications for Current Uses,'' February 27, 1998, GAO/AMID-
        98-67
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congressman John R. Kasich, 
chairman of the House Committee on the Budget, GAO examined the 
origins and evolution of the current structure of budget 
function classifications and recent spending trends by 
function. Also, they described the challenges of applying these 
classifications to other government-wide applications, such as 
the Federal Government Performance Plan and the Statement of 
Net Cost in the Consolidated Financial Statements of the 
Federal Government.
    The modern budget function system used today was first 
employed in 1948, and since then has only been changed 
slightly. But, the practice of classifying government spending 
by purpose goes back almost 200 years. The budget system has 
changed over the years from a retrospective summary of how 
Federal dollars are spent, to a system used by the President in 
his budget submission as a supplemental presentation piece, to 
the present-day method that Congress uses to display their 
congressional budget resolutions.
    When assessing the recent spending trends by function, the 
GAO found that spending has become concentrated over the last 
20 years in just a few of the budget functions. One third of 
the functions account for about 90 percent of the growth. 
Medicare, Net Interest, and Health are the functions with the 
highest average annual growth. Another trend analysis, based 
only on subfunction classifications, showed that spending 
associated with human resources missions and interest payments 
increased from 55 percent to 70 percent of the total Federal 
spending since 1977. These two areas are responsible for almost 
all the growth since 1977. Any decline in spending has been 
affiliated with funding cuts in State and local governments, 
certain veteran-related activities, and the central fiscal and 
personnel management activities of the Federal Government.
    As other government-wide applications begin to use this 
framework for their assessments of the performance and cost of 
government operations, certain questions will arise about the 
structure's suitability for these emerging uses. There are two 
basic concerns from which these questions will arise: (1) how 
agencies report specific spending, and (2) how this information 
is consolidated into various function and subfunction 
categories. GAO concluded that these questions must be 
addressed if this sort of framework will be useful.
38. ``Financial Audit: American Battle Monuments Commission's Financial 
        Statements for Fiscal Year 1997,'' February 27, 1998, GAO/AIMD-
        98-81
    a. Summary.--GAO audited the American Battle Monuments 
Commission's [ABMC] financial statements for the fiscal year 
which ended September 30, 1997. Copies of this report were sent 
to the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations, the 
Secretary of the Treasury, the Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget, the chairman of the ABMC, and other 
interested parties.
    This report indicates that the ABMC's balance sheet as of 
September 30, 1997, was reliable in all material aspects. Also, 
internal controls in place as of September 30, 1997 were 
effective in (1) assuring material compliance with laws 
governing the use of budget authority and with other relevant 
laws and regulations and (2) safeguarding assets against loss 
from unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition. Internal 
controls were not effective in ensuring that transactions were 
effectively recorded, processed, and summarized to permit the 
preparation of reliable financial statements and to maintain 
accountability of assets.
39. ``Forest Service: Status of Progress Toward Financial 
        Accountability,'' February 27, 1998, GAO/AIMD-98-84
    a. Summary.--In its third report on the Forest Service's 
financial troubles, GAO evaluated the Forest Service's 
activation of a new financial accounting system, modification 
of certain accounting deficiencies, settlement of key staffing 
and financial management organizational matters, and dedication 
to achieving financial accountability.
    GAO found that while the Forest Service is moving forward 
with its new accounting system, much work still remains. The 
Forest Service has corrected several accounting deficiencies, 
but reliable balances for certain assets remain to be 
established. Financial management organizational matters have 
not been fully evaluated by the Forest Service, so GAO could 
not determine whether the structures of these are enough to 
correct the financial problems. Some key positions in financial 
management are vacant. Forest Service management is moving 
toward correction of the financial problems. Its autonomous 
organizational arrangement may thwart top management from 
making all improvements by the end of fiscal year 1999.
40. ``Community Development: Changes in Nebraska's and Iowa's Counties 
        With Large Meatpacking Plant Workforces,'' February 27, 1998, 
        GAO/RCED-98-62
    a. Summary.--GAO issued a report on workforce changes in 
Nebraska and Iowa with the installation of meatpacking plants. 
Upon investigating, GAO determined there were several changes. 
From 1986 to 1990, 11 of 16 counties with large meatpacking 
workforces in Nebraska and Iowa experienced population growth. 
Minority populations grew in all 16 counties. School enrollment 
increased in 15 of 23 counties with large meatpacking 
workforces. The number of Medicaid recipients increased. There 
were statewide increases in economic well-being. From 1986 to 
1995, the level of serious crime increased in 14 of the 19 
counties which reported crime statistics. GAO found that 
housing conditions for meat plant workers were adequate, 
according to officials from nine Iowa and Nebraska communities. 
Also, the Immigration and Naturalization Service found that 
illegal aliens make up about 25 percent of all meatpacking 
workers in Nebraska and Iowa.
41. ``Intercity Passenger Rail: Issues Associated with a Possible 
        Amtrak Liquidation,'' March 2, 1998, GAO/RCED-98-60
    a. Summary.--At the request of Senators John McCain and 
Ernest F. Hollings of the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation and Representatives Bud Shuster and 
James L. Oberstar of the House Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure, GAO produced a report regarding the National 
Railroad Passenger Corp. (Amtrak) and its deteriorating 
financial status.
    Over the last 27 years, the government has supplied Amtrak 
with more than $20 billion in Federal assistance to cover it's 
operating losses and make capital improvements. However, 
Amtrak's financial condition has continued to deteriorate. This 
continuing financial deterioration might lead to bankruptcy and 
liquidation. If Amtrak's financial situation leads to 
bankruptcy, the trustee commissioned with the task of handling 
the bankruptcy procedures has the option to reorganize the 
company, rather than immediately liquidate it. GAO's report 
focuses on the issues associated with a possible liquidation of 
Amtrak, because it is difficult to predict how Amtrak might be 
reorganized. Specifically outlined in this report were (1) the 
uncertainties in estimating the potential costs associated with 
a liquidation; (2) the potential financial impacts on 
creditors, including the Federal Government; (3) the possible 
financial impact of an Amtrak liquidation on participants in 
the railroad retirement and unemployment systems; and (4) the 
possible impacts on intercity, commuter, and other rail 
services.
    There are many different variables to consider when 
examining the potential cost of a liquidation. These include 
Amtrak's debt and financial obligations at the time of 
liquidation, the market value of its assets, and the proceeds 
of the sale of its assets. Amtrak has estimated the net cost of 
a possible liquidation to creditors and others to be as much as 
$10 to $14 billion over a 6-year period. The labor protection 
arrangements for Amtrak workers were eliminated in the Amtrak 
Reform and Accountability Act of 1997. If there are to be any 
new protection arrangements, they must be worked out in 
negotiations between Amtrak and its unions. Also, these 
negotiations will determine whether or not Amtrak has a 
financial obligation to those employees that lose their job as 
a result of a liquidation.
    Amtrak's creditors could face losses in the event of a 
liquidation. As of September 30, 1997, Amtrak estimated that 
its debt to all institutional creditors could be about $2.2 
billion. The market value of Amtrak's assets at the time of 
liquidation will determine the extent to which the creditors 
will be reimbursed. In the event of a liquidation, the 
government's financial interests would probably be subordinate 
to all other claims, the only exceptions being Amtrak's 
interest in the Northeast Corridor and certain other real 
property.
    An Amtrak liquidation would require a higher payroll tax on 
employers and employees of other railroads or a reduction in 
benefits to compensate for the loss of Amtrak's annual 
contributions. Without the higher payroll tax or the reduction 
of benefits, the railroad retirement fund would start to 
decline by 2000 and would be depleted by 2026. In order for the 
unemployment fund to remain financially solvent, it would 
require immediate action in the form of surcharges on 
participants as well as borrowing from the retirement account 
for the next 2 or 3 years.
    The liquidation of Amtrak would also have negative effects 
on other intercity and passenger rail services. Access to the 
tracks and stations owned by Amtrak and others and the ability 
of States and commuter railroads to consume the cost of 
continuing service are two factors that could affect the 
continuation of rail service. In the event of a liquidation, 
commuter rail services that contract with Amtrak to provide 
service would be required to find new operators; this can be a 
timely and expensive proposition. The freight railroads that 
use the Northeast Corridor may also face a possible loss of 
millions of dollars of business if they are unable to gain 
access to the Northeast Corridor because of this liquidation.
42. ``National Weather Service: Events Surrounding Fiscal Year 1997 
        Budget,'' March 4, 1998, GAO/AIMD-98-69
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed and described the conception and 
enaction of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration's [NOAA] National Weather Service's [NWS] fiscal 
year 1997 budget and identified notable events regarding NWS' 
fiscal year 1997 budget ``shortfall'' and the endeavors to 
address it. NWS' budget ``shortfall'' refers to the decrease in 
funds the NWS had to operate within fiscal year 1997.
    The Department of Commerce asked the Office of Management 
and Budget [OMB] to include $693 million for NWS in the 
President's budget. OMB later lowered this amount to $671 
million which, upon to submission to Congress, was reduced to 
$638 million for fiscal year 1997. NWS stayed within this 
smaller budget by executing several temporary and permanent 
actions to reduce costs.
    One event surrounding the matter includes field vacancy 
reprogramming, started by NWS before it gave NOAA its answer on 
the matter. NWS had assumed that NOAA would approve the request 
and provide funding for the service later on. NOAA later would 
not grant permission for the reprogramming request, and NWS 
received no funding to compensate for money already spent on 
reprogramming.
    A second event involved NWS forwarding certification 
packages to NOAA for approval to merge, automate, and/or shut 
down weather service offices to make up for the field 
vacancies. Once NWS learned that NOAA would not grant 
permission for the field vacancy reprogramming, it asked that 
27 of the 83 certification packages be held back because these 
27 locations had vacancies in their field offices. NWS 
determined that merging, automating and shutting down these 
field offices would cause service quality to decline, which is 
in direct violation of section 706(b) of Public Law 102-567. 
The NOAA Under Secretary held back all 83 certification packets 
after that.
43. ``SEC Year 2000 Report: Future Reports Could Provide More Detailed 
        Information,'' March 6, 1998, GAO/GGD/AIMD-98-51
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congressman John D. Dingell, 
GAO reviewed the Securities and Exchange Commission's [SEC] 
June 1997 report on the SEC's endeavors to ensure the safety of 
individual investors and securities markets once the date 
changeover occurs in the year 2000. Computers, as of now, are 
programmed to recognize any two digit year--such as ``98'' for 
1998--as occurring in the 1900's. In the year 2000, a ``00'' 
date will, without alterations, be read by the computer as 
``1900.'' GAO, in order to determine how future reports can be 
improved, reviewed the state of the year 2000 Report's 
compliance (to be completed in five phases) on computing issues 
by SEC, the securities industry, and public companies. It also 
reviewed how well SEC is overseeing year 2000 changes focused 
on its internal systems, self-regulatory organizations [SRO], 
broker-dealers, and other regulated groups, as well as the 
instruction SEC has provided to public corporations for 
disclosing year 2000 remediation ventures.
    GAO found that SEC's June 1997 report was too general in 
its overview for Congress to be able to evaluate its progress 
as the end of the millennium draws near. An SEC official 
explained that SEC had collected more specific information on 
SROs, and that its report was done primarily to determine which 
market participants were both aware of and taking steps to 
prepare for the year 2000 problem.
    The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] reported that the 
following information should be included in future SEC reports 
to Congress: (1) which systems are deemed critical for the U.S. 
securities markets' functioning; (2) how much progress has been 
made in realizing year 2000 compliance issues; (3) how long it 
will take for each phase to be completed in reaching full 
compliance; (4) what needs to be done to address systems that 
are not on schedule; and (5) contingency strategies for those 
systems which will not be ready in time for the changeover. GAO 
also reported that the yearly reports SEC is submitting may be 
too infrequent, as the year 2000 is fast approaching.
44. ``Airport Financing: Funding Sources for Airport Development,'' 
        March 12, 1998, GAO/RCED-98-71
    a. Summary.--Large passenger airports and small general 
aviation airports receive Federal assistance in order to ensure 
safe and efficient operations. With this Federal assistance, 
they plan capital developments including new runways, passenger 
terminals, navigational aids, and roadway access. Several 
studies have been conducted in the last year examining the 
capital development needs. Incomplete financial information 
about the airports made it difficult to assess the airports' 
financial capabilities in financing future developments.
    The GAO was asked by Congress to respond to the following 
questions pertaining to this issue: (1) How much are airports 
of various sizes spending on capital development and where are 
they getting the money? (2) If current funding levels continue, 
will they be sufficient to meet capital development planned for 
the 5-year period from 1997 through 2001? (3) Taking into 
account a difference between current funding and planned 
development, what is the potential effect of various proposals 
to increase airport funding? In order to better answer these 
questions, the GAO established an extensive database of airport 
funding information which is linked to each airport and its 
level of activity.
    GAO found that in 1996, $7 billion was given to the 3,304 
airports that make up the national airport system. Ninety 
percent of this money came from three sources: airport and 
special facility bonds, the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, and 
passenger facility charges paid on each airline ticket. The 
amount and source of funding varied in relation to the size of 
the airport. The 71 largest airports received 79 percent of all 
funding. Ten percent of funding came from grants, but 
represented 50 percent of the funding for the smaller airports. 
Only 10 percent of the grant money went to the larger 71 
airports in the United States.
    The airports predict that they will need $10 billion per 
year for the development planned for 1997 through 2001, an 
increase over the current capital funding of $7 billion. In 
1996, funding for planned development for general aviation 
airports only covered half of the total costs. In contrast, 
Federal grants for the airports with the highest priority 
matched or exceeded the planned development for such projects.
    Over the past few years there have been a number of 
proposals to increase funding for airports. These proposals 
include enlarging the size of the Federal grant program, 
elevating the passenger facility charges, and leveraging 
existing funding sources. Increasing the size of the Federal 
grant system would benefit smaller airports more, while raising 
the passenger facility charges for passengers would be more 
help to larger airports. The current Federal Aviation 
Administration's pilot program to use grants in more innovative 
ways and to privatize airports will probably not succeed 
because of limited participation by airports. Capitalizing 
State revolving funds would be more successful in expanding 
airport investments. This is not a currently permitted use for 
Federal airport grants, but they have proved to be more 
successful in other infrastructure sectors.
45. ``Implementation of the Small Business Advocacy Review Panel 
        Requirements,'' March 18, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-36
    a. Summary.--In response to the request of Senators 
Christopher Bond and Pete Domenici and Representatives Roscoe 
G. Bartlett and Sue W. Kelly, GAO examined the enforcement of 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
[SBREFA], (which was passed in March 1996) by the Environmental 
Protection Agency [EPA] and the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration [OSHA].
    This bill requires both EPA and OSHA to convene a small 
business advocacy review panel on each new rule that may have a 
significant economic impact on a large portion of small 
businesses, before they publish a notice of proposed 
rulemaking. The advocacy review panel must seek the advice and 
recommendations of different entities that will actually be 
impacted by the proposed rule. The agencies responsible for the 
rule must participate as well as the Small Business 
Administration's [SBA] Chief Counsel for Advocacy and 
representatives from the Office of Management and Budget's 
[OMB] Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs [OIRA].
    GAO's report had four objectives: (1) to determine whether 
EPA and OSHA have applied the above requirements to all 
proposed rules issued between June 28, 1996 and June 28, 1997 
that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities; (2) to determine whether the advocacy 
review panels, the regulatory agencies themselves, and SBA's 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy followed the statute's procedural 
requirements for panels convened between June 28, 1996 and 
November 1, 1997; (3) to identify any changes made by the EPA 
or OSHA as a result of the advocacy panels; and (4) to identify 
any suggestions made by agency officials and small entity 
representatives on how to improve the advocacy review panel 
process.
    GAO's inquiry into this matter revealed that OSHA convened 
one advocacy review panel and published two other rules without 
a panel. OSHA made some slight changes to the text of the draft 
rule as a result of the one panel they convened, but it is not 
clear whether or not these changes will affect the final 
implementation of the rule because the rulemaking process has 
not been completed. EPA held four advocacy review panels and 
published 17 other draft rules without a review panel. Both 
agencies claimed that there was no need for an advocacy review 
panel on those rules that they certified would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. However, the SBA Chief Counsel said that the EPA 
should have held panels for 2 of those 17 that did not receive 
one. Specifically, the national ambient air quality standards 
for ozone and particulate matter should have received a panel 
review according to the Chief Counsel. The small entity 
representatives agreed that panels should have been held. The 
EPA claims that they are not responsible for the impact on 
small entities of these standards because the States make the 
final implementation decisions.
    For the five panels that were convened by EPA and OSHA, the 
regulatory agencies themselves and the SBA Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy generally followed most of the guidelines. The only 
discrepancy lies in the fact that they did not meet all 
deadlines established by SBREFA. The five panels were not 
conducted in a uniform manner, but that is because the agencies 
are still developing the panel procedures.
    The representatives of the five advocacy review panels 
submitted a few suggestions for improving the process: (1) 
adjust the timeframes in which the panels are conducted; (2) 
ensure that there are more representatives from the different 
small entities that will be affected by the rule; (3) enhance 
the methods that are used by the panelists to receive comments; 
and (4) improve the background materials that are supplied by 
the regulatory agencies.
46. ``IRS Audits: Workpapers Lack Documentation of Supervisory 
        Review,'' April 15, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-98
    a. Summary.--GAO evaluated the condition of the 
workpapers--papers IRS auditors use while auditing--of 354 
sample IRS audits from a December 30, 1997 report. GAO found 
that the workpapers did not always meet the workpaper 
standards, because the tax adjustments in the workpapers were 
not the same as the adjustments sent to the taxpayers or listed 
in the auditor's report. In addition, the workpapers did not 
include all required documents to sustain the tax liabilities 
reached and reported by auditors. GAO recommends supervisory 
reviews on workpapers so that their conditions can be improved.
47. ``Public-Private Competitions: DOD's Additional Support for 
        Combining Depot Workloads Contains Weaknesses,'' April 17, 
        1998, GAO/NSIAD-98-143
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed the reasons the Air Force 
believes it is both more logical and economical to combine the 
workloads from the Sacramento, CA and the San Antonio, TX 
maintenance depots. The Air Force made this decision as a 
result of a variety of information collected beginning in 
September 1995. But GAO found that the rationale behind the 
Department of Defense's [DOD] decision was not well supported.
    GAO's assessment reveals weaknesses in the logic, 
assumptions, and data behind DOD's rationale. The Air Force's 
claims are questionable, as many of the conclusions it has 
reached about the workload combination do not consider all 
factors involved. Because DOD has not analyzed the economic 
situation involved in maintaining individual workloads in 
Sacramento and San Antonio, and because the data has not 
supported its claims that the workloads must be combined, GAO 
could not agree with DOD's evaluations.
48. ``Telecommunications: Telephone Slamming and Its Harmful Effects,'' 
        April 21, 1998, GAO/OSI-98-10
    a. Summary.--At the request of Senator Susan M. Collins, 
the Office of Special Investigations of GAO helped the 
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations ascertain which 
companies or groups engage in intentional telephone slamming, 
how these entities defraud customers, and what efforts the 
Federal Communications Commission [FCC] and others have made to 
reduce slamming. Telephone slamming is the ``unauthorized 
switching of a customer from one long-distance provider to 
another.''
    GAO was also requested to provide a case study on a long-
distance telephone company which engaged in frequent, 
intentional slamming. The case study is on Daniel H. Fletcher, 
the owner and operator of a long-distance company. Between 1993 
and 1996, his company slammed or tried to slam over 500,000 
consumers. Fletcher's company billed customers more than $20 
million and left $3.8 million in unpaid bills to industry 
firms.
    Not only is telephone slamming harmful to consumers, it is 
also difficult to track, because there is no specific office to 
call when one has been the victim of slamming.
    Facility-based carriers, switching resellers, and 
switchless resellers have the motivation to practice slamming. 
They often engage in slamming by falsifying documents that 
switch a consumer from one long-distance provider to another.
    The FCC, state regulatory agencies, and the 
telecommunications industry all attempt to stop intentional 
slamming. GAO found that the FCC's efforts do very little to 
stop slamming. Though long-distance providers' FCC tariffs are 
reviewed, no significance is placed on the ones which must be 
provided prior to providing telephone service.
49. ``Public-Private Competitions: Review of Sacramento Air Force Depot 
        Solicitation,'' May 4, 1998, GAO/OGC-98-48
    a. Summary.--Under the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1998, GAO is required to submit a report on the 
allocation of depot workloads currently performed at the 
Sacramento and San Antonio Air Logistics Centers. This act 
obligates GAO to review solicitations issued for contracts to 
take over the workloads at Sacramento and San Antonio. Within 
45 days, GAO was required to report whether the two centers (1) 
complied with applicable laws and regulations and (2) provided 
an equal opportunity for both public and private offerors to 
compete for the contracts.
    This report, which was submitted to Senators Strom Thurmond 
and Carl Levin and Representatives Floyd Spence and Ike 
Skelton, examined McClellan Air Force Base's recent 
solicitation of contracts for numerous depot-level workloads 
that are being performed at the Sacramento Air Logistics Center 
in Sacramento, CA.
    GAO found that the Air Force has not successfully shown 
that soliciting contracts for the workloads on a combined basis 
is necessary to satisfy its needs. Otherwise, the solicitation 
was found to be in compliance with all relevant laws.
    One of the potential offerors raised a complaint about the 
Sacramento solicitation's requirement that the offeror must be 
able to perform all of the diverse types of workloads being 
solicited. They believe that this restricts competition because 
