[House Report 117-698]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                Union Calendar No. 514
117th Congress   }                                      {       Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session      }                                      {      117-698
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     



                      THE REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES

                                 of the

                   COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

                               during the

                             117TH CONGRESS

                      together with minority views













[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]











 December 30, 2022.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on  
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed 
            
                             _________
                              
                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                 
50-183                   WASHINGTON : 2023            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
            
                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
                         Committee on House Administration,
                                 Washington, DC, December 30, 2022.
Hon. Cheryl L. Johnson,
Clerk of the House,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Ms. Johnson: Pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, I present herewith the 
report on the activities of the Committee on House 
Administration for the 117th Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                               Zoe Lofgren,
                                                       Chairperson.





























                                                Union Calendar No. 514
117th Congress   }                                      {       Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session      }                                      {      117-698

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



 
REPORT ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION FOR THE 
                             117TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

 December 30, 2022.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

       Ms. Lofgren, from the Committee on House Administration, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                                 Report

    Clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives for the 117th Congress requires each standing 
Committee, not later than January 2 of each odd-numbered year, 
submit to the House a report on the activities of that 
Committee, including separate sections summarizing the 
legislative and oversight activities of that Committee during 
that Congress.

                              Jurisdiction


                           RULES OF THE HOUSE

    Clause 1(k) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives for the 117th Congress sets forth the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on House Administration as 
follows--
    (1) Appropriations from accounts for committee salaries and 
expenses (except for the Committee on Appropriations); House 
Information Resources; and allowance and expenses of Members, 
Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and 
administrative offices of the House.
    (2) Auditing and settling of all accounts described in 
subparagraph (1).
    (3) Employment of persons by the House, including staff for 
Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and committees; 
and reporters of debates, subject to rule VI.
    (4) Except as provided in paragraph (r)(11), the Library of 
Congress, including management thereof; the House Library; 
statuary and pictures; acceptance or purchase of works of art 
for the Capitol; the Botanic Garden; and purchase of books and 
manuscripts,
    (5) The Smithsonian Institution and the incorporation of 
similar institutions (except as provided in paragraph (r)(11)).
    (6) Expenditure of accounts described in subparagraph (1).
    (7) Franking Commission\1\;
    (8) Printing and correction of the Congressional Record.
    (9) Accounts of the House generally.
    (10) Assignment of office space for Members, Delegates, the 
Resident Commissioner, and committees.
    (11) Disposition of useless executive papers.
    (12) Election of the President, Vice President, Members, 
Senators, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner; corrupt 
practices; contested elections, credentials and qualifications; 
and Federal elections generally.
    (13) Services to the House, including the House Restaurant, 
parking facilities, and administration of the House Office 
Buildings and of the House wing of the Capitol.
    (14) Travel of Members, Delegates, and the Resident 
Commissioner.
    (15) Raising, reporting, and use of campaign contributions 
for candidates for office of Representative, of Delegate, and 
of Resident Commissioner; and
    (16) Compensation, retirement, and other benefits of the 
Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and 
employees of Congress.

    Rules for the Committee on House Administration, U.S. House of 
                    Representatives, 117th Congress


                      (Adopted February 10, 2021)


Rule No. 1--General Provisions

    (a) The Rules of the House of Representatives are the rules 
of the Committee so far as applicable, except that a motion to 
recess from day to day is a privileged motion in the Committee.
    (b) The Committee is authorized at any time to conduct such 
investigations and studies as it may consider necessary or 
appropriate in the exercise of its responsibilities under rule 
X of the Rules of the House of Representatives and, subject to 
the adoption of expense resolutions as required by clause 6 of 
rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, to incur 
expenses (including travel expenses) in connection therewith.
    (c) The Committee is authorized to have printed and bound 
testimony and other data presented at hearings held by the 
Committee, and to make such information available to the 
public. All costs of stenographic services and transcripts in 
connection with any meeting or hearing of the Committee shall 
be paid from the appropriate House account.
    (d) The Committee shall submit to the House, not later than 
January 2 of each odd-numbered year, a report on the activities 
of the committee under rules X and XI of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives.
    (e) The Committee's rules shall be made publicly available 
in electronic form and published in the Congressional Record 
not later than 60 days after the Chairperson is elected in each 
odd-numbered year.

