[House Report 107-25]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 107-25
======================================================================
PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENSES OF CERTAIN COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES IN THE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
_______
March 23, 2001.--Referred to the House calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Ney, from the Committee on House Administration, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H. Res. 84]
The Committee on House Administration, to whom was referred
the resolution (H. Res. 84) providing for the expenses of
certain committees of the House of Representatives in the One
Hundred Seventh Congress, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the
resolution as amended be agreed to.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. COMMITTEE EXPENSES FOR THE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS.
(a) In General.--With respect to the One Hundred Seventh Congress,
there shall be paid out of the applicable accounts of the House of
Representatives, in accordance with this primary expense resolution,
not more than the amount specified in subsection (b) for the expenses
(including the expenses of all staff salaries) of each committee named
in that subsection.
(b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts referred to
in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, $9,607,006; Committee
on Armed Services, $10,872,677; Committee on the Budget, $11,107,043;
Committee on Education and the Workforce, $13,573,886; Committee on
Energy and Commerce, $17,226,770; Committee on Financial Services,
$11,846,231; Committee on Government Reform, $19,420,233; Committee on
House Administration, $7,418,045; Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, $6,955,074; Committee on International Relations,
$12,672,626; Committee on the Judiciary, $13,166,463; Committee on
Resources, $11,601,260; Committee on Rules, $5,370,773; Committee on
Science, $10,628,041; Committee on Small Business, $4,798,783;
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, $2,871,091; Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, $14,479,551; Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, $5,142,263; and Committee on Ways and Means, $14,748,888.
SEC. 2. FIRST SESSION LIMITATIONS.
(a) In General.--Of the amount provided for in section 1 for each
committee named in subsection (b), not more than the amount specified
in such subsection shall be available for expenses incurred during the
period beginning at noon on January 3, 2001, and ending immediately
before noon on January 3, 2002.
(b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts referred to
in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, $4,675,093; Committee
on Armed Services, $5,182,597; Committee on the Budget, $5,403,522;
Committee on Education and the Workforce, $7,059,821; Committee on
Energy and Commerce, $8,527,251; Committee on Financial Services,
$5,705,025; Committee on Government Reform, $9,810,000; Committee on
House Administration, $3,560,662; Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, $3,407,986; Committee on International Relations,
$6,202,095; Committee on the Judiciary, $6,339,902; Committee on
Resources, $5,595,266; Committee on Rules, $2,644,509; Committee on
Science, $5,172,668; Committee on Small Business, $2,312,344; Committee
on Standards of Official Conduct, $1,358,708; Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, $6,964,664; Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, $2,516,765; and Committee on Ways and Means, $7,228,481.
SEC. 3. SECOND SESSION LIMITATIONS.
(a) In General.--Of the amount provided for in section 1 for each
committee named in subsection (b), not more than the amount specified
in such subsection shall be available for expenses incurred during the
period beginning at noon on January 3, 2002, and ending immediately
before noon on January 3, 2003.
(b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts referred to
in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, $4,931,913; Committee
on Armed Services, $5,690,080; Committee on the Budget, $5,703,521;
Committee on Education and the Workforce, $6,514,065; Committee on
Energy and Commerce, $8,699,519; Committee on Financial Services,
$6,141,206; Committee on Government Reform, $9,610,233; Committee on
House Administration, $3,857,383; Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, $3,547,088; Committee on International Relations,
$6,470,531; Committee on the Judiciary, $6,826,561; Committee on
Resources, $6,005,994; Committee on Rules, $2,726,264; Committee on
Science, $5,455,373; Committee on Small Business, $2,486,439; Committee
on Standards of Official Conduct, $1,512,383; Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, $7,514,887; Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, $2,625,498; and Committee on Ways and Means, $7,520,407.
SEC. 4. VOUCHERS.
Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized
by the committee involved, signed by the chairman of such committee,
and approved in the manner directed by the Committee on House
Administration.
SEC. 5. REGULATIONS.
Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House
Administration.
SEC. 6. ADJUSTMENT AUTHORITY.