many offerors would be able to perform some, but not all of the 
workloads. The solicitation for contracts on multiple workloads 
issued by the Air Force required DOD to submit to GAO a 
determination showing that the workloads could not be logically 
and economically done by separate sources. DOD issued this 
required determination, but GAO found that it did not provide 
adequate information to support their claims. In turn, the Air 
Force supplied GAO with supplemental information supporting 
their claim and again, GAO found this to be insufficient.
    Another potential competitor questioned the Air Force's 
ability to select a contractor other than the lowest bidder, 
despite the Air Force's claim that the solicitation award would 
go to the offeror whose proposal represents ``the best value to 
the Government.'' GAO found nothing in law requiring the Air 
Force to offer the contract to the lowest bidder. The only 
requirement of the DOD is that they show a cost comparison 
outlining the savings that will result if they choose a 
private-sector contract.
    Another potential competitor was concerned about the fact 
that the solicitation requires more support for savings that 
are proposed to be achieved in the later years of the 
performance period. Their concern is that this methodology may 
not catch an offeror's projected overhead savings for the 
entire performance period. However, after GAO researched this 
issue, they found the solicitation requirement to be reasonable 
and necessary considering the longevity of the project.
    The GAO was also required by law to determine whether the 
Sacramento solicitation provided a ``substantially equal 
opportunity for public and private offerors to compete for the 
contract without regard to where the workload is to be 
performed.'' The competitors must be allowed to perform at any 
location and preferential treatment may not be given based on 
their choice of location. GAO found nothing in the solicitation 
indicating any problems in these areas.
50. ``Forest Service: Weak Contracting Practices Increase Vulnerability 
        to Fraud, Waste, and Abuse,'' May 6, 1998, GAO/RCED-98-88
    a. Summary.--As requested by Senator Robert F. Smith, GAO 
evaluated whether the Forest Service's contracting practices 
are designed to minimize fraud, waste, and abuse, and maximize 
effectiveness. GAO found that the Forest Service is highly 
susceptible to fraud, waste, and abuse, because it does not 
comply with several internal control standards. Its internal 
system for contracting activities was also found to be 
ineffective.
    GAO's report recommends ways to both strengthen internal 
control and increase use of the best contracting practices. By 
developing a written plan for defining control objectives and 
techniques, documenting contract files of critical contract 
award and administration action, routinely supervising the 
contracting staff, consistently monitoring contractors' 
progress, and eliminating errors and omissions in the 
management information system, the effectiveness of the Forest 
Service's contracting would be improved.
51. ``Public-Private Competitions: Review of San Antonio Depot 
        Solicitation,'' May 14, 1998, GAO/OGC-98-49
    a. Summary.--In response to one of several reporting 
requirements contained in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1998, relating to the allocation of depot 
workloads currently performed at the closing San Antonio and 
Sacramento Air Logistics Centers, GAO reviewed solicitations 
issued for these workloads. Section 359 of the act (10 U.S.C. 
2469a) requires that within 45 days of the solicitations' 
issuance the centers (1) are in compliance with applicable laws 
and regulations and (2) provide a ``substantially equal 
opportunity for public and private offerors to compete for the 
contract without regard to the location at which the workload 
is to be performed.''
    On March 30, 1998, the Air Force issued a solicitation for 
the purpose of conducting a public-private competition for 
various depot-level workloads being executed at Kelly Air Force 
Base, Texas. Based on the review of this solicitation and 
concerns raised informally by potential offerors, GAO found 
that the Air Force had not, as of May 5, provided sufficient 
evidence to show that soliciting the workloads on a combined 
basis for both centers would satisfy the Air Force's needs. 
However, GAO found that the solicitation was in compliance with 
applicable laws, including 10 U.S.C. 2469a.
52. ``District of Columbia: Taxes and Other Strategies to Reduce 
        Alcohol Abuse,'' May 19, 1998, GAO/GGD/HEHS-98-140
    a. Summary.--The District of Columbia's 1986-1990 average 
annual rate of alcohol-related deaths was nearly twice the 
national average. One-third of the District's high school 
students, in a 1995 survey, indicated that they had consumed 
alcohol recently, and 13 percent indicated frequent heavy 
drinking.
    The General Government Division [GGD] of the GAO studied 
the taxation and regulation of alcoholic beverages in the 
District. The objectives were to compare the District's taxes 
on alcoholic beverages with those of Virginia and Maryland to 
determine whether the District's alcoholic beverage tax 
structure can be made more similar to those in surrounding 
jurisdictions; to measure how much higher the District's excise 
tax rates would be if adjusted for inflation; to determine 
whether higher alcohol taxes vary directly with lowered alcohol 
abuse; to list which States allot their alcohol taxes for 
specific purposes; and to describe alcohol prevention programs 
the District should consider.
    Combined taxes in Virginia, a neighbor of the District's, 
are lower for nearly all beers and relatively expensive wines. 
The opposite holds true for cheaper wines. Compared to all 
Maryland counties, excluding Montgomery County, the District's 
combined sales and excise taxes are higher for all alcoholic 
beverage types.
    The District's tax structure cannot be made identical to 
those in Maryland and Virginia because tax structures in these 
nearby jurisdiction's all differ.
    The District's excise taxes have declined because they have 
not been adjusted for inflation. However, the ad valorem 
special sales tax rates on alcoholic drinks make up for the low 
excise taxes. Higher alcohol taxes raise consumer prices on 
alcoholic beverages, and higher consumer prices lower the 
quantity of alcohol demanded by consumers. Alcohol abuse thus 
drops. Twenty-four States earmark their excise taxes for 
alcohol treatment, substance abuse, mental health programs and/
or other specific purposes.
    Most alcohol prevention strategies have not been adequately 
evaluated or studied for a long enough period of time to 
determine their effectiveness. GAO suggests both visible law 
enforcement on illegal alcohol-related activities, as well as 
education to prevent alcohol misuse. The District has already 
implemented several programs for this cause, though full 
implementation of these programs has been thwarted by budget 
and staffing constraints.
53. ``Tax Administration: Ways to Simplify the Estimated Tax Penalty 
        Calculation,'' May 27, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-96
    a. Summary.--GAO prepared a report on estimated tax [ES] 
penalty rules. The Internal Revenue Service's [IRS] Taxpayer 
Advocate's Annual Report to Congress reported that ES penalty 
rules are extremely complicated. GAO reported on which Internal 
Revenue Code and IRS requirements cause ES penalty calculations 
(which taxpayers have difficulty completing) to be so complex, 
and also on how changes to the requirements might make ES 
penalties easier to calculate.
    Taxpayers who have underpaid their taxes can choose to 
assess their own penalties with a Form 2210. GAO found that 
this form requires many superfluous calculations which do very 
little to change the ES penalty amounts.
    Form 2210 also requires taxpayers to calculate each 
underpayment separately, rather than tracking the combined 
amount owed. GAO determined that calculating the accumulated 
amount would allow taxpayers to make fewer calculations, and 
thus make their penalty amounts easier to calculate.
    In addition, taxpayers must make more ES penalty 
calculations to account for three of the four 15-day periods 
between ES interest rate effective dates and ES payment dates, 
during which the rates change. But the rate changes only 
slightly affect the penalty amounts. GAO suggests aligning the 
interest rate effective date and the ES payment date, 
eliminating additional calculations and virtually unaffecting 
ES penalty amounts.
    GAO also found that a 365-day-a-year-calendar would 
decrease the number of calculations on ES penalties. Right now, 
taxpayers must make extra calculations when the underpayment 
amount due extends through a leap year or the end of the year 
before a leap year. The penalty amounts would only be affected 
by about 0.3 percent by GAO's suggested change.
54. ``Environmental Protection: EPA's and States' Efforts to Focus 
        State Enforcement Programs on Results,'' May 27, 1998, GAO/
        RCED-98-113
    a. Summary.--The Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] is 
allowed to designate responsibilities for key programs to 
States which have sufficient ``authority to inspect, monitor 
and enforce the program.'' Some States have adopted alternative 
strategies to the traditional enforcement approaches. As 
requested by the chairman and ranking member of the House 
Committee on Commerce, GAO examined what alternative strategies 
States practice to comply with EPA, both whether States and how 
States measure these alternative strategies' effectiveness, and 
how EPA has responded to these alternative strategies.
    GAO gathered information from 10 States--Colorado, 
Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, 
Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington--for its report. These 
States' approaches fall into two categories: (1) ``compliance 
assistance'' strategies which seek to help dischargers comply 
with EPA's environmental requirements, and (2) more flexible 
strategies. The former approach, which most of these 10 States 
use, targets smaller facilities and businesses which may not 
fully comprehend the environmental requirements or the most 
effective and efficient ways of practicing them. The latter 
approach encourages facilities and business to monitor and 
correct their own environmental performances and problems.
    Both State and EPA officials agreed that the effectiveness 
of these alternative approaches should be evaluated and judged. 
However, GAO found it difficult to measure their effectiveness 
because the data needed for a thorough evaluation was often 
missing.
    EPA continues to emphasize strong enforcement of its 
environmental policies. The agency has raised concerns about 
decreases in enforcement in some States and it objects to many 
State audit privilege/immunity laws and other programs that it 
believes detract from the efficiency and usefulness of State 
enforcement programs. GAO found that EPA and State authorities 
differed in legal and policy views, as well as regarding the 
extent to which EPA should be involved in State enforcement 
activities. Because of this, their views on the 10 States' 
alternative strategies differ as well. EPA's varying approaches 
on how to measure the adequacy of these alternative programs, 
GAO reported, only aggravate the problem. GAO concluded that 
EPA could help States form methods to achieve ``results-
oriented enforcement strategies.''
55. ``Tax Administration: Increasing EFT Usage for Installment 
        Agreements Could Benefit IRS,'' June 10, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-112
    a. Summary.--At the request of Representatives Bill Archer 
and Nancy L. Johnson, GAO reported on the use of electronic 
funds transfer [EFT] for making installment payments to the 
Internal Revenue Service [IRS]. For its report, GAO questioned 
officials from Minnesota and California, two States which 
promote EFT use.
    EFT is used by various types of organizations (e.g., banks) 
to transfer and receive money. It is a more accurate and less 
costly way to pay delinquent taxes. In both Minnesota and 
California, installment agreement default rates have declined 
in part due to EFT. GAO concluded that IRS could lower its 
installment agreement default rates and lower costs if more 
taxpayers used EFT to pay tax installments.
56. ``IRS' YEAR 2000 Efforts: Business Continuity Planning Needed for 
        Potential Year 2000 System Failures,'' June 15, 1998, GAO/GGD-
        98-138
    a. Summary.--GAO evaluated the Internal Revenue Service's 
[IRS] progress in adjusting its systems according to the 
guidelines in the year 2000 assessment guide; determined the 
risks the IRS is undertaking while it prepares information 
systems for dates beyond December 31, 1999; and identified the 
continuity of IRS operations in the event of year 2000-produced 
system failures.
    GAO found that 12 of the 14 steps in the year 2000 
guidelines must still be completed by IRS. Two risk areas for 
IRS are ``the lack of an integrated master conversion and 
replacement schedule'' and limited contingency planning for 
system failures. GAO concluded that IRS' approach to the year 
2000 problem is inadequate to ensure continuity of IRS' 
operations in the event of system failures in 2000.
57. ``Tax Administration: IRS Measures Could Provide a More Balanced 
        Picture of Audit Results and Costs,'' June 23, 1998, GAO/GGD-
        98-128
    a. Summary.--GAO conducted a report on the Internal Revenue 
Service's [IRS] measures of the results of its tax return 
audits. GAO's objectives were to determine how many of the 
audits were settled between fiscal years 1992 and 1997 and how 
much of the additional tax money IRS recommended was collected 
by September 27, 1997. GAO also determined how much of the 
additional tax money recommended for fiscal year 1992 had been 
assessed and collected, and whether IRS' measures of audit 
results fully reflected both audit costs and revenues.
    GAO found that, though IRS recommended tens of billions of 
dollars' worth of additional taxes, not all of these 
recommended taxes were assessed, and of those that were 
assessed, not all recommended taxes were collected. For 
example, only 34 percent of fiscal year 1992 recommended 
additional taxes were assessed. IRS settled 40 percent of the 
recommended taxes without assessing them. Of the 34 percent 
that was assessed, 72 percent was collected that year. As of 
September 27, 1997, only 25 percent of the recommended taxes 
for the 1992 fiscal year had been collected, and less than half 
of the recommended additional taxes from all types of audits 
had been collected. Also, GAO found that IRS' performance 
measures do not fully reflect audit costs and revenues.
58. ``USDA Telecommunications: Strong Leadership Needed to Resolve 
        Management Weaknesses, Achieve Savings,'' June 30, 1998, GAO/
        AIMD-98-131
    a. Summary.--At the request of Congressman Bob Goodlatte, 
GAO investigated steps the U.S. Department of Agriculture 
[USDA] has taken to address its telecommunications management 
weaknesses. GAO first reported these weaknesses in 1995 and 
1996. At that time, GAO recommended that USDA develop strong 
management practices in order to efficiently manage 
telecommunications; consolidate and optimize Federal 
Telecommunications System [FTS] resources in order to save 
money when possible; integrate resource and information 
networks so that more sharing can occur throughout the FTS; and 
both correct and prevent telephone fraud and abuses.
    USDA has since taken measures to reduce management 
weaknesses--measures that could save it as much as $70 million 
a year on telecommunications. However, USDA still lacks strong 
management practices to ensure efficiency; it has neither 
consolidated nor optimized FTS resources to realize savings 
where possible; and it has not taken measures to determine how 
much USDA is at risk for telephone fraud and abuses. GAO 
believes it is unlikely that these problems will be addressed, 
or that any corrective measures will be taken because no one at 
USDA is obligated to mitigate its telecommunications management 
weaknesses.
59. ``Results Act: Observations on Treasury's Fiscal Year 1999 Annual 
        Performance Plan,'' June 30, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-149
    a. Summary.--As requested by several Members of the House 
Majority Leadership, GAO reviewed the Department of the 
Treasury's fiscal year 1999 annual performance plan. Such plans 
must be submitted to Congress as stated by the Government 
Performance and Results Act of 1993 (Results Act). GAO 
developed three core questions which, in being answered, would 
help in its review: (1) ``To what extent does the agency's 
performance plan provide a clear picture of intended 
performance across the agency?''; (2) ``How well does the 
agency's performance plan discuss the strategies and resources 
the agency will use to achieve its performance goals?''; and 
(3) ``To what extent does the agency's performance plan provide 
confidence that its performance information will be credible?''
    GAO found that Treasury's fiscal year 1999 performance plan 
only partially meets the criteria of the Review Act. Treasury's 
plan covers almost all of its program activities and, in 
general, demonstrates a clear link between these activities and 
its performance goals. By way of improvements, GAO suggests 
displaying performance goals and measures information in a way 
that would better demonstrate intended/expected achievements. 
GAO also suggests that the plan include more outcome goals and 
measures. GAO cited that the plan does not include consistent 
information about how Treasury intends to coordinate its 
bureaus, offices and other agencies' activities.
    The plan also mentions the resources to be used to meet the 
criteria of the Results Act. However, strategies for reaching 
the criteria are not thoroughly described.
    GAO added that if Treasury were to incorporate more details 
on the strategies Treasury intends to use to verify and confirm 
performance information, Congress could be better assured of 
the performance information's credibility.
    So that the plan can be of more use to Congress, GAO has 
advised that the plan elaborate on performance goals that would 
address management challenges and high-risk areas Treasury 
faces.
60. ``Nuclear Proliferation: Difficulties in Accomplishing IAEA's 
        Activities in North Korea'' July 7, 1998, GAO/RCED-98-210
    a. Summary.--North Korea is a signatory of the Treaty on 
the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which requires it to 
safeguard its nuclear materials with the International Atomic 
Energy Agency [IAEA]. IAEA conducted inspections in 1992 and 
1993 that uncovered numerous discrepancies in North Korea's 
disclosure of the quantity of nuclear material in its tenure. 
Immediately following these inspections, North Korea announced 
its refusal to clear up any of the discrepancies, its cessation 
of IAEA's inspections, and its intention to withdraw from the 
treaty. This announcement raised widespread concern that North 
Korea may have redirected some of its nuclear material to yield 
nuclear weapons.
    Under the bilateral agreement between the United States and 
North Korea, known as the Agreed Framework, to address the 
North Korean nuclear issue, the United States has agreed to 
help North Korea in obtaining two light-water nuclear power 
reactors to produce electricity. In exchange, North Korea must 
promise a ``freeze'' on operations and construction at North 
Korea's existing graphite-moderated reactors and related 
facilities and agree to ultimately disassemble these facilities 
sometime in the near future. Meanwhile, some of IAEA's requests 
have been dropped, but they still must comply with IAEA's 
standards of conduct pertaining to other activities specified 
in the Agreed Framework.
    GAO's report requested by the Honorable Frank H. Murkowski, 
chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources, discusses the status of IAEA's actions under the 
Agreed Framework, including IAEA's nuclear-freeze monitoring 
activities, inspections of facilities not included in the 
freeze, and plans to validate the accuracy and completeness of 
North Korea's 1992 disclosure of the quantity of their nuclear 
material. This is GAO's third report to Senator Murkowski on 
this issue.
    IAEA is confident that operations and construction in North 
Korean nuclear-related facilities have been frozen. However, 
IAEA has specified some other problems associated with their 
ability to determine whether North Korea is complying in full 
with other aspects of the nuclear freeze. For example, North 
Korea has not allowed IAEA to implement safeguards measuring 
the liquid nuclear waste tanks at the facility. These measures 
are necessary to ensure that the nuclear waste is not being 
removed from the site or altered in any way.
    Certain North Korean nuclear facilities are allowed to 
continue operating. These facilities are smaller and less 
important to North Korea's nuclear program. Inspections by IAEA 
currently occur several times a year. IAEA has said that North 
Korea has been cooperative in this area. The only activity that 
North Korea prohibits IAEA from doing is taking environmental 
samples.
    Many activities are required of IAEA in the future to 
verify the accuracy and completeness of (1) North Korea's 
initial declaration of nuclear facilities and (2) the amount of 
nuclear material in their possession. IAEA's activities are 
linked in the Agreed Framework to certain stages in a reactor's 
construction. If there are delays in the reactor's 
construction, there will also be delays in IAEA's activities. 
IAEA has identified their biggest problem to be the lack of an 
early agreement between IAEA and North Korea on (1) acquiring 
the information needed to verify the declaration and (2) the 
procedures required to preserve that information. If this 
agreement is not made, North Korea's nuclear declaration 
``might be lost'' and the ability to retrieve operating 
histories of a graphite-moderated reactor will be lost. North 
Korea has not agreed because they consider IAEA's requests and 
requirements to be too excessive and premature in relation to 
the agreed upon timeframe set up in the Agreed Framework. IAEA 
is currently investigating ways to reconstruct the reactor's 
operating history in order to verify North Korea's initial 
disclosure of nuclear material.
61. ``Regulatory Management: Implementation of Selected OMB 
        Responsibilities Under the Paperwork Reduction Act'' July 9, 
        1998, GAO/GGD-98-120
    a. Summary.--Senator Sam Brownback requested that GAO 
conduct an assessment of the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs [OIRA], which is part of the Office of 
Management and Budget [OMB], to see how well they have complied 
with select responsibilities assigned to them by the 1995 
Paperwork Reduction Act [PRA]. Three areas of OIRA's 
information collections responsibilities were investigated by 
GAO:
         (1) How OIRA reviews and controls paperwork;
         (2) How OIRA oversees Federal information resources 
        management [IRM] activities;
         (3) How well OIRA keeps Congress and congressional 
        committees informed about major activities under the 
        PRA.
    GAO found that OIRA has not provided agencies with adequate 
guidance on how they can estimate their paperwork burden. As 
required by the PRA, OIRA has implemented governmentwide and 
agency specific burden-reduction goals. But, they do not 
believe that the goals of the agencies need to add up to the 
total government-wide goal. OIRA has not established any pilot 
programs to test alternative projects and procedures to 
minimize the information collection burden. They do have other 
pilot programs, however, which predate the PRA and were not 
initiated in response to the PRA.
    OIRA believes that through their reports to Congress under 
the PRA, the President's budget, and a strategic plan from the 
Chief Information Officers' [CIO] Council, they satisfy their 
responsibility to create a government-wide IRM plan. However, 
these documents do not provide agencies guidance on how they 
can use these information resources to improve agency and 
program performance. These documents only partially outline the 
performance of agencies and their accomplishments (elements 
required by the PRA in a government-wide IRM).
    OIRA claims that their annual reports, the CIO Council's 
strategic plan, and other reports and informational mechanisms 
keep Congress and congressional committees fully informed of 
their major activities. However, all of the information 
required by the PRA is not specifically contained in these 
reports. Even though OIRA posts the changes in burden-hour 
estimates from year to year in their reports, they have not 
alerted Congress that the burden reduction goals are unlikely 
to be met. OIRA has not informed Congress or congressional 
committees of their failure to complete all of the actions 
required of them by the PRA.
62. ``Tax Administration: IRS' Telephone Routing Interactive System May 
        Not Meet Expectations'' July 13, 1998, GAO/GGD-98-152
    a. Summary.--At the request of Representative Nancy L. 
Johnson, GAO reviewed the Internal Revenue Service's [IRS] 
development and implementation of the Telephone Routing 
Interactive System [TRIS]. TRIS, created to improve service and 
telephone assistance to taxpayers, is comprised of different 
applications--sources or networks--to which callers can be 
routed. GAO investigated taxpayers' use of TRIS applications, 
as well as IRS' estimates of TRIS' benefits.
    As of May 1998, nine TRIS applications were in operation. 
GAO found that in fiscal year 1997, 80 percent of the 30 
million customer service calls IRS received were handled by 
customer service representatives. Ten percent of the calls--3 
million of them--were ended before being completed, which means 
that only 10 percent of the calls were served by TRIS 
applications. Of this 3 million, only 300,000 called TRIS to 
receive information that was not already provided by another 
system. Thus, applications TRIS alone provided were only used 
one-third of a percent of the time when taxpayers called IRS.
    IRS' 1996 benefit estimates included having 45 percent of 
all customer representative calls shifted to its TRIS 
applications by fiscal year 2000 and implementing 27 TRIS 
applications, as well as the Integrated Case Processing system, 
which would allow service representatives to find information 
callers might need more quickly.
    GAO recommends that IRS rethink its TRIS plans, as well as 
determine which services taxpayers really need, want and would 
use; determine why taxpayers do not use TRIS more frequently; 
and reevaluate the costs and benefits of TRIS.

Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal 
                                Justice

1. ``Drug Control: Long-Standing Problems Hinder U.S. International 
        Efforts,'' February 1997, GA/NSIAD-97-75
    a. Summary.--GAO summarized the findings from its previous 
work on international drug control and interdiction efforts, 
focusing on: (1) the effectiveness of U.S. efforts to combat 
drug production and the movement of drugs into the United 
States; (2) obstacles to implementation of U.S. drug control 
efforts; and (3) suggestions to improve the operational 
effectiveness of the U.S. international drug control efforts. 
GAO noted that: (1) despite long-standing efforts and 
expenditures of billions of dollars, illegal drugs still flood 
the United States; (2) although these efforts have resulted in 
some successes, including the arrest of traffickers and the 
eradication, seizure, and disruption in the transport of 
illegal drugs, they have not materially reduced the 
availability of drugs; (3) a key reason for U.S. 
counternarcotics programs' lack of success is that 
international drug-trafficking organizations have become 
sophisticated, multi-billion dollar industries that quickly 
adapt to new U.S. drug control efforts; (4) as success is 
achieved in one area, the drug-trafficking organizations change 
tactics, thwarting U.S. efforts; (5) other significant, long-
standing obstacles also impede U.S. and drug-producing and 
transit countries' drug control efforts; (6) in the drug-
producing and transit countries, counternarcotics control 
efforts are constrained by competing economic and political 
policies, inadequate laws, limited resources and institutional 
capabilities, and internal problems such as terrorism and civil 
unrest; (7) moreover, drug traffickers are increasingly 
resourceful in corrupting the countries' institutions; (8) U.S. 
efforts have been hampered by competing U.S. foreign policy 
objectives, organizational and operational limitations, 
difficulty in obtaining bilateral and multilateral support for 
U.S. drug control efforts, inconsistency in the funding for 
U.S. international drug-control efforts, and the lack of ways 
to tell whether or how well counternarcotics efforts are 
contributing to the goals and objectives of the national drug 
control strategy, which results in an inability to prioritize 
the use of limited resources; (9) there is no panacea for 
resolving all of the problems associated with illegal drug 
trafficking; (10) however, a multi-year plan that describes 
where, when, and how U.S. agencies intend to apply resources 
would provide a more consistent approach; (11) this plan should 
include performance measures and long-term funding needs linked 
to the goals and objectives of the international drug control 
strategy; (12) ONDCP should, at least annually, review the plan 
and make appropriate adjustments; and, (13) with this multiyear 
plan, program managers and policymakers can make more-informed 
decisions on priorities.
    b. Benefits.--The United States has spent billions of 
dollars on international drug control and interdiction efforts 
but illegal drugs still flow into this country. A major factor 
is that international drug-trafficking organizations have 
become sophisticated, multibillion-dollar industries capable of 
changing tactics to elude new U.S. drug control efforts and 
corrupting the institutions of drug-producing and transit 
countries. U.S. efforts have also been hampered by competing 
foreign policy objectives, inconsistent funding for U.S. 
international drug control plans, and a lack of ways to measure 
the success of counternarcotics efforts. Although no panacea 
exists that will curb illegal drug trafficking, a multi-year 
plan that sets out funding needs linked to goals and objectives 
would provide a more consistent approach to drug control 
efforts. GAO also believes that improved uses of technology and 
intelligence and the development of a centralized ``lessons 
learned'' system could bolster counter-narcotics efforts.
2. ``Environmental Cleanup at DOD: Better Cost-Sharing Guidance Needed 
        at Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated Sites,'' March 1997, 
        GAO/NSIAD-97-32
    a. Summary.--This report examines Department of Defense 
[DOD] policies and practices regarding cleanup of environmental 
contamination at government-owned, contractor-operated [GOCO] 
plants, as a follow-up to previous reports which demonstrated 
inconsistent policies and practices on cost sharing. GAO 
reviewed nine higher-cost case studies at the Defense Logistics 
Agency [DLA] and the military services (1) to assess the 
consistency of cost-sharing practices across DOD and (2) to 
compare the service cleanup estimates against DOD's. 
Specifically, GAO identified the actions taken and the types of 
arrangements for sharing cleanup costs between the Government 
and other responsible parties, and examined site-specific 
cleanup cost data.
    The services' policies and practices for having contractors 
share cleanup costs still vary widely. Not withstanding GAO 
recommendations to do so, DOD has not given the services 
adequate guidance for making decisions on whether and when to 
seek recovery of environmental cleanup costs incurred by DOD 
from contractors and other parties at GOCO facilities. The Army 
authorized indemnifying its operating contractors from cleanup 
costs at ammunition plants; the Navy policy requires cost-
recovery efforts, but has not initiated timely requests for 
cost sharing or followed up; and the Air Force is beginning to 
seek participation in cleanup costs from its operating 
contractors.
    Regarding cleanup at GOCO facilities visited by GAO, DOD's 
fiscal year 1994 report to Congress included costs that were 
closer to the military services' supporting data than DOD's 
reported fiscal year 1993 estimates. DOD's estimates for 
cleaning up the 78 GOCO facilities increased from $1.4 billion 
in fiscal year 1993 to $3.6 billion in 1994, but decreased 
somewhat to $3.3 billion in 1995. Although DOD and the services 
have addressed GAO's recommendations to improve cost 
information, their estimates of past and projected costs still 
differ, and not all costs were included.
    Because Superfund holds parties liable for the billions of 
dollars needed to remedied past contamination regardless of 
wrongdoing, it is important that DLA and the services deal with 
potentially responsible parties on the basis of consistent 
policy and accurate data. However, the lack of DOD guidance on 
cost sharing has permitted inconsistencies in approaches to 
cost sharing, and the potential for some parties to be held 
responsible for cleanup costs, while others in similar 
situations are not. If cost sharing agreements are reached, 
omissions in historical information and cost data may inhibit 
the recovery of all appropriate costs.
    b. Benefits.--This report highlights DOD's lack of accurate 
accounting data and a coherent and consistent department-wide 
policy for determining cleanup costs at GOCO sites. In 
addition, this reports the likelihood of higher and previously 
unplanned cleanup costs to the Congress. To address the 
inconsistencies in cost sharing approaches and the potential 
for disparate treatment of other responsible parties described 
in this report, GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense 
issue guidance to DOD components to resolve current disparities 
and to promote future consistent treatment of all parties in 
cost recovery decisions. So that sufficient data will be 
available for cost sharing negotiations and program oversight, 
GAO also recommends that the Secretary of Defense direct the 
military services and DLA to: (1) Identify, to the extent it 
has not already been done, whether parties other than the 
government were involved with any contamination, as part of 
environmental cleanup preliminary assessments at GOCO 
facilities; (2) Obtain all relevant data regarding other 
responsible parties identified, whether or not wrongdoing is an 
issue; (3) Gather and maintain the most timely and accurate DOD 
cost data available in DLA, military service, and other 
agencies' records; and (4) Provide consistent estimates, 
including all cleanup costs for DOD's environmental reports to 
Congress, regardless of the source of funds.
3. ``Combating Terrorism: Threat and Risk Assessments Can Help 
        Prioritize and Target Program Investment,'' April 1998, GAO/
        NSIAD-98-74.
    a. Summary.--This report points out that many combating 
terrorism programs are being implemented in a vacuum without 
the benefit of proper threat and risk assessments. For example, 
as a result of the Domestic Preparedness Program, the largest 
120 cities in the United States will receive about $300,000 
worth of training equipment. Yet no coordinated threat and risk 
assessments have been conducted by Federal, State and local 
governments to determine the threat a particular city may face 
and what type of training and equipment these cities should 
have. Such assessments are not required under NLD. However, if 
properly applied, threat and risk assessments can provide an 
analytically sound basis for building programmatic responses to 
various identified threats, including terrorism, they could 
help cities prioritize their investments in weapons of mass 
destruction preparedness. The report also discusses how 
possible challenges to using threat and risk assessments could 
be overcome through Federal, State and local collaboration.
    The GAO notes the success that a private company has had in 
employing threat and risk assessments to identify risk and 
prioritize security measures for areas such as overseas 
corporate operations in hostile conditions to hiring practices. 
Such assessments were conducted by a multi disciplinary team of 
experts that reviewed threat information, the value and 
vulnerability of critical assets, and the probability and 
severity of a terrorist act. Subcommittee staff had the 
opportunity to meet with and were briefed by an official from 
this company.
    b. Benefits.--While experts may disagree as to the 
likelihood of a terrorist attack in the United States involving 
a chemical, biological or nuclear weapon, the Congress has 
determined that such an incident has the potential to be so 
devastating that we must be fully prepared to respond. The 
Department of Defense Domestic Preparedness Program was 
designed to prepare first-responders for such an incident.
    This report highlights the lack of a valid threat and risk 
assessment program used in conjunction with this training and 
equipment loans program. Without such assessments, the Federal 
Government may not be directing resources in the most efficient 
manner to the cities most at risk. The subcommittee believes 
this to be a serious deficiency of the Domestic Preparedness 
Program, and took corrective action this year. Working with 
majority and minority staff on the House Committee on National 
Security, language was included in the 1999 Defense 
Authorization bill that will mandate that the Department of 
Justice through the Federal Bureau of Investigation will 
conduct threat and risk assessments in collaboration with other 
Federal, State and local agencies, and that the results of such 
assessments may be used to determine training and other 
requirements.
4. ``Drug Control: Update on U.S. Interdiction Activities in the 
        Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.'' October 1997, GAO/NSIAD-98-30
    a. Summary.--Since GAO's April 1996 report ``Drug Control: 
U.S. Interdiction Efforts in the Caribbean Decline [NSIAD-96-
119]'' the amount of drugs smuggled and the counternarcotics 
capabilities of host countries and the United States have 
remained largely unchanged. Cocaine trafficking through the 
Caribbean and Eastern Pacific regions continues, and drug 
traffickers are still relying heavily on maritime modes of 
transportation. Recent information shows that traffickers are 
using ``go-fast'' boats, fishing vessels, coastal freighters, 
and other vessels in the Caribbean and fishing and cargo 
vessels with multiton loads in the Eastern Pacific. Also, 
recent estimates indicate that, of all cocaine moving through 
the transit zone, 38 percent (234 metric tons) is being shipped 
through the Eastern Pacific. Although the United States has 
continued to provide technical assistance and equipment to many 
Caribbean and other transit zone countries, the amount of 
cocaine seized by most of the countries is small relative to 
the estimated amounts flowing through the area. The counterdrug 
efforts of many transit zone countries continue to be hampered 
by limited resources and capabilities. Moreover, the United 
States does not have bilateral maritime agreements with 12 
transit zone countries to facilitate interdiction activities. 
Also, since the April 1996 report, the United States has 
increased funding but has had limited success in detecting 
monitoring, and interdicting air and maritime trafficking in 
the transit zone. JIATF-East assets devoted to these efforts 
have stayed at almost the same level. However, drug-trafficking 
events are usually not detected and, when detected, often do 
not result in narcotics seizures. U.S. counternarcotics 
officials believe that the Eastern Pacific, ``a major drug-
threat area.'' could benefit from greater attention. JIATF-East 
has requested additional resources from DOD to address Eastern 
Pacific drug trafficking, believing that cocaine seizures it 
supports could be doubled. DOD has not determined, what, if 
any, additional support will be allocated to the Eastern 
Pacific above current force levels. In 1996, the U.S. Customs 
Service and the U.S. Coast Guard initiated two intensive 
operations in and around Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands that resulted in increased cocaine seizures and a 
disruption in drug-trafficking patterns.
    b. Benefits.--In response to GAO's recommendation in their 
April 1996 report that ONDCP develop a regional plan of action, 
ONDCP officials told GAO that it developed an overall strategy 
that identifies agency roles, missions, and tasks to execute 
the drug strategy and establish task priorities. However, the 
strategy does not include quantitative objectives for 
activities that would establish a defined baseline for 
developing operational plans and resource requirements. 
According to GAO, ONDCP's performance measurement system 
remains incomplete, as of October 1, 1997, because proposed 
measurable targets, the core of ONDCP's system, were still 
under review. Until these measurable targets are developed, it 
will not be possible to hold agencies accountable for their 
performance. In addition, law enforcement agencies with 
jurisdiction in the Caribbean are in the process of developing 
a regional plan led by DEA, the FBI, and the U.S. Customs 
Service. This plan was expected to be completed by January 
1998.
5. ``Safe and Drug-Free Schools: Balancing Accountability With State 
        and Local Flexibility.'' October 1997, GAO/HEHS-98-3
    a. Summary.--The Safe and Drug-Free Schools program is one 
of several substance abuse- and violence-prevention programs 
funded by the Federal Government. The act that authorizes the 
program requires a variety of Federal, State, and local actions 
to ensure accountability. These actions involve four major 
types of accountability mechanisms: (1) an application process, 
requiring approval of State and local program plans; (2) 
monitoring activities by State agencies; (3) periodic reports 
and evaluations; and (4) the use of local or substate regional 
advisory councils. In combination, these mechanisms address 
accountability for both how funds are spent and progress toward 
achieving national, State, and locally defined goals.
    The Department of Education oversees State programs 
directly and local programs indirectly through required State 
actions. Its State oversight is a combination of activities 
required by the act and other generally applicable 
requirements. Working along with States, Education reviews, 
helps States to revise, and, finally, approves State plans--
which include a description of planned State-level activities, 
criteria for selecting high-need districts that will receive 
supplemental funds, and plans for monitoring local activities--
before disbursing funds. In addition, Education conducts on-
site monitoring visits. To allow States and localities enough 
flexibility to meet their needs, Education has issued no 
program-specific regulations on the act. Education does, 
however, require States to conform to general and 
administrative regulations and advises States on program 
matters, such as allowable expenditures, through nonbinding 
guidance. In addition, the Department may get involved in 
resolving allegations of impropriety in the use of funds. For 
example, Education, in response to allegations about Drug-Free 
Schools programs, reviewed programs in West Virginia and 
participated in resolving adverse audit findings in Michigan. 
To date, however, no overall evaluations of the Safe and Drug-
Free Schools program have been completed.
    b. Benefits.--The major purpose of the Safe and Drug-Free 
Schools programs is to help the Nation's schools provide a 
disciplined environment conducive to learning by eliminating 
violence in and around schools and preventing illegal drug use. 
States and localities have wide discretion in designing and 
implementing programs funded under the act. They are held 
accountable for achieving the goals and objectives they set as 
well as for the Federal dollars they spend. As permitted under 
the act, States and localities are delivering a wide range of 
activities and services. Likewise, accountability mechanisms 
have been established and appear to be operating in ways 
consistent with the act.
    The lack of uniform information on program activities and 
effectiveness may, however, create a problem for Federal 
oversight. First, with no requirement that States use a 
consistent set of measures, the Department faces a difficult 
challenge in assembling the triennial reports so that a 
nationwide picture of the program's effectiveness emerges. 
Second, although Education provides a mechanism for States to 
report information annually, under the act, nationwide 
information on effectiveness and program activities may only be 
available every 3 years, which may not be often enough for 
congressional oversight.