Rule No. 2--Regular and Special Meetings

    (a)(1) The regular meeting date of the Committee shall be 
the second Tuesday of every month when the House is in session 
in accordance with clause 2(b) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives. If the House is not in session on the 
second Tuesday of a month, the regular meeting date shall be 
the third Tuesday of that month.
          (2) Additional meetings may be called by the 
        Chairperson of the full Committee as the Chairperson 
        considers necessary, or at the request of a majority of 
        the members of the Committee in accordance with clause 
        2(c) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
        Representatives.
          (3) The determination of the business to be 
        considered at each meeting shall be made by the 
        Chairperson subject to clause 2(c) of rule XI of the 
        Rules of the House of Representatives. A regularly 
        scheduled meeting may be dispensed with if, in the 
        judgment of the Chairperson, there is no need for the 
        meeting.
    (b) If the Chairperson is not present at any meeting of the 
Committee, the ranking member of the majority party who is 
present shall preside at the meeting.
    (c) The Chairperson, in the case of meetings to be 
conducted by the Committee shall make public announcement of 
the date, place, and subject matter of any meeting to be 
conducted on any measure or matter. Such meeting shall not 
commence earlier than the third calendar day (excluding 
Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays except when the House is 
in session on such a day) on which members have notice thereof. 
If the Chairperson, with the concurrence of the ranking 
minority member, determines that there is good cause to begin 
the meeting sooner, or if the Committee so determines by 
majority vote, a quorum being present, the Chairperson shall 
make the announcement at the earliest possible date. The 
announcement shall promptly be made publicly available in 
electronic form and published in the Daily Digest.
    (d) The Chairperson, in the case of meetings to be 
conducted by the Committee shall make publicly available in 
electronic form the text of any legislation to be marked up at 
a meeting at least 24 hours before such meeting (or at the time 
of an announcement made within 24 hours of such meeting). This 
requirement shall also apply to any resolution or regulation to 
be considered at a meeting.

Rule No. 3--Open Meetings

    As required by clause 2(g) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, each meeting for the transaction of 
business, including the markup of legislation of the Committee, 
shall be open to the public except when the Committee in open 
session and with a quorum present determines by record vote 
that all or part of the remainder of the meeting on that day 
shall be closed to the public because disclosure of matters to 
be considered would endanger national security, would 
compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or would tend 
to defame, degrade, or incriminate any person, or otherwise 
would violate any law or rule of the House. Provided, however, 
that no person other than members of the Committee, and such 
congressional staff and such other persons as the Committee may 
authorize, shall be present in any business or markup session 
which has been closed to the public. To the maximum extent 
practicable, the Chairperson shall cause to be provided audio 
and video coverage of each hearing or meeting that allows the 
public to easily listen to and view the proceedings and 
maintain the recordings of such coverage in a manner that is 
easily accessible to the public.

Rule No. 4--Records and Rollcalls

    (a)(1) A record vote shall be held if requested by any 
member of the Committee.
          (2) The result of each record vote in any meeting of 
        the Committee shall be made publicly available in 
        electronic form within 48 hours of such record vote. 
        Information so available shall include a description of 
        the amendment, motion, order or other proposition, the 
        name of each member voting for and against, and the 
        members present but not voting.
          (3) The Chairperson shall make publicly available in 
        electronic form on the Committee's website not later 
        than 24 hours after the adoption of any amendment, or 
        48 hours after the disposition or withdrawal of any 
        other amendment, to a measure or matter the text of 
        such amendment.
    (b)(1) Subject to subparagraph (2), the Chairperson may 
postpone further proceedings when a record vote is ordered on 
the question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an 
amendment. The Chairperson may resume proceedings on a 
postponed request at any time.
          (2) In exercising postponement authority under 
        subparagraph (1), the Chairperson shall take all 
        reasonable steps necessary to notify members on the 
        resumption of proceedings on any postponed record vote.
          (3) When proceedings resume on a postponed question, 
        notwithstanding any intervening order for the previous 
        question, an underlying proposition shall remain 
        subject to further debate or amendment to the same 
        extent as when the question was postponed.
    (c) All Committee hearings, records, data, charts, and 
files shall be kept separate and distinct from the 
congressional office records of the member serving as 
Chairperson, and such records shall be the property of the 
House and all members of the House shall have access thereto.
    (d) House records of the Committee which are at the 
National Archives shall be made available pursuant to rule VII 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives .The Chairperson 
shall notify the ranking minority member of any decision to 
withhold a record pursuant to the rule and shall present the 
matter to the Committee upon written request of any Committee 
member.
    (e) To the maximum extent feasible, the Committee shall 
make its publications available in electronic form.

