[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.