                   Subcommittee on the Postal Service

1. ``Information on Post Office Closures, Appeals, and Affected 
        Communities,'' March 1997. GAO/GGD-97-38BR
    a. Summary.--At the request of Subcommittee Chairman 
McHugh, the General Accounting Office reported on the Postal 
Service's closure of post offices. A Post Office closure is 
when the Postal Service permanently closes the operations of an 
independent post office [IPO], eliminates the position of the 
postmaster associated with that office, and provides the 
customers with alternative postal services, such as highway 
contract routes, rural route services, or community post 
offices.
    In a 1996 report, GAO reported that of 39,140 post offices, 
stations branches and other postal outlets, about 45 percent 
reported total revenues that were about $1.1 billion lower than 
their total expenses in fiscal year 1995.
    The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 provides that no 
small post office can be closed for economic reasons alone. For 
some years after the act, Congress appropriated funds to 
reimburse the Postal Service for the ``public service costs'' 
that the Postal Service incurred in retaining postal operations 
in communities where the post offices were not self-sustaining. 
In 1976, Congress added to the provisions to govern whether and 
how the Service is to close post offices. These provisions 
included that prior to closing a post office, the USPS must 
consider the effects on the community served, the postal 
employees affected by the closure, the Government policy to 
provide effective and regular postal service to all areas of 
the country as well as any economic savings to the Service 
resulting from the closure. The customers must be provided with 
a written proposal and adequate notice at least 60 days prior 
to the proposed date for the closure of the post office and 
what lead to the decision to close the post office. About 
28,000 post offices, headed by a postmaster, are subject to the 
statutory closing restrictions. The Postal Rate Commission is 
authorized to affirm the proposal or remand the issue to the 
Postal Service for reconsideration, using Postal Service data. 
Though the Postal Service is not required to notify the PRC of 
the outcome of the reconsideration, the PRC must rule on 
appeals no later than 120 days after receiving it.
    The Postal Service has closed 3,924 post offices since 
1970. There have been 296 appeals of closures to the PRC which 
affirmed 170 of the Postal Service's proposals. Three 
circumstances may prompt the Postal Service to consider whether 
to close a post office: vacancy in the postmaster position (due 
to promotion, transfer, retirement or death); emergency 
suspension of a post office's operations (as in circumstances 
such as a fire, natural disaster or termination of a lease); 
and special circumstances (such as incorporation of two 
communities into one). In fiscal year 1995, 239 post offices 
were closed, and in 1996, 161 post offices were closed.
    b. Benefits.--By commissioning this study, the Postal 
Service is alerted to the subcommittee's oversight concerns 
about retention of small and rural post offices. This report 
provides important information to Congress and to the 
communities facing postal closures. It encapsulates the process 
for closing post offices.
2. ``Postal Reform in Canada: Canada Post Corporation's Universal 
        Service and Ratemaking,'' March 1997. GAO/GGD-9745/BR
    a. Summary.--The General Accounting Office responded to 
Subcommittee Chairman McHugh's request to provide information 
on the 1981 reform initiative of the Canadian postal system 
which ultimately became the Canadian Post Corp. [CPC], a Crown 
Corp.--a commercial function operating for public purposes in 
which the Canadian Government is the only shareholder--which 
was given broad authority to address existing problems within 
the Canadian postal system. The GAO report covered matters 
relating to universal mail service, CPC ratemaking and key 
events affecting the CPC since its establishment.
    The CPC Act provided that the CPC Board of Directors would 
be selected by the Canadian Government, designate a minister to 
oversee the CPC and approve proposed CPC regulations, approve 
its 5 year-plans, annual operating and capital budgets. The CPC 
is subject to antitrust law which is executed by Canada's 
Bureau of Competition Policy. The CPC is required to endeavor 
to operate on a self-sustaining financial basis.
    It is reported that the CPC incurred operating losses from 
its inception through fiscal year 1988. In 1989 it reported its 
first profit and also reported profits in 4 of the 7 fiscal 
years 1990 through 1996. CPC has now paid dividends. In 1994, 
it became subject to Federal income tax. The term ``universal 
service'' is not mentioned in the CPC Act but it does cite 
``maintaining basic customary postal service,'' and must 
consider several conditions in providing a standard of service 
which will meet the needs of communities of similar size. The 
CPC does not require basic letter mail service at uniform 
price, but it is CPC policy to do so. The CPC Act provides that 
the Canadian Post has the ``exclusive privilege'' of collecting 
and delivering most letter mail in Canada; this accounts for 
about 50 percent of CPC's operating revenue. In an attempt to 
improve mail service, the CPC reduced mail delivery from 6 to 5 
days a week and dropped mail delivery for businesses in urban 
areas from several times a day to once a day. CPC provides mail 
delivery less frequently, as infrequently as once a week, to 
about 200 communities in the remote regions of northern Canada. 
CPC reduced the number of post offices it owned by closing post 
offices and privatizing 50 percent of its post offices, which 
are now typically in conveniently located, privately owned 
outlets like grocery stores, which can provide longer operating 
hours and a wider range of services. Most of the conversions 
took place prior to February 1994 when the Government put a 
moratorium on the conversion program.
    The CPC sets some of its postal rates by regulation. These 
are generally single-piece domestic and international letters, 
and prescribing rates of postage discounts on mailable matter 
prepared in the form defined by regulation. Under the CPC Act, 
reasonable opportunity is provided for interested parties to 
comment on the regulations subject to government approval, 
though it does not specify how these comments are to be 
addressed. The comments are analyzed and sent to the Minister 
responsible for CPC and then the proposed regulation is 
approved by the Board of Directors. In 1996, the only postal 
rates established by regulation were for basic domestic and 
international single-piece letters, international printed 
matter--including newspapers and periodical--literature for the 
blind and some registered mail products. Non-regulated rates, 
those set by agreement, must be approved by the CPC Board of 
Directors or others within the CPC. These rates may relate to 
variations of postage rates based on bulk mailing or 
preparation of mail in a manner which would expedite processing 
and provision of experimental services for periods not 
exceeding 3 years. The CPC, over the years, has sought and 
received government approval to remove a number of rate 
categories from the regulatory process and now most of the 
postal rates are established without regulation and without 
government approval. These products include bulk mail, 
overnight or urgent delivery, unaddressed advertised mail and 
parcels. Nonregulated postage rates fall into generic and 
nongeneric rates. Generic rates apply to discounted bulk-
business letter mail, advertising mail, parcels, and courier 
services. These rates are available to anyone who meets bulk 
mail requirement. Nongeneric postage rates are established 
though negotiated, confidential agreements, customized for 
individual, large-volume business customers and approved by CPC 
officials below the top level through authority delegated by 
the Board of Directors. These are generally for mail other than 
letter, such as parcels and unaddressed advertising mail.
    The CPC Act provides that rates issued by regulation must 
be fair, reasonable and consistent. The rates are established 
by taking into account the basic customary service obligation, 
providing uniform basic letter rates and limiting rates to the 
rise in the Consumer Price Index. The total revenues provided 
must be sufficient to defray expenses incurred by the CPC in 
the conduct of its operations. The established pricing policies 
comply with the CPC Act and the antitrust provisions of the 
Competition Act. An independent auditing firm ensures that the 
CPC is allocating and distributing costs properly for 
ratemaking purposes. The detailed cost and revenue data is 
considered to be commercially sensitive.
    b. Benefits.--The information reported in this study 
provides useful information to the subcommittee in its efforts 
to reform the U.S. Postal Service to make it more competitive 
in an era when it is facing extreme competition because of 
advances made in the electronic and technological fields.
3. ``U.S. Postal Service: Information on Emergency Suspensions of 
        Operations at Post Offices,'' April 1997, GAO-GGD-97-70R
    a. Summary.--Subcommittee Chairman McHugh requested 
information on emergency suspension of operations at post 
offices by the Postal Service. The Postal Reorganization Act of 
1970 mandates that no post office can be closed for economic 
reasons alone. In 1976, Congress added provisions that govern 
whether and how the Postal Service can close post offices and 
give the customers the right to appeal the determination to the 
Postal Rate Commission. However, emergency suspensions cannot 
be appealed because they are not governed by statute. These 
closures are set within the Postal Operations Manual and the 
Post Office Discontinuance Guide (Handbook-101). They provide 
that Service district managers, Customer Service and Sales, may 
suspend the operations of any post office under their 
jurisdiction when an emergency or other condition requires such 
action. An emergency is defined as an occurrence that creates a 
threat to the safety and health of postal employees or 
customers, or to the security of the mail. This may include, 
among other situations, a natural disaster; termination of a 
lease or rental agreement when other suitable accommodations 
are unavailable; lack of qualified personnel to operate the 
post office; severe health or safety hazard in the work 
environment; severe damage to, or destruction of, the post 
office building; and lack of adequate measures to safeguard the 
office or its revenues. Service procedures require that the 
senior vice president, Marketing be notified immediately by the 
district managers, who must also notify affected customers by 
individual letter of the effective date and the reason for the 
suspension, the alternative service available, the nearest post 
office and its hours of operation, and the name and telephone 
number of a person to contact for more information. Alternative 
postal service must be established as soon as possible after a 
suspension and, if there is time, a community meeting should be 
convened. District managers are required to decide within 6 
months of a suspension whether to reopen the post office or to 
initiate a study to determine the feasibility of permanently 
closing the post office. The post office remains in suspension 
status while the study is initiated and there is no set time 
for completion of the study. The Postal Service reports that 
since the beginning of 1992 through March 1997, the operations 
of 651 post offices were suspended, the greatest number 
occurring in 1993, primarily because of the early out 
retirement incentive which resulted in a number of postmasters 
retiring early in 1993. Many of the post offices lost their 
lease at that time because the retiring postmaster owned the 
building or qualified people were not available to continue the 
operations of the post office. As of March 1997, 470 post 
offices were under emergency suspensions. The average time of 
the suspension was 4.3 years.
    b. Benefits.--There was much postal patron concern 
regarding the emergency closing of post offices because of the 
inconveniences they caused. This study by the GAO puts into 
concise form the number of emergency suspensions and why the 
post offices were closed.
4. ``U.S. Postal Service: Information About Restrictions on Mailbox 
        Access,'' May 1997. GAO/GGD-97-85
    a. Summary.--At the request of Subcommittee Chairman 
McHugh, the GAO responded to subcommittee concerns to evaluate 
if changes are needed to 18 U.S.C. 1725, the law that gives the 
Postal Service exclusive access to mailboxes, known as the 
``mailbox restriction.'' The Postal Service relies on the 
provision to protect postal revenue, facilitate efficient and 
secure delivery of mail and ensure the privacy of postal 
customers. Some postal competitors believe that the provision 
is unnecessary, unfair and restricts their business and, 
therefore, should be repealed. No studies have been made to 
substantiate the claims of either the Postal Service or the 
competitors. GAO reported that Congress adopted the mailbox 
restriction rule in 1934 to prevent the delivery of unstamped 
matter in mailboxes, which was occurring during that time and 
adversely impacting postal revenues. Civic groups which had 
placed the unstamped material in the mailboxes claimed that the 
restriction abridged their first amendment rights to free 
speech and the press.
    In 1981, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the 
constitutionality of the mailbox restriction, ruling that the 
law and enforcement actions were not geared to the content of 
the message place in mailboxes. It also found that mailboxes 
are essential to mail delivery and that postal customers agree 
to abide by laws and regulations that apply to mailboxes in 
exchange for the Postal Service agreeing to deliver and pick up 
mail in them. Based on their national study, the GAO found 
about 66 percent reported that their household received mail in 
unlocked mailboxes. About 82 percent of the adults surveyed are 
opposed to allowing just anyone to put materials into their 
mailbox. However, 58 percent favored granting mailbox access to 
express mail companies such as Federal Express and United 
Parcel Service. About 49 percent endorsed allowing other 
companies, such as utilities, to have access; 38 percent 
favored magazines and newspapers, and 29 percent agreed to 
having catalogs, coupons or ads. The Postal Service, postal 
labor unions and management associations, and a contractors' 
association expressed that the mailbox restriction should not 
change. The Justice Department also opposed change because the 
restriction deters the distribution of sexually explicit 
materials to mailboxes because there are some laws and 
regulations governing the distribution of these materials only 
to mail delivered by the Postal Service and would not be 
applicable to others if they utilized the mailboxes for 
delivery. Most mailer groups also agreed with the mailbox 
restriction should remain but others differed.
    The Postal Inspection Service which is responsible for 
enforcing postal laws, did not have data on the number of mail 
thefts but reported that it was not a serious problem because 
the mailbox restriction deters mail theft and makes it easier 
to resolve the cases. Under current law a violation of the 
mailbox restriction provision can be punished by a fine but not 
by imprisonment. The maximum fine for each offense is $5,000 
for individuals and $10,000 for organizations.
    b. Benefits.--In its deliberations on postal reform, the 
subcommittee considered a demonstration project to relax the 
mailbox rule. This provision became a hotly debated issue but 
no empirical data was available until this GAO study was 
completed. As a result of the GAO finding, this measure has 
been dropped from the legislative proposal.
5. ``The Results Act: Observations on the Postal Service's June 1997 
        Draft Strategic Plan,'' July 1997, GAO/GGD-97-163R
    a. Summary.--The majority leader, chairmen of the 
Committees on the Budget, Appropriations and Government Reform 
and Oversight asked for GAO review of the drafts prepared by 
cabinet departments of strategic plans as required by the 
Government Performance and Results Act. Subcommittee Chairman 
McHugh requested that the Postal Service be included in this 
review. This report assessed whether the Postal Service was in 
compliance with the Results Act, whether the major statutory 
responsibilities were reflected in the submitted text, whether 
the Postal Service addressed major management problems, whether 
the Service had capacity to provide reliable information for 
measuring results and whether the strategic plan shows input 
from consultation and interagency coordination for cross-
cutting functions. For several years, the Postal Service has 
been using its own strategic planning system, CustomerPerfect!, 
based on the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, to set 
its goals and it provided a strong basis for addressing the 
Results Act requirements. Recognizing that the strategic 
planning process is ongoing and iterative, the GAO observed 
that the Postal Service draft plan generally included the six 
components required by the act and provided useful information, 
but that the discussion could be strengthened to meet the 
requirements of the act. Though the plan showed the major 
statutory responsibilities, GAO determined that the Service 
should have elaborated on and discussed major management 
problems and submitted a more complete mission statement, 
general goals and objectives, and strategies to achieve the 
goals and objectives.
    The Results Act requires that strategic plans contain a 
description of how goals and objectives are to be achieved 
including a description of operational processes, skills and 
technology, and human, capital information and other resources 
necessary to meet these goals. The GAO also suggested that the 
plan could better discuss how these components may be affected 
by key management problems, such as labor-management relations, 
the need to strengthen internal controls to protect revenues 
and ensuring the integrity of acquisitions. The Postal Service 
provided multiple goals. GAO commented that the Postal Service 
faces a difficult challenge in successfully implementing all 
the projected goals. Even though it recognizes the challenges, 
the Postal Service needs to explain how its executives will 
manage the process.
    b. Benefits.--This overview by the GAO will provide the 
Postal Service with an objective, unbiased assessment of its 
presentation of goals and projections for the future. A more 
refined product from the Postal Service will enable Congress to 
perform its oversight duties with clearer direction and, by 
charting its course with more refinement, Postal Service 
customers will be served by a more efficient and goals oriented 
agency. Clearly, the Postal Service stakeholders will have a 
better vision of how the Postal Service will compete in an 
electronic communications market. The Postal Service will 
benefit from the expressed clarity of purpose, expressing 
accuracy and effectiveness of delivery performance, 
appropriateness of measurements of postal productivity and the 
measurement of business and residential customer satisfaction.
6. U.S. Postal Service: ``Issues Related to Governance of the Postal 
        Service,'' August 1997, GAO/GGD-97-141
    a. Summary.--Subcommittee Chairman McHugh requested that 
GAO furnish information regarding the governance of the Postal 
Service which would be beneficial in the subcommittee's efforts 
to reform the Postal Service. The objectives were to identify 
major areas of concern or issues that former and current 
Governors of the Postal Service may have regarding the Board 
and to compare the major characteristics, similarities or 
differences, of the Postal Service Board of Governors with the 
characteristics of other boards of government-created 
corporations or corporation-like organizations. Nine other 
entities were chosen for comparison (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, 
TVA, RTB, FDIC, AMTRAK, CPB, Canada Post, Australia Post). 
Additionally, the GAO provided information on governance issues 
to assist in the postal reform endeavor. Present and former 
Governors of the Postal Service indicated that attention should 
be given to several areas: the limitations on the Board to 
establish postage rates; the inability of the Board to pay the 
PMG more than the level I of the Executive Schedule; the lack 
of pay comparability of the Board; and amending the 
qualification requirements of Board appointees to ensure they 
have the necessary experience to oversee a major Government 
entity.
    b. Benefits.--Prior to the issuance of this report, no 
other study was available to answer questions pertinent to the 
subcommittee's interest in comparison of the Postal Service 
with other entities of like characteristics. This report 
contains invaluable information for the subcommittee's use.
7. ``Little Progress Made in Addressing Persistent Labor-Management 
        Problems,'' October 1997, GAO/GGD-97-85 and GAO/T-GGD-98-7
    a. Summary.--This report was submitted in response to 
Subcommittee Chairman McHugh's request that the GAO review the 
efforts of the Postal Service to enhance employee working 
conditions and the overall performance of the Service. This 
report contains updated material to GAO's 1994 report, ``U.S. 
Postal Service: Labor-Management Problems Persist on the 
Workroom Floor.'' The GAO had made several recommendations to 
the Service to improve labor-management relations. The current 
report determined the status and results of the identified 
concerns in the previous report and made recommendations to 
help alleviate the problems. The GAO ascertained that the 
problems still exist because the Postal Service and the unions 
and management groups cannot concur on how best to address the 
concerns; therefore, the GAO recommendations have not been 
implemented in most cases, though employee officials indicated 
that some of the initiatives would be workable. Improving 
relations between labor and management continues to be an 
ongoing challenge and concern, particularly since the 
communications arena is becoming inevitably competitive. This 
material was the subject of a subcommittee hearing on November 
4, 1997 at which GAO testified.
    b. Benefits.--Employee salaries represent 80 percent of the 
cost for services for the USPS. Additionally, as the Postal 
Service faces increased competition, and in an effort to 
contain costs associated with employee grievances, it is 
imperative that labor-management relations be improved and 
costs contained. The GAO report of 1994 prompted the Postal 
Service to call a summit in October 1997, in an effort to start 
implementing some of the recommendations that it proposed to 
improve relations and expedite the grievance process.
8. ``U.S. Postal Service: Information on Centralized Procurement of 
        Uniforms,'' January 28, 1998, GGD-98-58R
    a. Summary.--GAO reviewed the U.S. Postal Service [USPS] 
planned change from a decentralized system for procuring postal 
uniforms to a centralized system. The GAO noted that according 
to the Postal Service the new Centralized Uniform Purchasing 
program will require contractors to ensure that uniforms are 
made exclusively with American materials and labor. The Postal 
Service will require contractors to adhere to the Apparel 
Industry Partnership's ``Work Place Code of Conduct'' regarding 