Rule No. 5--Proxies

    No vote by any member in the Committee may be cast by 
proxy.

Rule No. 6--Power to Sit and Act; Subpoena Power

    (a) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions 
and duties under rules X and XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee is authorized (subject to 
subparagraph (b)(1) of this paragraph)--
          (1) 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
          (2) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the 
        attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the 
        production of such books, records, correspondence, 
        memoranda, papers, documents, and other materials as it 
        deems necessary, including materials in electronic 
        form. The Chairperson, or any member designated by the 
        Chairperson, may administer oaths to any witness.
    (b)(1) A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the 
Chairperson of the full Committee, in accordance with clause 
2(m) of rule XI of the House of Representatives, in the conduct 
of any investigation or activity or series of investigations or 
activities within the jurisdiction of the Committee, following 
consultation with the ranking minority member.
          (2) In addition, a subpoena may be authorized and 
        issued by the Committee in accordance with clause 2(m) 
        of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
        Representatives, in the conduct of any investigation or 
        activity or series of investigations or activities, 
        when authorized by a majority of the members voting ,a 
        majority of the Committee being present. Authorized 
        subpoenas shall be signed by the Chairperson or by any 
        member designated by the Committee.
          (3) At least two business days before issuing any 
        subpoena pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection, 
        the Chairperson shall consult with the ranking minority 
        member regarding the authorization and issuance of such 
        subpoena, and the Chairperson shall provide a full copy 
        of the proposed subpoena, including any proposed 
        document schedule, at that time.
          (4) The requirements of paragraph (3) may be waived 
        in the event of an exigent circumstance that does not 
        reasonably allow for advance written notice.

Rule No. 7--Quorums

    No measure or recommendation shall be reported to the House 
unless a majority of the Committee is actually present. For the 
purposes of taking any action other than reporting any measure, 
issuance of a subpoena pursuant to rule 6(b)(2) of the Rules of 
the Committee, closing meetings, promulgating Committee orders, 
or changing the rules of the Committee, one-third of the 
members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum. For 
purposes of taking testimony and receiving evidence, two 
members shall constitute a quorum.

Rule No. 8--Amendments

    Any amendment offered to any pending legislation before the 
Committee must be made available in written form when requested 
by any member of the Committee. If such amendment is not 
available in written form when requested, the Chairperson will 
allow an appropriate period of time for the provision thereof.