The Committee on House Administration shall have authority to make
adjustments in amounts under section 1, if necessary to comply with an
order of the President issued under section 254 of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 or to conform to any
reduction in appropriations for the purposes of such section 1.
committee action
On March 22, 2001, by voice vote, a quorum being present,
the Committee agreed to an amendment in the nature of a
substitute and, by voice vote, a quorum being present, the
Committee agreed to a motion to report the resolution, as
amended, favorably to the House.
committee oversight findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states that the
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
statement on budget authority and related items
The resolution does not provide new budget authority, new
spending authority, new credit authority, or an increase or
decrease in revenues or tax expenditures and a statement under
clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 is not required.
congressional budget office cost estimate
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states, with
respect to the resolution, that the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office did not submit a cost estimate and
comparison under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974.
statement of general performance goals and objectives
The Committee states, with respect to clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, that
the general discussion section of this report includes a
statement of the general performance goals and objectives,
including outcome-related goals and objectives, for which H.
Res. 84 authorizes funding.
record votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, with respect to each record vote
on a motion to report the resolution and on any amendment
offered to the resolution, there were no record votes on a
motion to report the resolution or on any amendment offered to
the resolution.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Voice vote
The Committee, by voice vote, with a quorum present, on
March 22, 2001, agreed to report H. Res. 84, as amended,
favorably to the House.
General discussion
The House Administration Committee would first like to
express its deepest appreciation to Speaker Dennis Hastert for
his leadership on this issue. Without the Speaker's
determination and willingness to reach a bi-partisan committee
funding resolution, this process and outcome would have been
quite different. The committee would also like to recognize the
efforts of the Speaker's staff who worked diligently to bring
this process to a successful conclusion.
In addition, the Committee would also like to express its
appreciation to our Ranking Minority Member, Steny Hoyer of
Maryland, for his efforts in working with Chairman Ney and the
ranking members of the committees to assist in fashioning an
agreeable bi-partisan resolution that could be supported by
minority members on the House floor.
H. Res. 84, as amended, authorizes for standing committees
(excluding the Committee on Appropriations) and the Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence $203,506,704 for the 107th
Congress. Unlike the previous and former committee funding
resolutions, this resolution does not contain any amounts for a
fund held in reserve for unanticipated activities. In a
separate Committee resolution, the Committee on House
Administration established franked mail allocations for these
committees.
The sum total of all budget requests for the 107th Congress
was $223,977,186. The $203,506,704 authorized for committees is
$20,470,482 or 9.1 percent less than the sum of all amounts
requested by committees.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
107th
Committee request\1\ H. Res. 84 2001 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture............................................. $10,010,397 $9,607,006 $4,675,093 $4,931,913
Armed Services.......................................... 10,847,677 10,872,677 5,182,597 5,690,080
Budget.................................................. 15,590,870 13,573,886 7,059,821 6,514,065
Education & the Workforce............................... 15,095,429 11,846,231 5,705,025 6,141,206
Energy & Commerce....................................... 18,813,475 17,226,770 8,527,251 8,699,519
Financial Services...................................... 11,221,913 11,107,043 5,403,522 5,703,521
Government Reform....................................... 21,842,000 19,420,233 9,810,000 9,610,233
House Administration.................................... 7,859,306 7,418,046 3,560,662 3,857,383
Intelligence............................................ 7,475,074 6,955,074 3,407,986 3,547,088
International Relations................................. 14,495,256 12,672,626 6,202,095 6,470,531
Judiciary............................................... 15,490,248 13,166,463 6,339,902 6,826,561
Resources............................................... 11,980,260 11,601,260 5,595,266 6,005,994
Rules................................................... 5,370,773 5,370,773 2,644,509 2,726,264
Science................................................. 12,254,302 10,628,041 5,172,668 5,455,373
Small Business.......................................... 4,798,783 4,798,783 2,312,344 2,486,439
Standards of Official Conduct........................... 2,921,091 2,871,091 1,358,708 1,512,383
Transportation & Infrastructure......................... 16,559,562 14,479,551 6,964,664 7,514,887
Veterans' Affairs....................................... 5,273,013 5,142,263 2,516,765 2,625,498
Ways & Means............................................ 16,077,758 14,748,888 7,228,481 7,520,407
-------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................. 223,977,186 203,506,704 99,667,359 103,839,345
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Amount requested in budget request submitted to Committee on House Administration.
Committee funding process
The 107th Congress is the fourth funding cycle under the
biennial funding process instituted in the 104th Congress. At
the beginning of the 104th Congress, House Rules were revised
changing the Committee funding process to a biennial cycle and
abolishing the bifurcation of funding under statutory and
investigative accounts.