standards for working conditions and wages. The Postal Service 
plans to ensure that contractors follow these requirements, 
hence, the Service plans to monitor the contractor's efforts, 
including contracting with third parties. GAO noted that under 
the new uniform program the number of retail vendors selling 
postal uniforms will be reduced from more than 800 to 6 or 
less. The Postal Service anticipated that the new centralized 
system could save from $13 million to $17 million annually. 
Bulk buying would help to hold down costs as well as 
streamlining the number of vendor invoices for postal uniforms 
which consumed more than 61,000 staff hours. The Secretary of 
the Board of Governors indicated to the GAO that the decision 
of the Board to subscribe to a centralized uniform purchasing 
plan was not based on anticipated savings but with memorandums 
of understanding with postal unions. When the review was made, 
USPS had not studied the likely impact of the program and it 
had not contacted the Small Business Administration or the 
Department of Commerce about a move to a centralized system. 
However, the USPS had met with the National Association of 
Uniform Manufacturers and Distributors, which represents some 
current retail vendors in an attempt to address their concerns 
about centralized purchasing.
    The January 28, 1998, GAO letter was in response to 
Representative Strickland's December 18, 1997 request for 
information. Copies of the response were sent to Chairman 
McHugh and Ranking Minority Member Fattah, the chairman and 
ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on International 
Security, Proliferation and Federal Service, the Senate 
Committee on Governmental Affairs, the Postmaster General and 
the Postal Service Board of Governors.
    b. Benefits.--This GAO letter provided useful information 
to the subcommittee regarding the pros and cons of centralized 
procurement of postal uniforms--for instance, many small 
vendors would be affected in their ability to do business with 
the Postal Service but procuring uniforms from the centralized 
system would be cost efficient for the Postal Service.
9. ``Postal Service Reform: Observations on Proposed Revisions to H.R. 
        22,'' April 7, 1998, GGD-98-97R
    a. Summary.--At the request of Subcommittee Chairman 
McHugh, the GAO responded to his letter of February 27, 1998, 
asking for comments on the proposed revision to H.R. 22, the 
Postal Reform Act of 1997. This legislation would provide the 
Postal Service greater commercial freedom while establishing 
rules to ensure fair competition. GAO noted that the revision 
contained several new complex provisions which GAO has not 
previously considered and so it would not be in a position to 
comment on those issues and would not take a position whether 
those revisions should be adopted. The proposals include 
mandating that the concept of universal service be defined. The 
GAO reported that the $2 limit on delivery price of items 
covered by the postal monopoly would have little impact on 
USPS's ability to provide service. GAO also opined that 
requiring the Postal Service to report the quality of delivery 
service would be consistent with the Government Performance and 
Results Act. GAO reported that the revisions would give the 
Postal Service additional flexibility to set prices for 
competitive products and services, however, some consideration 
are appropriate--credit markets could view Federal financial 
backing of USPS obligations though they are not guaranteed. 
This perception would give rise to concerns that the Service 
has funding advantages. There could be a risk to taxpayers if 
the Service had losses and the government repaid those 
obligations. However, strong oversight could reduce the risk to 
taxpayers related to losses from investments made from the 
Competitive Products Fund. The proposed revisions would give 
the Postal Service flexibility to set prices for competitive 
products and services and would subject its activities to many 
of the same laws to which the private sector is subjected. The 
GAO expressed that as long as the Postal Service remains a 
Federal entity, protected by the postal monopoly, the Service's 
ability to compete with the private sector should be balanced 
with oversight and legal safeguards to ensure equal application 
of the laws. The proposed revision would subject the Postal 
Service, apart from the postal monopoly, to Federal antitrust 
laws and unfair competition prohibitions. The proposed 
revisions are designed to ensure fair competition for 
international mail by making rate-setting for outbound 
international single-piece letter, cards, and parcels subject 
to review by the Postal Regulatory Commission. The revision 
would also subject the Postal Service's competitive 
international products to the same customs laws applicable to 
the private sector and would change the designation of the U.S. 
representative in the Universal Postal Union from the Postal 
Service to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative [USTR]. 
This provision would enjoin the USTR from making agreements 
which would give preferential treatment to the Postal Service 
in provisions of competitive products or for the Postal Service 
to enter into agreements with foreign governments of post 
offices that would give preference to the USPS for its 
competitive products. The revision would remove the requirement 
that the USPS use only American flag carriers for international 
mail. The GAO gave no opinions but would have ongoing work on 
international mail.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO observations give an analyzed, 
objective, commentary on the proposed revisions of H.R. 22 
which were a compilation and compromise of recommendations by 
the Postal Service and its stakeholders. Further GAO study on 
these issues will help to refine the ``Postal Modernization Act 
of 1998'' even further.
10. ``U.S. Postal Service: Progress Made in Implementing Automated 
        Letter Sequencing, but Some Issues Remain,'' April 17, 1998, 
        GGD-98-73
    a. Summary.--This GAO report provides information regarding 
the Postal Service's program to implement Delivery Point 
Sequencing [DPS], mail that is sorted in the exact order that 
it is delivered by the carrier. This process is the automated 
sorting of letters, rather than the more labor intensive and 
expensive manual sorting. DPS is the final phase of the letter 
automation program which commenced in 1982. In March 1993, the 
USPS started DPS on letter carrier routes in an effort to save 
time that carriers take to sort letters manually within the 
premises of a post office. Target goals for DPS equipment 
deployment, barcoded letter volume, and delivery zone and 
carrier route implementation throughout the Nation were due in 
fiscal year 1995, but this implementation fell behind schedule. 
However, equipment deployment achieved the extended November 
1997 target. In addition, labor-management relations have also 
impeded the Postal Service's efforts to achieve DPS goals. 
These issues include poor working relationships with the 
National Association of Letter Carriers over DPS 
implementation, insufficient numbers of city carrier support 
for DPS work methods and effect on city carrier street 
efficiency. These disagreements regarding DPS have resulted in 
grievances which have led to national arbitration cases. The 
GAO identifies remaining issues that may affect the Postal 
Service's ability to achieve its 1998 Delivery Point Sequencing 
goals.
    b. Benefits.--The Postal Service has been working toward 
attaining a fully automated delivery system. This GAO Report 
gives illustrative examples of DPS-related issues and 
identifies related problems facing the full implementation of 
this phase of automation. The report provides information to 
the subcommittee which will be valuable in its oversight 
efforts of the Postal Service.
11. ``U.S. Postal Service: Competitive Concerns About Global Package 
        Link Service,'' June 5, 1998, GGD-98-104
    a. Summary.--Global Package Link [GPL] is one of several 
international mail services offered by the U.S. Postal Service. 
It was designed as a parcel delivery service that would make it 
easier and more economical for direct marketers to export bulk 
shipments of merchandise internationally. GPL users are mainly 
direct marketers--U.S. companies that mail high-volume 
shipments of catalog merchandise. Private express firms which 
compete with the international parcel delivery service operated 
by the U.S. Postal Service have raised concern that GPL 
receives preferential treatment from customs in other nations. 
They asserted that GPL packages are subjected to fewer customs 
clearance requirements. GAO reviewed the difference in customs 
treatment between the Postal Service and private entities by 
customs services in Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom. GAO 
found that the delivery and customs clearance processes for GPL 
and private carriers were based on domestic import requirements 
applicable to mail and parcels imported by private carriers in 
the three countries under review. Each country had separate 
customs clearance processes and requirements for mail and 
parcels imported by private carriers. It was reported that 
there were differences in foreign customs treatment of GPL and 
private express parcels particularly in Japan. Japanese customs 
subjected private carriers to requirements regarding the 
preparation of shipping documentation and the payment of duties 
and taxes on their parcels that did not apply to GPL parcels. 
In the United Kingdom, the U.S. Postal Service was providing 
shipping data to the customs service on GPL parcels that was 
similar to the information that private carriers were required 
to provide. Canadian authorities subjected GPLs and private 
express parcels to the same requirements because GPL parcels 
were being delivered for USPS by a private express carrier. GAO 
found that there was no evidence that GPL parcels received 
preferential treatment over private express parcels in terms of 
the speed of customs clearance in any of the three countries or 
that the assessment of duties and taxes differed in Canada and 
the United Kingdom. The Postal Service was paying duties and 
taxes on behalf of individual importers on GPL parcels shipped 
to Canada and the United Kingdom. GAO was unable to ascertain 
whether duties and taxes were assessed on dutiable GPL parcels 
shipped to Japan because the Postal Service did not have 
records on payment of duties and taxes on GPL parcels because 
the recipients of postal parcels in Japan are responsible for 
paying applicable duties and taxes. Furthermore, Japan Customs 
did not provide statistics on the amount of duties and taxes 
that recipients paid on GPL parcels. Private express carriers 
followed similar delivery and customs clearance processes for 
parcels shipped from the United States to the three countries 
in this review. USPS's delivery and customs clearance processes 
for GPL parcels differed among the three countries. The 
differences reflected USPS's use of different types of delivery 
agents, which were subject to different sets of requirements 
within the countries. In Japan and the United Kingdom, GPL 
parcels were delivered by a private express carrier and were 
subject to the customs laws that applied to private carriers 
for importing goods. The private express industry has commented 
that differences in customs clearance requirements for postal 
and privately shipped parcels results in more work and higher 
costs for the carriers, placing them at a disadvantage in 
competing with USPS to provide international parcel delivery 
service. USPS officials noted that they also incur costs that 
the private carriers do not, such as meeting their obligations 
to provide delivery services to persons in all communities of 
the United States and to member countries of the Universal 
Postal Union.
    b. Benefits.--Businesses that ship their goods 
internationally, as well as USPS and the carriers, stressed the 
importance of having competitive choices that provide 
alternatives in the cost and speed of international shipping 
for customers. Whereas carriers have urged Congress to protect 
fair competition, this report reviews whether international 
parcels delivered by the postal services and private carriers 
should be subject to the same requirements and customs 
treatment, and, if so, what requirements would be appropriate 
to apply to international parcels and how the requirements 
should be implemented.
12. ``U.S. Postal Service: Performance Progress Has Been Made, But 
        Continued Attention to Challenges Is Needed,'' June 10, 1998, 
        T-GGD-98-142
    a. Summary.--The Postal Service faces significant 
challenges as it strives to sustain and augment performance 
improvements. The Postal Service ended the 1997 fiscal year 
with overall high performance in some of its operations, 
maintaining 3 years of promising results. The Service has shown 
that it can maintain its income level by increasing its on-time 
delivery scores for First-Class Mail. The USPS net income was 
reported at more than $1 billion. The report discusses the 
Postal Service's overall performance during fiscal year 1997 
including its successes and challenges. It also discusses work 
that GAO has completed since 1997 and provides information 
about ongoing GAO work on competition and diversity.
    b. Benefits.--The information contained in this report will 
enable the subcommittee to continue evaluating the progress of 
the Postal Service and to evaluate if they are meeting their 
goals.
13. ``The Results Act: Observations on the Postal Service's Preliminary 
        Annual Performance Plan,'' July 10, 1998, GGD-98-144
    a. Summary.--The U.S. Postal Service's preliminary annual 
performance plan, prepared in response to the Government 
Performance and Results Act, provides a partial picture of the 
Postal Service's intended performance for fiscal year 1999. GAO 
reports that although the plan generally has performance goals 
and related measures that are quantifiable and results-
oriented, the plan could be more helpful if it articulated 
current performance levels or baselines from which to gauge 
progress. GAO also observed that the Postal Service should more 
clearly link program activities in the Postal Service's budget 
to performance goals. Moreover, the plan could better link 
particular strategies and resources to performance goals. This 
would better provide understanding of how the Service intends 
to achieve its goals. GAO reports that the plan does a good job 
of discussing how the Postal Service intends to measure and 
review results and recognizes the role of management and some 
stakeholders, such as the Inspector General, in reviewing and 
evaluating programs. The plan does not state how the Postal 
Service will verify and validate the data that will be used to 
measure data.
    b. Benefits.--The GAO observations will enable Congress to 
perform its oversight duties in a more methodical manner. The 
Postal Service will benefit by GAO's direction to express 
clearly the validation of data and methods used to measure 
results which would be more in keeping with the intent of the 
Results Act.
14. ``Proposed Legislation: Issues Related to Honesty In Sweepstakes 
        Act of 1998,'' September 1, 1998, T-GGD-98-198
    a. Summary.--Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell introduced S. 
2141 on June 5, 1998. This report contains GAO's discussion on 
the issues related to the bill, focusing on the extent and 
nature of problems that consumers may have experienced with 
various sweepstake mailings and information related to the 
mailing of documents that resembled cashier's checks but are 
not the negotiable instrument they appear to be. GAO reported 
that comprehensive data indicating the full extent of the 
problems that consumers experience with look-alike checks was 
not available. The main reasons officials gave for the lack of 
data was that consumers often do not report their problems and 
no centralized database exists where data could be obtained. 
The GAO identified the Federal Trade Commission [FTC] and the 
Postal Inspection Service as having some data on consumers' 
complaints about deceptive mail marketing practices. FTC 
Consumer Information System showed that in many instances, 
consumers were required to remit money or purchase products or 
service before being allowed to participate in the sweepstakes. 
Cases investigated by the Postal Inspection Service mainly 
involved sweepstakes and cash prize promotions for which up-
front taxes, insurance, judging, or handling fees were required 
before consumers could participate in sweepstakes promotions. 
Information was not readily available regarding consumers' 
problems with cashier's check look-alikes. Two recent 
initiatives--Project Mail Box and the establishment of a multi-
State sweepstakes committee that is designed to facilitate 
cooperation among States in effective dealing with companies 
attempting to defraud consumers through mailed sweepstake 
materials--are intended to address consumer problems.
    b. Benefits.--GAO comments on the sweepstakes measure will 
be beneficial as the subcommittee continues to evaluate and 
monitor the issue of fraud and misleading information in the 
sweepstakes business and promotional matters without hurting 
legitimate sweepstake commerce which does not indulge in 
deceptive information.
15. ``U.S. Postal Service: Information About Selected Promotions of 
        Women and Minorities to EAS Management-Level Positions,'' 
        September 21, 1998, GGD-98-200R
    a. Summary.--Representative Danny Davis, a member of the 
subcommittee, requested that GAO provide information on 
promotions of women and minorities to management-level 
positions under the Postal Service's Executive and 
Administrative Schedule [EAS]. There was concern that women and 
minorities may be experiencing problems in receiving promotions 
to high level jobs. The GAO focused on whether the USPS-
required promotion procedures for EAS levels 16 and above were 
followed at four (Atlanta, GA; Dallas and Forth Worth, TX; and 
Van Nuys, CA) Postal Service performance clusters during fiscal 
year 1997. The GAO also reviewed the percentages of women and 
minorities who submitted applications, were considered best 
qualified and were promoted and how these percentages compared 
to women's and minorities' EAS levels 16 and above workforce 
representation at each location before the promotions. A total 
of 1,164 applications were received for the 117 promotions that 
were reviewed. Of these applications, 64 percent submitted by 
women and minorities; 64 percent of those who were considered 
best qualified were women and minorities; and 64 percent of 
those promoted were women and minorities. Though variations 
existed among the clusters, women and minorities never received 
less than 50 percent of the promotions. Sixty two percent of 
those who were promoted to the EAS levels 16 and above in the 
three clusters were women and minorities, compared to the 
representation rate of 59 percent at the same grade levels in 
all three clusters combined, before promotions. GAO reported 
that when looking at the distribution of specific equal 
employment opportunity groups throughout the promotional stages 
(i.e., application, considered best qualified and promoted), 
white males accounted for the largest percentage of 
applications submitted, considered best qualified and promoted 
through the three clusters. The percentages at which individual 
EEO groups progressed through the three promotion process 
stages varied by EAS levels at each performance cluster as well 
as among the three clusters combined.
    b. Benefits.--The subcommittee is working for fairness 
within the Postal Service, whether it will be in competition on 
a level playing field with its competitors or in interpreting 
its own laws and regulations. The issue of fair employment 
practices within the Postal Service is of interest to the 
subcommittee and to most postal employees. The report has 
outlined the Postal Service's pattern and practice in 
promotions for senior positions.
    c. Hearings.--None.
16. ``U.S. Postal Service: Postal and Telecommunications Sector 
        Representation in International Organization,'' October 29, 
        1998, GAO/GGD-99-6BR
    a. Summary.--This report updates the GAO information 
provided in their July 1998 briefing on U.S. representation in 
the Universal Postal Union [UPU] and the International 
Telecommunications Union [ITU]. The subcommittee has received 
allegations from private delivery companies that the USPS 
receives unfair advantage in competition because of its role as 
the U.S. representative in the UPU. Private delivery companies 
would like to be part of the U.S. delegation to the UPU and to 
have more public process in developing U.S. policies to be 
developed at the UPU, particularly on issues related to 
international postal rates and restrictions on the 
international delivery market. UPU is the specialized agency of 
the United Nations [U.N.] that governs international postal 
service; the ITU is also a specialized agency of the U.N. which 
works with governments and the private sector to coordinate 
global telecommunication networks and services. The report 
provides a comprehensive summary of the structure and 
responsibilities of the UPU and ITU, and the similarities and 
the differences in the two organizations. Though the 
organizations do not parallel each other, private delivery 
entities would like U.S. representation to the UPU to mirror 
its representation to the ITU. The U.S. Postal Service asserts 
that the ITU does not provide an appropriate model for U.S. 
representation in the UPU. GAO noted that the differences in 
the roles of government agencies in the U.S. international 
policy development for postal and telecommunication sectors 
were related to the agencies' roles and responsibilities as 
defined under the law. Some agencies had specific legally 
defined postal or telecommunications responsibilities, while 
other agencies had legally defined responsibilities that were 
not sector specific, and still others did not have issue or 
sector-specific responsibilities. The roles of private-sector 
participants in policy development differ between the two 
sectors. Private-sector participants in the telecommunications 
sector are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission 
and participation in the U.S. international policy development 
is more formal. Private-delivery companies in the postal sector 
are not regulated and private-sector participation is more 
informal. The GAO reported that the differences in legal 
requirements contributed to the differences in the 
formalization of the processes used to develop U.S. policies 
for international postal and telecommunications issues. As the 
telecommunications and postal environments are seeing rapid 
changes in the roles of public and private-service providers, 
the international organizations have struggled with adapting 
their structures to the evolving changes. The UPU is reviewing 
its organizational structure and will consider proposals at the 
next UPU Congress that includes a consultative status for 
international nongovernment organizations.
    b. Benefits.--It is possible that legislation will be 
introduced in the next Congress that will change of composition 
of the U.S. delegation to the UPU from the USPS to the 
Secretary of State. It would require the Secretary and the USPS 
to consult with other government agencies, users, and private 
providers of international postal and delivery services as 
appropriate. The information in this GAO report will be useful 
in overseeing the transition of leadership and representation.