Rule No. 9--Hearing Procedures

    (a) The Chairperson shall make public announcement of the 
date, place, and subject matter of any hearing to be conducted 
on any measure or matter at least one week before the 
commencement of that hearing. If the Chairperson, with the 
concurrence of the ranking minority member, determines that 
there is good cause to begin the hearing sooner, or if the 
Committee so determines by majority vote, a quorum being 
present, the Chairperson shall make the announcement at the 
earliest possible date, and the announcement shall be published 
promptly in the Daily Digest handmade publicly available in 
electronic form.
    (b) Unless excused by the Chairperson, each witness who is 
to appear before the Committee shall file with the clerk of the 
Committee, at least 48 hours in advance of their appearance, a 
written statement of their proposed testimony and shall limit 
their oral presentation to a summary of their statement.
    (c) When any hearing is conducted by the Committee upon any 
measure or matter, the minority party members on the Committee 
shall be entitled, upon request to the Chairperson by a 
majority of those minority members before the completion of 
such hearing, to call witnesses selected by the minority to 
testify with respect to that measure or matter during at least 
one day of hearings thereon.
    (d) All other members of the Committee may have the 
privilege of sitting with any subcommittee during its hearing 
or deliberations and may participate in such hearings or 
deliberations, but no member who is not a member of the 
subcommittee shall count for a quorum or offer any motion or 
amendment or vote on any matter before the subcommittee.
    (e) Committee members may question witnesses only when they 
have been recognized by the Chairperson for that purpose, and 
only for a five-minute period until all members present have 
had an opportunity to question a witness. The five-minute 
period for questioning a witness by any one member can be 
extended as provided by clause 2(j) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives. The questioning of a witness in 
Committee hearings shall be initiated by the Chairperson, 
followed by the ranking minority member and all other members 
alternating between the majority and minority. In recognizing 
members to question witnesses in this fashion, the Chairperson 
shall take into consideration the ratio of the majority to 
minority members present and shall establish the order of 
recognition for questioning in such a manner as not to 
disadvantage the members of the majority. The Chairperson may 
accomplish this by recognizing two majority members for each 
minority member recognized.
    (f) The following additional rules shall apply to hearings 
of the Committee as applicable:
          (1) The Chairperson at a hearing shall announce in an 
        opening statement the subject of the investigation.
          (2) A copy of the Committee rules and this clause 
        shall be made available to each witness as provided by 
        clause 2(k)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
        Representatives.
          (3) Witnesses at hearings may be accompanied by their 
        own counsel for the purpose of advising them concerning 
        their constitutional rights.
          (4) The Chairperson may punish breaches of order and 
        decorum, and of professional ethics on the part of 
        counsel, by censure and exclusion from the hearings; 
        and the Committee may cite the offender to the House 
        for contempt.
          (5) If the Committee determines that evidence or 
        testimony at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or 
        incriminate any person, it shall--
                  (A) afford such person an opportunity 
                voluntarily to appear as a witness;
                  (B) receive such evidence or testimony in 
                executive session; and
                  (C) receive and dispose of requests from such 
                person to subpoena additional witnesses.
          (6) Except as provided in paragraph (5) of this 
        subsection, the Chairperson shall receive, and the 
        Committee shall dispose of, requests to subpoena 
        additional witnesses.
          (7) No evidence or testimony taken in executive 
        session may be released or used in public sessions 
        without the consent of the Committee.
          (8) In the discretion of the Committee, witnesses may 
        submit brief and pertinent sworn statements in writing 
        for inclusion in the record. The Committee is the sole 
        judge of the pertinence of testimony and evidence 
        adduced at its hearing.
          (9) A witness may obtain a transcript copy of their 
        testimony given at a public session or, if given at an 
        executive session, when authorized by the Committee.