The biennial committee funding process has proven
successful. A two-year budget cycle saves time and resources
for all committees because the process is undertaken only once
per Congress, rather than twice as was done previously. The
biennial funding process facilitates long term planning and
cuts in half the time and resources dedicated to making,
defending and approving budget requests.
Comparison of committee funding resolution
At the beginning of the 104th Congress, three standing
committees and 32 subcommittees were abolished. Committee staff
was reduced by 33 percent from the 103rd Congress levels and
committee funding levels were reduced by a total of 30 percent.
In the 107th Congress, committee staff and funding levels
continue to remain well below the 103rd levels.
H. Res. 84, as amended, authorizes a total of $203,506,704
which is 8.9 percent or $19,828,714 below the 103rd Congress
level. The Speaker has set the staff ceiling for committees,
excluding the Committee on Appropriations, at 1,205 for the
107th Congress, which is 26.5 percent or 434 staff slots below
the 103rd Congress level.
Committee Funding Resolution Comparisons
[Excluding Appropriations]
103rd Congress, Democratic Majority:
$223.3 million
1,639 staff
104th Congress, Republican Majority:
$157.2 million = 70% of 103rd level (reduced 30%)
1,089 staff = 67% of 103rd level (reduced 33%)
105th Congress, Republican Majority:
$177.9 million = 80% of 103rd level (reduced 20%)
1,104 staff = 67% of 103rd level (reduced 33%)
106th Congress, Republican Majority:
$183.4 million = 82% of 103rd level (reduced 18%)
1,153 staff = 70% of 103rd level (reduced 30%)
107th Congress, Republican Majority:
$203.5 million = 91% of 103rd level (reduced 9%)
1,205 staff = 74% of 103rd level (reduced 26%)
The House Administration Committee believes that these
comparisons are significant and show a pattern of responsible
spending, with substantial savings being passed on to
taxpayers. The 107th Congress mark is lower than the overall
funding levels in the 103rd Congress in both nominal and real
dollars. Under Democrat control, the total committee funding
allocation in the 103rd Congress was $223,335,418. Adjusted for
inflation, and factoring in a 5 percent session increase this
Congress, the current committee budget would be about $271
million, almost $50 million more than committees have requested
in this Congress. This mark, combined with budgets for the
three previous Congresses, will have resulted in a savings to
taxpayers of at least $286 million over the amount that would
have spent during the same time frame had Democrats retained
control of the House.
Hearing room upgrades
The Committee on House Administration has determined, in
consultation with the Office of the Speaker of the House, that
funds requested for hearing room upgrades by the committees
should be removed from the committee funding process and be
funded separately. The Committee believes this is necessary so
that the omnibus resolution accurately reflects the true base
funding levels for each committee. Since much of the work
performed in upgrading hearing rooms arises from costs related
to infrastructure modifications of House buildings and other
services usually performed by the Architect of the Capitol and
Chief Administrative Officer under their own budget authority,
it is not appropriate to account for these costs within
committee's budgets.
Numerous committees requested money in their budgets to
fund hearing room upgrades in the 107th Congress. Some
committees planning upgrades did not submit requests for funds,
on the assumption that such costs would be borne by the
Architect of the Capitol and/or the Chief Administrative
Officer. Several committees have completed hearing room
upgrades in the previous Congress. The House Administration
Committee believes that these upgrade requests are indicative
of the need for a responsive and organized committee hearing
room upgrade process.
It should be noted that most committee rooms are in serious
need of upgrades, as many have not been improved in decades.
Even more immediate is the need to upgrade the audio and video
capabilities in the hearing rooms. Increased demand by the
public to have more access to congressional proceedings is
fueling the need for better and more technologically advanced
hearing rooms.
The decision to separate hearing room upgrades is part of
an overall review of how committee room upgrades are being
achieved. It is important to note that the funds requested by
committees represent a short term solution to committee room
upgrades, providing improvements for general audio and video
enhancements in the hearing rooms themselves and to streamline
video and/or audio on the Internet in order to provide
increased public access.
The House Administration Committee believes that a
standardized approach is the most logical and efficient
solution to dealing with committee room upgrades. It is also
critical that minimum technical standards be implemented to
ensure the efficient use of resources and the compatibility of
equipment and infrastructure. As a result, it is the intention
of the House Administration Committee to institute a policy
wherebycommittees will be required to submit a plan and receive
approval from the Committee before committee rooms can be upgraded.