                     B. OTHER REPORTS OR STATEMENTS

                    Subcommittee on Human Resources

    1. The subcommittee chairman requested a report by the 
National Institutes of Health [NIH] on the minimum number of 
plasma donors whose plasma should be pooled to manufacture 
immunoglobulin products with suitable antibody diversity. The 
NIH convened an expert panel to review the issues and make 
recommendations in the spring of 1998. On September 9, 1998, 
the NIH ``Report of the Expert Panel On Donor Pool Size of 
Immunoglobulin Products'' was submitted for the record at the 
subcommittee's hearing on ``Blood Safety: Minimizing Plasma 
Product Risks.''

         V. Prior Activities of Current or Continuing Interest

                       Subcommittee on the Census

    The subcommittee will continue its investigations and 
oversight work in the following areas within its jurisdiction:
    1. Continuing oversight of the 1998 dress rehearsals.
    2. Oversight of preparations for the 2000 census.
    3. Census Bureau outreach programs.
    4. Field preparations and hiring.
    5. Collection of data.
    6. Coverage Evaluation Survey (ICM).
    7. Data delivery and products.
    8. Other Issues.

                Subcommittee on the District of Columbia

    The subcommittee will continue its investigations and 
oversight work in the following areas within its jurisdiction:
    1. Review public safety in the District of Columbia.
    2. Continue investigation into the District of Columbia's 
financial condition, to include the District's accumulated 
operating deficits.
    3. Oversight of the District of Columbia's education 
emergency Board of Trustees and temporary superintendent/CEO 
Julius Becton.
    4. Continue monitoring the Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment 
Facility and the operation and performance of the Water and 
Sewer Authority.
    5. Investigation of the Washington Aqueduct.
    6. Review the operations of the Lorton Corrections 
Facility.
    7. Continue to monitor the closing of Pennsylvania Avenue 
and the impact of the Federal Government's security reviews.
    8. Public housing. Review public housing in the District--
the receivership aspect.
    9. St. Elizabeth's Hospital. Oversight review of St. 
Elizabeth's Hospital and the mental health system of the 
District of Columbia.
    10. Public Law 105-33. Oversight of District of Columbia 
Finance Responsibility Assistance Management Authority's 
implementation of Public Law 105-33.
    11. District of Columbia courts. Oversight of 
administrative management of the District of Columbia Superior 
Courts.
    12. Year 2000 oversight correction. Oversight of 
implementation of corrections to the year 2000 problem for the 
District of Columbia government.

                    Subcommittee on Human Resources

    The subcommittee will continue its investigations and 
oversight work in the following areas within its jurisdiction:
    1. The benefits and challenges of privatizing social 
services.
    2. The Department of Educations' handling of student loans 
in forbearance when calculating cohort rates.
    3. The Department of Health and Human Services' Early Head 
Start program.
    4. Oversight of the Department of Labor's Employment and 
Training Administration, Wage and Hour Divisions enforcement 
authority and activities with regard to sweat shops.
    5. Reviewing the Department of Labor, the Department of 
Education, and the Department of Health and Human Services 
compliance with the requirements of the Results Act.
    6. One-stop Career Center programs.
    7. Child Support Enforcement programs.
    8. Oversight of the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.
    9. HUD Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Community program 
performance.
    10. Department of Labor enforcement of the Employee 
Retirement Income Security Act [ERISA] and the limited scope 
audit exemption.
    11. Vulnerability of the 203(k) Rehabilitation Mortgage 
Insurance program with regard to non-profit organizations.
    12. HUD's HOPE VI program performance.
    13. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' [BLS] management of the 
consumer price index [CPI] and treatment of ``quality'' issues 
in pricing.
    14. Effectiveness of the HUD Integrated Disbursement and 
Information System.
    15. HUD's pending withdrawal from the Chicago Housing 
Authority and the restoration of local control.
    16. Effectiveness of the Office of Workers Compensation 
Program.
    17. The Equal Employment Opportunity complaint process for 
Federal employees.
    18. Implementation of the HUD 2020 Management Reform Plan.
    19. Impact of welfare reform on the roles of housing 
agencies and HUD.
    20. The value of voluntary health care provider compliance 
plans in the efforts to protect against waste, fraud and abuse.
    21. Management of the rural health clinic program, effects 
of the BBA changes and agency efforts to measure improvements 
in access to care.
    22. HCFA's progress with Y2K requirements for Medicare, 
Medicaid and their multiple contractors; status of contingency 
plans.
    23. HCFA's use of inherent reasonableness and competitive 
bidding as ways to improve the pricing for Medicare-covered 
supplies and equipment.
    24. Medical records confidentiality.
    25. Overview of HHS's implementation of CHIPS, outreach to 
uninsured children and program expenditures.
    26. The status of the home health surety bond requirement 
after the pending GAO report is released, as well as the pros 
and cons of an interim payment system for home health.
    27. HHS's children's immunization programs.
    28. Quality measures for both managed care and fee-for-
service; the merits of the ``patients' bill of rights'' 
proposed mandated changes for managed care.
    29. Projected national long-term care needs for the baby 
boom generation and alternatives to public financing.
    30. The future of the Medicare Trust Fund and ways to 
preserve the program, improve quality of care, reduce costs and 
promote wellness and prevention.
    31. Medicare complexity and opportunities to simplify the 
program, improve provider understanding and enhance uniformity 
in contractor application of the regulatory requirements.
    32. Overview of implementation of Prospective Payment 
System for skilled nursing facilities.
    33. HCFA's efforts to reduce program waste, fraud and abuse 
through their administrative and regulatory authority.
    34. Medicare Choice--incentives or disincentives to 
participate in the Medicare expansion.
    35. Overview of the Indian Health Program.
    36. Overview of SSA's oversight and verification of 
benefits to international addresses.
    37. The pros and cons of the current return to work 
initiatives in SSA's disability benefit program.
    38. HRSA programs and their ability to measure improvements 
in access to care through the Federally funded health care 
programs for rural, minority or hard to reach populations.
    39. Equitable allocation of Federal resources to emerging 
HIV-AIDS populations.