Rule No. 10--Procedures for Reporting Measures or Matters

    (a)(1) It shall be the duty of the Chairperson to report or 
cause to be reported promptly to the House any measure approved 
by the Committee and to take or cause to be taken necessary 
steps to bring the matter to a vote.
          (2) In any event, the report of the Committee on a 
        measure which has been approved by the Committee shall 
        be filed within seven calendar days (exclusive of days 
        on which the House is not in session) after the day on 
        which there has been filed with the clerk of the 
        Committee a written request, signed by a majority of 
        the members of the Committee, for the reporting of that 
        measure. Upon the filing of any such request, the clerk 
        of the Committee shall transmit immediately to the 
        Chairperson notice of the filing of that request.
    (b)(1) No measure or recommendation shall be reported to 
the House unless a majority of the Committee is actually 
present.
          (2) With respect to each record vote on a motion to 
        report any measure or matter of a public character, and 
        on any amendment offered to the measure or matter, the 
        total number of votes cast for and against, and the 
        names of those members voting for and against, shall be 
        included in the Committee report on the measure or 
        matter.
    (c) The report of the Committee on a measure or matter 
which has been approved by the Committee shall include the 
matters required by clause 3(c) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.
    (d)(1) If, at the time any measure or matter is ordered 
reported by the Committee, any member of the Committee gives 
notice of intention to file supplemental, minority, additional, 
or dissenting views for inclusion in the report, members shall 
be entitled to not less than two additional calendar days after 
the day of such notice, commencing on the day on which the 
measure or matter(s) was approved, excluding Saturdays, 
Sundays, and legal holidays, in which to file such views, in 
writing and signed by that member, with the clerk of the 
Committee.
          (2) All such views so filed by one or more members of 
        the Committee shall be included within, and shall be a 
        part of, the report filed by the Committee with respect 
        to that measure or matter.
          (3) The report of the Committee upon that measure or 
        matter shall be printed in a single volume which--
                  (A) shall include all supplemental, minority, 
                additional or dissenting views, the form 
                submitted, by the time of the filing of the 
                report, and
                  (B) shall bear upon its cover a recital that 
                any such supplemental, minority, additional, or 
                dissenting views (and any material submitted 
                under clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules 
                of the House of Representatives) are included 
                as part of the report. This subparagraph does 
                not preclude--
                          (i) the immediate filing or printing 
                        of a Committee report unless timely 
                        request for the opportunity to file 
                        supplemental, minority, additional, or 
                        dissenting views has been made as 
                        provided under clause 2(l) of rule XI 
                        of the Rules of the House of 
                        Representatives; or
                          (ii) the filing of any supplemental 
                        report upon any measure or matter which 
                        may be required for the correction of 
                        any technical error in a previous 
                        report made by the Committee upon that 
                        measure or matter.
          (4) shall, when appropriate, contain the documents 
        required by clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
        the House of Representatives.
    (e) The Chairperson, following consultation with the 
ranking minority member, is directed to offer a motion under 
clause 1 of rule XXII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives relating to going to conference with the 
Senate, whenever the Chairperson considers it appropriate.
    (f) If hearings have been held on any such measure or 
matter so reported, the Committee shall make every reasonable 
effort to have such hearings published and available to the 
members of the House prior to the consideration of such measure 
or matter in the House.
    (g) The Chairperson may designate any majority member of 
the Committee to act as floor manager of a bill or resolution 
during its consideration in the House.

Rule No. 11--Committee Oversight

    (a) The Committee shall conduct oversight of matters within 
the jurisdiction of the Committee in accordance with clauses 2 
and 4(d) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.
    (b) Not later than March 1 of the first session of a 
Congress and in accordance with clause 2(d) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee shall 
prepare an oversight plan for that Congress.

Rule No. 12--Review of Continuing Programs; Budget Act Provisions

    (a) The Committee shall, in its consideration of all bills 
and joint resolutions of public character within its 
jurisdiction, ensure that appropriation for continuing programs 
and activities of the Federal Government will be made annually 
to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the nature, 
requirement, and objectives of the programs and activities 
involved. For the purposes of this paragraph a Government 
agency includes the organizational units of government listed 
in clause 4(c) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.
    (b) The Committee shall review, from time to time, each 
continuing program within its jurisdiction for which 
appropriations are not made annually in order to ascertain 
whether such program could be modified so that appropriations 
therefore would be made annually.
    (c) The Committee shall, in accordance with clause 4(f)(1) 
of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, submit 
to the Committee on the Budget (1) its views and estimates with 
respect to all matters to be set forth in the concurrent 
resolution on the budget for the ensuing fiscal year which are 
within its jurisdiction or functions, and (2) an estimate of 
the total amounts of new budget authority, and budget outlays 
resulting therefrom, to be provided or authorized in all bills 
and resolutions within its jurisdiction which it intends to be 
effective during that fiscal year.
    (d) Whenever the Committee is directed in a concurrent 
resolution on the budget to determine and recommend changes in 
laws, bills, or resolutions under the reconciliation process it 
shall promptly make such determination and recommendations and 
report a reconciliation bill or resolution (or both) to the 
House or submit such recommendations to the Committee on the 
Budget, in accordance with the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.

Rule No. 13--Audio and Visual Coverage of Committee Proceedings

    Whenever any hearing or meeting conducted by the Committee 
is open to the public, those proceedings shall be open to 
coverage by audio and visual means as provided in clause 4 of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, subject 
to the limitations therein.