The Architect of the Capitol and the Chief Administrative
Officer should commence a Committee Room Renovation Program to
improve audio/visual capacity to a common standard and to
accomplish longer-term infrastructure renovations, subject to
the oversight of the Committee on House Administration, the
Speaker and the Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee.
The committee strongly encourages that funding for this purpose
be provided.
The Chief Administrative Officer is directed to provide
support staff to operate the broadcasting functions for each
Committee Room that is renovated under the Committee Room
Renovation Program. Committee staff are not authorized to
operate broadcasting functions for such renovated committee
rooms. The Chief Administrative Officer is authorized, but not
required to provide staff to operate the broadcasting functions
of committee rooms that have been renovated prior to
implementation of the Committee Room Renovation Program. The
Chief Administrative Officer at the request of any such
committee shall operate the broadcasting functions in such
committee rooms.
Minority resources
In the 103rd Congress, while still in the minority,
Republicans established the goal of providing for a two-thirds/
one-third minority resources split. Since becoming the majority
party in the 104th Congress, Republicans have continued to make
progress on this issue. Through his own leadership, Speaker
Hastert, has vigorously pursued this goal, advocating that all
committees attain a one-third split with the minority. The
House Administration Committee believes that with this budget,
we have reached that goal. The Committee is also pleased with
the bi-partisan nature with which this goal was reached.
MINORITY RESOURCE COMPARISON
[103rd Congress vs 107th Congress]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
103rd 104th 105th 106th 107th
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Committees providing 11% 35% 41% 53% 88%
33% of staff slots \1\ to the
minority.......................
Number of Committees providing:
33% or more................. 2 6 7 9 15
30% to 32%.................. 7 9 9 8 1
28% and higher.............. 10 2 1 0 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the 103rd Congress, the calculation is based on investigative
staff. Committees with non-partisan staff, Armed Services and
Standards of Official Conduct, are not listed.
It is important to recognize again, at this point, the
leadership that House Administration ranking minority member,
Steny Hoyer, has shown working with all of the ranking members
to ensure that we could arrive at a mark that can be supported
in a bipartisan manner.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF STENY H. HOYER, CHAKA FATTAH AND JIM DAVIS
We support this committee funding resolution, House
Resolutions 84, as amended, and will be urging Democratic
members to vote for it on the House Floor. The process through
which this resolution was developed, and the concern
demonstrated by the Majority leadership toward meeting the
Minority's legitimate needs, indicate that it may be a new day
in the life of this institution. Our new committee chairman,
Bob Ney, must be commended for steering us toward comity and
bipartisanship. His leadership has been critical to the
progress toward fairness in allocation of committee resources
to the Minority which this resolution represents.
After consulting with each Ranking Member, we are satisfied
that the Minority has the minimum amount of resources needed to
accomplish its objectives over the next two years.
House Resolution 84 goes a long way toward achieving the
Minority's long-time goal of controlling one-third of each
committee's total resources and staff slots. While it did not
reach this goal in every single case, the Ranking Minority
Members of the 19 committees covered by the provisions of the
resolution agree that substantial progress has been made over
the levels of the 106th Congress, and that additional
accommodations will occur over the course of the 107th Congress
to deal with remaining issues between the two parties.
Even the handful of committees that had been most visibly
deficient in the past in meeting the Minority's legitimate
needs have come a long way. The tricks and gimmicks used too
often during the committee funding process by the Majority
during its initial years in power to create an illusion of
fairness have either been abolished or are clearly on their way
out.
We would also note that H. Res. 84 does not include a
reserve fund for ``unanticipated expenses'' of committees. This
is the first time since House rules were amended in 1997 to
permit use of a reserve fund that the committee did not feel a
need to include it. In the last Congress, $3 million had been
provided, but it was never spent for that purpose and instead
was reprogrammed to meet other pressing needs of the House.
Finally, we are grateful to Chairman Ney and Speaker
Hastert for their leadership and support of the Minority's
funding needs, and for working with other committee chairman to
ensure a fair distribution of staff and budget resources.
Chairman Ney, through his fairness toward us here on the House
Administration Committee, has set an example for how the
Minority party in the House of Representatives, be it
Democratic or Republican, should be treated in the future.
We are also submitting with these views a copy of a
relevant chart agreed to by the Majority which demonstrates the
breakdown of funding and staff slots between the Majority and
Minority for the 107 Congress.
Steny Hoyer.
Chaka Fattah.
Jim Davis.