Subcommittee on National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal 
                                Justice

    The subcommittee will continue its investigations and 
oversight work in the following areas within its jurisdiction:
    1. The activities of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
    2. The efforts of the Office of National Drug Control 
Policy in coordinating the National Drug Control Program 
agencies.
    3. The Department of Defense with respect to areas which 
fall under subcommittee jurisdiction.
    4. The U.S. Coast Guard's involvement in international drug 
interdiction.
    5. The U.S. Customs Service involvement in the drug war.
    6. The use of the National Guard in multi-jurisdictional 
areas.
    7. Oversight of the National Aeronautic and Space 
Administration.
    8. The efficiency of the National Archives and Records 
Administration.
    10. The operations of the Department of State.
    11. The efficiency of the drug treatment programs, 
including the use of methadone.
    13. Oversight of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program.
    14. Investigation of the waste in defense inventory 
management.
    15. Oversight of counternarcotics intelligence 
coordination, analysis and dissemination.
    16. Oversight of Federal sentencing guidelines.

                   Subcommittee on the Postal Service

    The subcommittee will continue its investigations and 
oversight work in the following areas within its jurisdiction.
    1. Operation of the U.S. Postal Service. The subcommittee 
will continue to exercise its general oversight authority 
through the conduct of general oversight hearings.
    2. Postal Service labor-management relations. The 
subcommittee is interested in keeping the avenues of 
communication open between labor and management in an effort to 
minimize grievance related activities and raising the levels of 
productivity among all levels of employees within the Postal 
Service.
    3. Cooperation between the Postal Service and the Postal 
Inspection Service and the Postal Service Inspector General's 
Office. The Inspector General's Office was created a year ago. 
The effectiveness of the IG's office is dependent on mutual 
respect and professionalism between the offices, and adequate 
funding for that office. The subcommittee is fully committed to 
ensuring that the integrity and effectiveness of the office is 
protected so that it will ensure oversight responsibilities of 
the Postal Service and help to protect the Service from waste, 
fraud and abuse.
    4. The application of OSHA and its effect on avoiding 
workplace accidents. Workplace safety and health.
    5. Sexual harassment in the workplace.
    6. Monitoring international postal reorganization.

                  VIEWS OF THE RANKING MINORITY MEMBER

    This activities report presents the chairman's summary of 
the activities of the committee during the 105th Congress. 
Unlike other committee reports, this report is not required to 
be--and has not been--approved by the committee. While I agree 
with elements of the chairman's report, there are several 
sections that warrant a response as discussed below.

            Comments on Matters of Interest, Full Committee

  review of the food and drug administration and its regulations and 
  activities respecting terminally ill patients and their ability to 
                       access desired treatments

    The majority report asserts that the Food and Drug 
Administration's regulations operate to delay or deny access to 
safe, nontraditional therapeutic options to patients. The 
report argues that terminally ill patients are compelled to 
navigate a bureaucratic maze to obtain necessary treatment. 
These assertions are inaccurate and reveal a misunderstanding 
of the drug approval process.
    The FDA is the principal consumer protection agency in the 
Federal Government. An estimated 25 cents out of every dollar 
is spent on FDA-regulated products. For 90 years, FDA has 
promoted the public health as directed by the Federal Food, 
Drug and Cosmetic Act. One of its essential responsibilities is 
to determine whether drugs are safe and effective for public 
use. This determination is based on the results of clinical 
studies that can take several years to complete.
    The FDA drug approval process works well much of the time. 
However, there are occasions when the traditional process is 
insufficient to meet the needs of a patient with a serious or 
terminal illness. FDA has implemented several initiatives to 
assist these patients. Under a process known as ``compassionate 
use'' study, patients who are not in clinical trials can be 
provided with access to investigational drugs by the 
manufacturer. In addition, where the doctor does not have time 
to file the required investigational new drug application [IND] 
prior to administering an investigational drug, FDA can 
authorize use by phone. Single patient use and emergency INDs 
are also often allowed when a physician determines that a 
particular unapproved therapy might be of benefit to a patient 
for whom other options do not exist. Contrary to the majority's 
assertions, these regulatory programs provide a range of 
reasonable means for doctors to obtain unapproved treatments 
for their patients.
    The majority also contends that FDA tries to restrict 
access to alternative and complementary treatments, but the 
public record does not support this assertion. In fact, in the 
case of vitamins, dietary supplements, herbal medicines, and 
homeopathic medicines there is no FDA approval required prior 
to marketing.

  review of the food and drug administration human subject protection 
  guidelines, informed consent documents, and the use of children and 
            patients with mental illness in clinical trials

    The fenfluramine challenge that was the subject of 
committee hearings involved an experiment that was 
scientifically flawed on several levels and should not have 
passed the scrutiny of any oversight board. Under Federal 
regulations, experiments cannot be conducted on children where 
there is more than minimal risk but no therapeutic value, nor 
can racial criteria be used in a manner which is not 
scientifically justified. These requirements may have been 
violated in the fenfluramine experiment, which is currently 
under investigation by the Federal Office of Protection from 
Research Risks. Unfortunately, the majority failed to recognize 
the scientific flaws with the challenge and also that NIH, 
rather than FDA, was the relevant oversight agency.

elimination of section 1555 of the federal acquisition streamlining act 
                             of 1994 [fasa]

    The majority's contention that the committee strongly 
supported the repeal of section 1555 of FASA is wrong. While 
the chairman may have supported repeal of this program, this 
action was strongly opposed by the other members. The committee 
held no hearings on the issue, and it was never considered by 
the members at any business meeting of the committee or any of 
its subcommittees. The cooperative purchasing program 
established by this section could have saved State and local 
governments, and their taxpayers, millions if not billions of 
dollars.

  cost accounting standards in the federal employees health benefits 
                                program

    Section 518 of the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriation for fiscal year 1999 exempts health insurance 
carriers contracting with the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
Program [FEHBP] from complying with cost accounting standards 
established under the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act. 
This waiver is unwise, unnecessary, and could cost millions of 
dollars. Cost accounting standards are applied to all 
contractors performing under cost-based pricing arrangements 
with the Federal Government and ensure that costs are properly 
measured, assigned, and allocated. Congress has established a 
formal waiver process for exempting those contractors whose 
circumstances are so unique as to make the application of cost 
accounting standards inappropriate. This administrative waiver 
process for the FEHB program was completed on October 5, 1998, 
with the Cost Accounting Standards Board granting a partial 
waiver requested by the Office of Personnel Management. The 
waiver was from some, but not all, cost accounting standards. 
This is an extremely technical area which Congress entrusted to 
the Cost Accounting Standards Board. The Board should have been 
allowed to act without legislative interference.
    The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the complete 
waiver contemplated by section 518 would increase Federal costs 
by a total of $5 million, by allowing higher administrative 
costs to be incorporated into premium rates for calendar year 
2000. Logically, this provision could also then increase the 
premiums for the participants in the FEHB program, an 
especially onerous result at a time when health care costs have 
again begun to rise dramatically.

                  Comments on Formal Committee Reports

                             full committee

Investigation of Political Fundraising Improprieties and Possible 
        Violations of Law
    The committee's campaign finance investigation was the most 
partisan, inept, and abusive congressional investigation since 
the McCarthy hearings in the 1950s and the most expensive 
congressional investigation in history. The minority estimates 
that the committee spent over $7 million on the investigation 
while issuing over 1,200 subpoenas and information requests and 
taking 161 depositions--over 99 percent of which investigated 
allegations of Democratic fundraising abuses while ignoring 
substantial evidence of Republican campaign finance 
improprieties. Furthermore, the majority's investigation was 
characterized by mishaps, mistakes, and persistent abuses of 
the committee's powers to subpoena documents, depose witnesses, 
and release private and confidential information.
    The majority's report claims that the committee 
investigation ``uncovered a number of illegal schemes'' and 
that it was the reason ``prosecutors . . . investigated or 
pursued criminal charges against a number of individuals.'' In 
fact, the committee's investigation largely duplicated 
investigations previously conducted by the Senate Governmental 
Affairs Committee, other congressional committees, the 
Department of Justice, and the press, and uncovered little new 
evidence of violations of campaign finance law.
    The minority views to the committee's campaign finance 
report describe the systematic problems that characterized the 
committee's investigation and respond in detail to the 
majority's allegations. Minority Views to the Interim Report on 
the Investigation of Political Fundraising Improprieties and 
Possible Violations of Law, H. Rept. 105-829, 105th Cong., 2d 
Session, v. IV, 3927 (1998).
Contempt of Congress--Refusal of Attorney General Janet Reno to Produce 
        Documents Subpoenaed by the Government Reform and Oversight 
        Committee
    The committee's partisan vote to cite Attorney General 
Janet Reno for contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over 
internal memoranda related to an ongoing criminal investigation 
constituted an abuse of the most coercive and rarely invoked 
power of Congress. The Attorney General's refusal to turn over 
this type of information was consistent with 100 years of 
precedent in both Republican and Democratic administrations, 
and was supported by FBI Director Louis Freeh, who called the 
memoranda a ``road map to the investigation,'' the head of the 
Department of Justice Campaign Finance Task Force, Charles La 
Bella, and the lead FBI agent in the investigation, James 
DeSarno. The majority's vote to hold the Attorney General in 
contempt was also an attempt to intimidate Ms. Reno. In fact, 
in a meeting in his office, Chairman Burton explicitly linked 
his efforts to hold the Attorney General in contempt to her 
decision on the appointment of an independent counsel.
    The majority's activities report claims that the contempt 
proceedings allowed the committee ``to gain access to the 
documents.'' In fact, Attorney General Reno had made every 
effort to accommodate the committee and provide the necessary 
information before the contempt vote, including offering to 
brief the chairman and ranking minority member on the contents 
of the memoranda and to appear at a public hearing on the 
issue. The activities report also claims that the information 
provided after the filing of the contempt report ``met the 
committee's needs.'' Although this is an important 
acknowledgment of the appropriateness of the Attorney General's 
decision to allow the chairman and ranking minority member to 
review redacted versions of the memoranda, it calls into 
question why Chairman Burton continued his efforts to bring the 
contempt citation to the full House even after the Attorney 
General provided the information that the majority acknowledges 
``met the committee's needs.''
    The minority's position on the contempt report is fully 
explained in the Minority Views to the Report on Contempt of 
Congress Regarding the Refusal of Attorney General Janet Reno 
to Produce Documents Subpoenaed by the Government Reform and 
Oversight Committee, H. Rept. 105-728, 105th Cong., 2d Session, 
117 (1998). The committee's abuse of the contempt power is also 
addressed in the Minority Views to the Interim Report on the 
Investigation of Political Fundraising Improprieties and 
Possible Violations of Law, H. Rept. 105-829, 105th Cong., 2d 
Session, v. IV, 3953 (1998).

   subcommittee on government management, information, and technology

The Year 2000 Problem
    The majority report describes the subcommittee's report on 
the year 2000 computer problem (House Report 105-827). While 
rightly noting the need for Federal agencies to improve their 
efforts and increase the resources devoted to the Y2K problem, 
the discussion ignores the substantial progress made by the 
administration. Indeed, most experts now agree that the 
greatest risks to the health and welfare of the public will not 
come from failures in the Federal Government, but will instead 
come from problems in computers operated by State and local 
governments and the private sector.
    According to OMB's Seventh Quarterly Report on Progress on 
Year 2000 Conversion,\1\ of the 6,696 mission critical systems 
in the Federal Government, 61 percent are now Y2K compliant, up 
from 50 percent in August. Agencies have completed the 
renovation, validation, and implementation steps necessary to 
ensure Y2K compliance on these systems. Of the remaining 
systems that have been or will be repaired, 90 percent have now 
finished renovation, up from 71 percent in August. Furthermore, 
OMB has indicated that the development of continuity of 
business plans and contingency plans in the event of Y2K 
problems will be high priorities in the upcoming months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ U.S. Office of Management and Budget, ``7th Quarterly Report: 
Progress on Year 2000 Conversion'' (Dec. 8, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the spring and summer of 1998, the administration worked 
closely with Congress on a contingency emergency funding 
proposal specifically for unforeseen Y2K requirements. As a 
result of these efforts, $3.25 billion was included in the 
fiscal year 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency 
Supplemental Appropriations Act. To date, $891 million of this 
funding has been allocated, and the remainder of this funding 
will ensure that Federal agencies have adequate resources to 
solve the Y2K problem.

   subcommittee on national economic growth, natural resources, and 
                           regulatory affairs

Investigation of the Conversion of the $1.7 Million Centralized White 
        House Computer System, Known as the White House Database, and 
        Related Matters
    As described in detail in the minority views filed with the 
committee's October 30, 1998, report on the investigation, the 
subcommittee's conclusions are not supported by the record, 
which may explain why neither the committee nor the 
subcommittee held a hearing on the merits of the investigation 
during the entire 105th Congress. Contrary to the majority's 
conclusions, this investigation did not produce any concrete 
benefits--other than consuming large sums of taxpayer dollars 
since it began in June 1996. Furthermore, the investigation 
prevented the subcommittee from fulfilling its legislative and 
oversight responsibilities as evidenced by a 9 month period--
between June 16, 1997, and March 5, 1998--when the subcommittee 
held no hearings on any topic.

                    Comments on Other Investigations

                       subcommittee on the census

    During the 105th Congress, the Subcommittee on the Census 
made repeated attempts to call in question the statistical 
methods proposed for the 2000 census. However, there is 
widespread support for the use of these methods within the 
statistical community, as well as the public.
    There is overwhelming support within the statistical 
community for the use of statistical methods to correct for the 
errors in the census. The most recent report from the National 
Academy of Sciences' panel on the census said, ``Change is not 
the enemy of an accurate and useful census; rather, not 
changing methods as the United States changes would inevitably 
result in a seriously degraded census.'' The President of the 
Population Association of America has said, ``The planned and 
tested statistical innovations [in the census] . . . have the 
overwhelming support of members of the scientific community who 
have carefully reviewed and considered them. If their use is 
severely limited or prohibited, the 2000 Census planning 
precess will be obstructed, and the result could be a failed 
census.''
    The plan for the 2000 census has also been endorsed by the 
General Accounting Office and the Department of Commerce 
Inspector General. The General Accounting Office testified 
before Congress that ``Sampling households that fail to respond 
to questionnaires produces substantial cost savings and should 
improve final data quality.'' Similarly, the Inspector General 
said, ``The Census Bureau has adopted a number of innovations 
to address the problems of past censuses--declining accuracy 
and rising costs. One innovation, which we fully support, is 
the use of statistical sampling for nonresponse follow-up.''
    The 1990 census had serious problems. The net undercount 
increased by 50 percent over 1980. The error level was over 10 
percent. There were 8.4 million people missed, 4.4 million 
people counted twice, and 13 million people counted in the 
wrong place. The experts convened by the National Academy of 
Sciences at the request of Congress said, ``[P]hysical 
enumeration or pure `counting' has been pushed well beyond the 
point at which it adds to the overall accuracy of the census. . 
. . Techniques of statistical estimation can be used, in 
combination with the mail questionnaire and reduced scale of 
follow-up of nonrespondents, to produce a better census at a 
reduced cost.'' The Census Bureau's plan for the 2000 census 
appropriately implements these recommendations.
    Despite these facts, the majority wants to block the use of 
statistical methods and rely on methods guaranteed to repeat 
the errors of the past. Throughout the 105th Congress, the 
majority failed to identify a single alternative that would 
correct for persons missed in the census, and even went so far 
as to consider introducing legislation to block the correction 
for persons counted twice. This would result in missing 
millions of people, and incorrectly counting millions of others 
twice. Turning history on its head, the majority has tried to 
portray the attempts to correct the 1990 census as a failure of 
statistical methods. In fact, the efforts to correct the 1990 
census failed because political appointees in the Reagan 
administration forced the Census Bureau to reduce the sample 
size of the survey to correct for errors in the census. This 
political interference resulted in the inability of the survey 
to identify differences for small areas, which President Bush's 
Secretary of Commerce then cited as his reason for not using 
the survey to correct the census.
    The majority's review of the legal issues surrounding the 
2000 census is also marred by a failure to present both sides 
of the issue. In the section entitled ``Two recent Federal 
district courts have held that section 195 of Title 13 
prohibits the use of statistical sampling in the determination 
of population for purposes of apportionment of Representatives 
in Congress among the several States,'' the majority omits a 
discussion of the Federal district courts which ruled that the 
use of sampling for purposes of apportionment of 
Representatives in Congress among the several States is 
permitted by both Title 13 and the Constitution. A fair 
analysis would conclude that the lower Federal courts decisions 
have split on the legality of sampling.
    For example, in 1980, the District Court for the Eastern 
District of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia v. Klutznik, stated, 
``the Court holds that the Constitution permits the Congress to 
direct or permit the use of statistical adjustment factors in 
arriving at the final census results used in reapportionment.'' 
The court went on to hold that ``the Census Act permits the 
Bureau to make statistical adjustments to the headcount in 
determining the population for apportionment purposes.'' Also 
in 1980, in Young v. Kutznik, the District Court for the 
Eastern District of Michigan ruled that sampling was legal, 
stating, ``All that section 195 does is prohibit the use of 
figures derived solely by statistical techniques. It does not 
prohibit the use of statistics to arrive at a more accurate 
population count.'' Similarly, in 1980, in City of New York v. 
Department of Commerce (reversed on other grounds), the 
District Court for the Eastern District of New York held that, 
``it is no longer novel, or, in any sense, new law to declare 
that statistical adjustment of the decennial census is both 
legal and constitutional.'' See also Cuomo v. Baldridge 
(S.D.N.Y. 1987) and Carey v. Kutznik (S.D.N.Y. 1980).