Rule No. 14--Committee Staff

    The staff of the Committee on House Administration shall be 
appointed as follows:
    (a) The staff shall be appointed by the Chairperson except 
as provided in paragraph (b), and may be removed by the 
Chairperson, and shall work under the general supervision and 
direction of the Chairperson;
    (b) All staff provided to the minority party members of the 
Committee shall be appointed by the ranking minority member, 
and may be removed by the ranking minority member of the 
Committee, and shall work under the general supervision and 
direction of such member;
    (c) The appointment of all professional staff shall be 
subject to the approval of the Committee as provided by, and 
subject to the provisions of, clause 9 of rule X of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives;
    (d) The Chairperson shall fix the compensation of all staff 
of the Committee, after consultation with the ranking minority 
member regarding any minority party staff, within the budget 
approved for such purposes for the Committee.

Rule No. 15--Travel of Members and Staff

    (a) Consistent with the primary expense resolution and such 
additional expense resolutions as may have been approved, the 
provisions of this rule shall govern travel of Committee 
members and staff. Travel for any member or any staff member 
shall be paid only upon the prior authorization of the 
Chairperson or their designee. Travel may be authorized by the 
Chairperson for any member and any staff member in connection 
with the attendance at hearings conducted by the Committee and 
meetings, conferences, and investigations which involve 
activities or subject matter under the general jurisdiction of 
the Committee. Before such authorizations given there shall be 
submitted to the Chairperson in writing the following:
          (1) The purpose of the travel;
          (2) The dates during which the travel will occur;
          (3) The locations to be visited and the length of 
        time to be spent in each; and
          (4) The names of members and staff seeking 
        authorization.
    (b)(1) In the case of travel outside the United States of 
members and staff of the Committee for the purpose of 
conducting hearings, investigations, studies, or attending 
meetings and conferences involving activities or subject matter 
under the legislative assignment of the committee, prior 
authorization must be obtained from the Chairperson. Before 
such authorization is given, there shall be submitted to the 
Chairperson, in writing, a request for such authorization. Each 
request, which shall be filed in a manner that allows for a 
reasonable period of time for review before such travel is 
scheduled to begin, shall include the following:
                  (A) the purpose of the travel;
                  (B) the dates during which the travel will 
                occur;
                  (C) the names of the countries to be visited 
                and the length of time to be spent in each;
                  (D) an agenda of anticipated activities for 
                each country for which travel is authorized 
                together with a description of the purpose to 
                be served and the areas of committee 
                jurisdiction involved; and
                  (E) the names of members and staff for whom 
                authorization is sought.
          (2) At the conclusion of any hearing, investigation, 
        study, meeting, or conference for which travel outside 
        the United States has been authorized pursuant to this 
        rule, members and staff attending meetings or 
        conferences shall submit a written report to the 
        Chairperson covering the activities and other pertinent 
        observations or information gained as a result of such 
        travel.
    (c) Members and staff of the Committee performing 
authorized travel on official business shall be governed by 
applicable laws, resolutions, or regulations of the House and 
of the Committee on House Administration pertaining to such 
travel.

Rule No. 16--Staff Deposition Authority

    The Chairperson may authorize the staff of the Committee to 
conduct depositions pursuant to section 3(b) of House 
Resolution 8, One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, and subject to 
any regulations issued pursuant thereto.

Rule No. 17--Number and Jurisdiction of Subcommittees

    (a) There shall be one standing subcommittee, with party 
ratios of members as indicated. The subcommittee shall have 
jurisdiction as stated by these rules, may conduct oversight 
over such subject matter, and may consider such legislation as 
may be referred to them by the Chairperson. The name and 
jurisdiction of the subcommittee shall be:
          (1) Subcommittee on Elections (3/1)--Matters relating 
        to voting rights issues and such other matters as may 
        be referred to the subcommittee.
          (b) The Chairperson may establish and appoint 
        members, consistent with the ratio between majority and 
        minority members serving on the Subcommittee on 
        Elections, to serve on task forces, panels, special, or 
        select subcommittees of the Committee, to perform 
        specific functions for limited periods of time, as the 
        Chairperson deems appropriate.