   subcommittee on national economic growth, natural resources, and 
                           regulatory affairs

Investigation of OIRA's Review of the NAAQS Rules
    Contrary to the majority's conclusions, the review of the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAAQS] by the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs [OIRA] appears to have been 
thorough and legal. Its analysis estimated that the health and 
environmental benefits of the NAAQS would be between $20 and 
$100 billion a year, significantly more than the costs. 
Furthermore, OIRA has been cooperative by answering numerous 
production requests, requests for interviews, and other 
information requests. In fact, former Administrator of OIRA 
Sally Katzen testified in front of the subcommittee on this 
issue and answered all of its questions.
Investigation of the Securities and Exchange Commission
    The subcommittee's investigation of the Securities and 
Exchange Commission is an example of the abuse of the 
subcommittee's powers and procedures. These abuses are 
described in the July 15, 1997, Wall Street Journal opinion 
column, ``Business World: Fly First Class (With the Other 
Criminals).''
Oversight of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Programs
    In its report, the majority fails to note that wetlands 
have numerous benefits: they improve water quality by filtering 
out pollutants; they provide a home for a large variety of 
plants and animals; they are important to the fishing industry; 
and they prevent flooding.
    In 1780, the lower 48 States had about 220 million acres of 
wetlands; today the United States has about 104 million acres. 
Protections such as the Clean Water Act and the Swampbuster 
Program have significantly slowed the rate at which wetlands 
are lost; however, the Nation has not yet reached a level of no 
net loss. A recent study found the United States is losing 
about 117,000 acres a year. About 78 percent of the current 
conversions of wetlands to non-wetlands are conversions to 
agricultural uses.
    Moreover, it is not always the number of acres that is 
important, but the quality of the wetlands. One large protected 
area may be more important than a number of very small wetlands 
that add up to more acreage. Furthermore, a smaller but older 
wetland area can be more valuable because of the diversity of 
flora and fauna it supports. Others are important because of 
their proximity to polluted waterways.
Oversight of the Security and Exchange Commission's Disclosure of 
        Accounting Policies for Derivative Financial Instruments and 
        Derivative Commodity Instruments
    The conclusions in this section of the report are 
controversial and not necessarily supported by the record 
before the subcommittee.
EPA's Particulate and Ozone Rulemaking
    This section of the report is full of erroneous conclusions 
and is contradicted by much of the evidence and testimony 
presented to the subcommittee.
GAO Findings on Superfund Cleanup
    This section of the report relies heavily on a GAO analysis 
of EPA's Superfund Program. At the subcommittee's hearing, 
however, substantial problems were raised with GAO's 
methodology. The majority's conclusions are not warranted.
Office of Management and Budget's Report to Congress on the Costs and 
        Benefits of Federal Regulations
    The subcommittee's conclusions are not justified. In 1997, 
OMB estimated that benefits of regulations in 1997 exceeded 
costs by about $19 billion. In fact, according to a draft OMB 
report, the benefits of major regulations between 1987 and 1996 
exceeded costs by an amount in the range of $34 billion to 
$3.29 trillion per year.
Investigation of President Clinton's Executive Order 13083
    The subcommittee's conclusion that Executive Order 13083 
shows a basic difference between Republican and Democratic 
philosophies is not supported. The subcommittee's hearing and 
votes in the House and Senate regarding this issue show that 
Members of both parties shared concerns about the involvement 
of State and local interest groups in the drafting of the 
order.
Investigation of Paperwork and Regulatory Accomplishments by OMB's OIRA
    The subcommittee's conclusions in this section are not 
justified.
The Congressional Review Act
    The conclusions in this section of the report are 
controversial and not necessarily supported by the record 
before the subcommittee.
Investigation of the White House Initiative on Global Climate Change 
        and the Kyoto Protocol and Related Hearings
    These sections of the report are full of erroneous 
conclusions and are contradicted by much of the evidence and 
testimony presented to the subcommittee. Many of the 
subcommittee's conclusions are based on studies sponsored by 
fossil fuel industries responsible for a significant amount of 
greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, the record does not 
indicate that the administration has attempted backdoor 
implementation of the Kyoto Protocol.
    There is scientific consensus--one that is shared by the 
National Academy of Sciences, the IPCC, and 110 Nobel Prize 
winners--that the earth is warming and that humans are 
contributing to the problem. Studies indicate that the goals in 
the Kyoto Protocol for reducing greenhouse gas emissions can be 
met with only modest negative economic impacts. A 1997 study 
entitled, ``Energy Innovations'' estimates that reducing 
emissions 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2010 could save 
consumers $58 billion and create 773,000 jobs.
The ``Noxious Nine''
    This section of the report is full of erroneous conclusions 
and is contradicted by much of the evidence and testimony 
presented to the subcommittee. Further, the nine regulations 
targeted by the majority provide significant protections for 
health, safety, the environment, consumers, and schoolchildren.

subcommittee on national security, international affairs, and criminal 
                                justice

Substance Abusing Expectant Mothers
    The majority, in its discussion of a hearing held July 23, 
1998, on ``Expectant Mothers and Substance Abuse: Intervention 
and Treatment Challenges for State Governments,'' omitted 
mention of the testimony of Francine Feinberg, Psy.D, the 
Director of a treatment facility in Milwaukee, WI, and Mary 
Faith Marshall, Ph.D, a member of the bioethics faculty at the 
Medical University of South Carolina.
    The hearing focused on two models of State intervention 
designed to deter and punish illicit drug use by expectant 
mothers: (1) the recent enactment of a statute in Wisconsin 
permitting judges to order confinement and treatment of 
substance-abusing expectant mothers, and (2) a South Carolina 
policy, approved by a 1997 ruling of the South Carolina Supreme 
Court, to prosecute expectant mothers who abuse illicit drugs 
and refuse to undergo drug treatment. In their testimony before 
the subcommittee, Dr. Feinberg and Dr. Marshall voiced 
objections made by public health, social welfare, and civil 
liberties activists to these programs. They testified that 
efforts in Wisconsin and South Carolina have had no 
demonstrated effect on improving child health care or deterring 
substance abuse by pregnant women. To the contrary, they 
explained that such measures had the unintended effect of 
driving women away from prenatal care and substance abuse 
treatment for fear of arrest or loss of parental rights. They 
testified, moreover, that reduced access to the health care 
system would likely worsen birth outcomes and, because HIV 
infected women would not receive medication, increase rates of 
HIV transmission to fetuses.
    Dr. Feinberg and Dr. Marshall noted that for these and 
related reasons, professional health care and child welfare 
organizations have taken positions against the criminalization 
of perinatal substance abuse. These organizations include the 
American Medical Association, the American Nurses Association, 
the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of 
Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Public Health 
Association, the American Society of Addiction Medicine, and 
the National Society of Public Child Welfare Administrators.
Needle Exchange Programs
    In its discussion of the September 15, 1997, hearing 
entitled, ``Needle Exchange, Legalization, and the Failure of 
the Swiss Heroin Experiments,'' the majority acknowledged that 
the needle exchange program in Baltimore ``may have had 
adequate `exchange' controls'' but declined to discuss the 
demonstrable success of the Baltimore program in preventing the 
transmission of HIV.
    Dr. Peter Beilenson, commissioner of health in Baltimore 
City, explained that Baltimore's needle exchange program 
operates as follows: Two 26-foot vans travel among six sites in 
Baltimore City. Expressly invited to each participating 
neighborhood, the vans spend 2 hours at each site. At the vans, 
counselors exchange with enrolled participants new needles for 
old needles on a one-for-one basis. They give drug users advice 
on drug treatment, the prevention of HIV, and practices to 
reduce the spread of infectious and sexually transmitted 
diseases. Testing is available on-site for detection of HIV, 
syphilis, and tuberculosis. Through city funds, approximately 
90 drug treatment slots are dedicated to needle exchange 
program participants, treating roughly 200 clients per year at 
Bon Secours' New Hope Treatment Center, Johns Hopkins Bayview 
Medical Center, or the University of Maryland.
    According to Dr. Beilenson, the Baltimore needle exchange 
program has achieved remarkable results during its 3 years of 
operation. The rate at which injection drug users convert from 
HIV-negative to HIV-positive has dropped 39.7 percent as 
compared to the same population of drug users outside the 
program. Dr. Beilenson also testified that:
         The benefit of reduced rates of HIV infection 
        among program participants has not come at the expense 
        of increased drug use. To the contrary, needle exchange 
        participants in Baltimore report a 22 percent decrease 
        in drug use frequency since joining the program.
         The yearly cost of the Baltimore needle 
        exchange program is $310,000. The average cost of 
        caring for an adult patient from the time of AIDS 
        diagnosis (not HIV infection) is approximately 
        $102,000. A single case of AIDS in an infant costs 
        taxpayers $230,000. If three adult cases or two infant 
        cases of HIV infection are prevented, taxpayers save 
        money on health care costs. Based on a comparison of 
        the blood results of needle exchange participants with 
        similar drug users in Baltimore, Dr. Beilenson 
        estimated that the needle exchange program prevented 
        approximately 300 AIDS cases over the past 3 years.
         The Baltimore program requires drug users to 
        turn in a used needle in exchange for a new needle; it 
        does not distribute needles. A well-designed Baltimore 
        study, which examined areas outside needle exchange 
        sites in expanding concentric circles, reported no 
        increase in discarded needles as compared to other 
        areas in the city.
    Robert Maginnis, a hearing witness from the Family Research 
Council and a strong advocate against needle exchange programs, 
testified that he was impressed by what he had heard of the 
Baltimore program and applauded its good work.
Immigration and Naturalization Service's Citizenship USA Program
    In its summary and analysis of the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service's Citizenship USA program [CUSA], the 
majority correctly notes that failures in the INS's 
administrative processes resulted in inadequate criminal 
background checks of aliens applying for naturalization and the 
improper naturalization of aliens ineligible for U.S. 
citizenship. Of the 1.3 million aliens who applied for 
citizenship between August 31, 1995, and September 30, 1996, 
1,049,867 were naturalized. Criminal history reports from the 
FBI disclosed that 17,257 applicants naturalized during this 
period had records of arrests for felonies of other potentially 
disqualifying crimes. The INS was able to obtain and review 
case files for 16,858 of these individuals. Under the review of 
the accounting firm KPMG Peat Marwick, INS concluded that 
10,535 (62 percent) were properly adjudicated, 5,954 (35 
percent) required further review, and 369 (2 percent) were 
presumptively ineligible for citizenship.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ U.S. General Accounting Office, ``Naturalized Aliens: Efforts 
to Determine If INS Improperly Naturalized Some Aliens'' (March 1998) 
(GAO/GGD-98-62). The KPMG Peat Marwick firm, as part of its contract 
with the Department of Justice, also conducted a ``Federal Agency 
Benefit Benchmark Report,'' which reviewed the error rates of other 
benefits-granting Federal agencies, including Aid to Families with 
Dependent Children (administered by the Department of Health and Human 
Services), Food Stamp Program (administered by the Department of 
Agriculture), Pell Grant Program (administered by the Department of 
Education), Veterans Compensation and Pension Benefits (administered by 
the Department of Veterans Affairs), and Unemployment Insurance 
Benefits (administered by the Department of Labor.) It is interesting 
to note that these agencies had significantly higher rates of error 
than did the INS during the Citizenship USA program. See KPMG Peat 
Marwick LLP, ``Department of Justice Federal Agency Benefit Benchmark 
Report: Final Report'' 5-9 (May 29, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    After an extensive review conducted by the subcommittee, 
the Justice Department, the General Accounting Office, and KPMG 
Peat Marwick, the weight of evidence suggests that improper 
naturalizations during this period resulted from longstanding 
management problems within the INS coupled with a dramatic 
increase in applications for naturalization beginning in 1995. 
The record does not support the majority's summary conclusions 
that: (1) CUSA was a politically motivated program designed to 
register new Democratic voters for the 1996 elections, (2) 
officials of the INS, White House, or National Performance 
Review consciously weakened, discarded, or ignored applicable 
legal and procedural requirements in order to register new 
Democratic voters, and (3) INS officials deliberately concealed 
information concerning CUSA from the subcommittee.
    The purpose of the Citizenship USA program was not to 
improperly generate registered voters but to reduce backlogs 
and achieve timely adjudication of applications.\3\ This was an 
appropriate objective that had bipartisan support. From 1992 to 
1996, the number of applications for naturalization submitted 
to the INS increased dramatically. In 1992, the INS received 
342,000 applications. This number increased to 522,000 in 1993, 
to 543,000 in 1994, to 1,100,000 in 1995, and to 1,221,000 in 
1996.\4\ In this same period, the backlog of applications 
increased from 199,000 in 1992 to 701,000 in 1996.\5\ According 
to Commissioner Doris Meissner, the increased demand for 
naturalization was the result of several factors, including (1) 
the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1996 legalization 
program, which enabled a large number of permanent residents to 
become eligible to naturalize by 1994, (2) increasing anxiety 
among the alien population over the passage of ballot 
initiatives and legislation such as California Proposition 187, 
limiting the availability of education, health care, and social 
services to immigrants, and (3) an increased fee for green-card 
replacement that was nearly the same as the fee for an 
application for citizenship.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Testimony of Doris Meissner, Commissioner, Immigration and 
Naturalization Service, joint hearing before the Subcommittee on 
National Security, International Affairs, and Criminal Justice of the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and the Subcommittee on 
Immigration and Claims of the Committee on the Judiciary, 90 (Mar. 5, 
1997).
    \4\ Id. at 88.
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ Id. at 87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The majority suggests, without evidentiary support, that 
White House officials, including Vice President Gore and 
officials of the National Performance Review [NPR], knowingly 
subverted the naturalization process to create Democratic 
voters for the 1996 election. Documents produced to the 
subcommittee tend to show that NPR was actively involved and 
worked closely with INS officials to streamline the 
naturalization process and reduce the growing backlog of 
applications, but they do not reveal an improper motive.\7\ 
When the Office of the Vice President offered to make witnesses 
available for informal interviews to explain documents produced 
to the subcommittee and its efforts aimed to improve the 
naturalization process, the majority declined the offer. 
Instead, the majority demanded that these officials give 
testimony in the presence of a court reporter, even though the 
majority lacked authority to conduct these staff depositions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ See, e.g., Memorandum from Elaine Kamarck to Vice President 
Gore (Apr. 4, 1996) (Bates No. Z000339).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The weight of evidence gathered by the subcommittee, the 
Justice Department, and the General Accounting Office shows 
that the INS has had long-standing problems with its system for 
conducting criminal background checks that long predated the 
Citizenship USA program. The authors of a 1989 Department of 
Justice Audit Report recognized that there were significant 
problems with INS's system of background checks at least as far 
back as 1988. They noted:

        In our 198[8] audit of the adjudications process, we 
        found that in the 349 cases reviewed, 163 disclosed no 
        evidence of the required background investigations 
        being conducted. In our current review, we examined 51 
        cases and found that virtually 100 percent of the cases 
        also showed no evidence that background investigations 
        and fingerprint checks were conducted.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ U.S. Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, 
``Audit Report: Special Audit of the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service,'' 27 (Feb. 1989) (89-9).

Although the INS should have been aware that speeding the 
naturalization process without implementing necessary reforms 
would lead to additional errors, there is no evidence that INS 
officials acted willfully to naturalize ineligible aliens.
    The majority also contends that the INS ``deliberately 
concealed'' information regarding the Citizenship USA program 
and that INS officials repeatedly made ``misleading'' public 
statements on the scope of the problem. The majority supplies 
no information, and the minority is independently aware of 
none, to support the serious accusation that a Federal agency 
concealed information from Congress. The assertion, moreover, 
that named officials of the INS ``misled'' the public by 
underestimating the scope of improperly naturalized citizens is 
unwarranted and unfair, particularly considering that the 
formal review into the matter was, at the time, ongoing and 
incomplete.

                                