Rule No. 18--Referral of Legislation to Subcommittees

    The Chairperson may refer legislation or other matters to 
the Subcommittee as the Chairperson considers appropriate. The 
Chairperson may discharge the Subcommittee of any matter 
referred to it.

Rule No. 19--Powers and Duties of Subcommittees

    The Subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings, 
receive evidence and report to the full committee on all 
matters referred to it. The Subcommittee shall not meet during 
any full Committee meeting or hearing.

Rule No. 20--Other Procedures and Regulations

    The Chairperson may establish such other procedures and 
take such actions as maybe necessary to carry out the foregoing 
rules or to facilitate the effective operation of the 
Committee.

Rule No. 21--Designation of Clerk of the Committee

    For the purposes of these Rules and the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the Staff Director of the Committee shall 
act as the clerk of the Committee.

  Membership and Organization of the Committee on House Administration


                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                   COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

                              (Ratio: 6-3)

                  Zoe Lofgren, California, Chairperson
JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland               RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois, Ranking 
G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina        Member
PETE AGUILAR, California             BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia
MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania       BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico

                         SUBCOMMITEE MEMBERSHIP

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS

                              (Ratio: 3-1)

     G. K. Butterfield, North Carolina, Chairperson
Pete Aguilar, California
Teresa Leger Fernandez, New Mexico
Bryan Steil, Ranking Member

                         Committee Organization

    The Committee on House Administration organized on February 
10, 2021, the Honorable Zoe Lofgren presiding. During the 
organizational meeting the Committee adopted the Rules of the 
Committee for the 117th Congress, (Committee Resolution 117-
01). The Committee also reconstituted the Subcommittee on 
Elections and established its jurisdiction and membership 
(Committee Resolution 117-02). The Committee approved seven 
additional Committee Resolutions: Committee Resolution 117-03, 
to adopt the Parking Policy for the 117th Congress; Committee 
Resolution 117-04, to promulgate regulations regarding 
Mandatory Anti-Harassment and Anti-Discrimination Policies for 
House Offices; Committee Resolution 117-05, to promulgate 
Regulations regarding Displaying a Statement of Rights and 
Protections Provided to House Employees; Committee Resolution 
117-06, to promulgate Regulations Governing the House Student 
Loan Repayment Program; Committee Resolution 117-07, to 
promulgate Regulations GoverningHouse Paid Internships; 
Committee Resolution 117-08, to amend the Eligible 
Congressional Member Organizations Handbook; and Committee 
Resolution 117-09, prohibition on use of Exercise Facilities of 
the House of Representatives by Registered Lobbyists or Agents 
of Foreign Principals.

                            COMMITTEE STAFF
                             MAJORITY STAFF

    Jamie Fleet, Staff Director
   Khalil Abboud, Deputy Staff 
             Director
 Enumale Agada, Oversight Counsel
Patrick Briggs, Professional Staff 
              Member
Georgina Cannan, Elections Counsel
  Kylie Carpenter, Professional 
 Staff--Communications Standards 
            Commission
   Hannah Carr, Staff Assistant
    Mary Kathryn Daigle, Staff 
    Assistant--Communications 
       Standards Commission
 Matt DeFreitas, Staff Director--
     Communications Standards 
            Commission
    Eddie Flaherty, Chief Clerk
  Andrew Garcia, Staff Assistant
  Sean Gregory, Staff Assistant--
     Communications Standards 
            Commission
 Aaron LaSure, Professional Staff 
              Member
        Jim Levine, Counsel
 Kulani Jalata, Elections Counsel
   Sean Jones, Legislative Clerk
Jose Morales, Professional Staff--
          Member Services
Teri Morgan, Deputy Staff Director
  Jonathan Murray, Professional 
           Staff Member
  Sarah Nasta, Elections Counsel
  Sierra Norton, Press Secretary
 Giancarlo Pellegrini, Elections 
              Counsel
  Matthew Schlesinger, Oversight 
              Counsel
   Daniel Taylor, Deputy Staff 
    Director and Chief Counsel
   Peter Whippy, Communications 
             Director
  Sean Wright, Senior Elections 
              Counsel

                             MINORITY STAFF

  Tim Monahan, Republican Staff 
             Director
    Nick Crocker, Deputy Staff 
             Director
 Caleb Hays, General Counsel and 
       Deputy Staff Director
 Aubrey Neal Wilson, Director of 
     Modernization Initiatives
  Rachel Collins, Senior Counsel
  Elisabeth Conklin, Republican 
  Staff Director--Communications 
       Standards Commission
   Ryan Arient, Staff Assistant
 Brittany Caldwell, Senior Staff 
             Assistant
        Alex Deise, Counsel
   Robert Fitzpatrick, Special 
              Advisor
Ryan Giachetti, Professional Staff
  Hillary Lassiter, Professional 
               Staff
Sloane Perkins, Press and Digital 
             Assistant
  Andrea Porwoll, Communications 
             Director
 Reed Powell, Professional Staff--
     Communications Standards 
            Commission
  Craig Roberts, Special Advisor
    Janet Schwalb, Director of 
  Administration and Advice and 
             Guidance
 Elliott Smith, Professional Staff
Jordan Wilson, Director of Member 
             Services

                 Oversight Plan for the 117th Congress

    Clause 2(d) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives states:
          (d)(1) Not later than March 1 of the first session of 
        a Congress, the chair of each standing committee (other 
        than the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on 
        Ethics, and the Committee on Rules) shall----
          (A) prepare, in consultation with the ranking 
        minority member, an oversight plan for that Congress;
          (B) provide a copy of that plan to each member of the 
        committee for at least seven calendar days before its 
        submission; and
          (C) submit that plan (including any supplemental, 
        minority, additional, or dissenting views submitted by 
        a member of the committee) simultaneously to the 
        Committee on Oversight and Reform and the Committee on 
        House Administration.
    Accordingly, the Committee submitted the following 
oversight plan in accordance with this provision:

                   COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION


                 Oversight Plan for the 117th Congress

    The Committee on House Administration (Committee) has 
developed the following oversight plan pursuant to clause 2(d) 
of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives. The 
Committee's oversight activities are key to the operations of 
the Legislative Branch, including the House and House Officers, 
Legislative Branch agencies, and other related entities. The 
Committee's responsibilities also include oversight of federal 
elections. The jurisdiction of the Committee, pursuant to 
clause House rule X, clause 1(k), is as follows:
    (1) Appropriations from accounts for committee salaries and 
expenses (except for the Committee on Appropriations); House 
Information Resources; and allowance and expenses of Members, 
Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and 
administrative offices of the House.
    (2) Auditing and settling of all accounts described in 
subparagraph (1).
    (3) Employment of persons by the House, including staff for 
Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and committees; 
and reporters of debates, subject to rule VI.
    (4) Except as provided in paragraph (r)(11), the Library of 
Congress, including management thereof; the House Library; 
statuary and pictures; acceptance or purchase of works of art 
for the Capitol; the Botanic Garden; and purchase of books and 
manuscripts,
    (5) The Smithsonian Institution and the incorporation of 
similar institutions (except as provided in paragraph (r)(11)).
    (6) Expenditure of accounts described in subparagraph (1).
    (7) Franking Commission \2\;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\The name of the House Commission on Congressional Mailing 
Standards, also known as the Franking Commission, was changed to the 
House Communications Standards Commission. COMMS Act., P.L. 116 260. 
(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (8) Printing and correction of the Congressional Record.
    (9) Accounts of the House generally.
    (10) Assignment of office space for Members, Delegates, the 
Resident Commissioner, and committees.
    (11) Disposition of useless executive papers.
    (12) Election of the President, Vice President, Members, 
Senators, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner; corrupt 
practices; contested elections. credentials and qualifications; 
and Federal elections generally.
    (13) Services to the House, including the House Restaurant, 
parking facilities, and administration of the House Office 
Buildings and of the House wing of the Capitol.
    (14) Travel of Members, Delegates, and the Resident 
Commissioner.
    (15) Raising, reporting, and use of campaign contributions 
for candidates for office of Representative, of Delegate, and 
of Resident Commissioner; and
    (16) Compensation, retirement, and other benefits of the 
Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and 
employees of Congress.
    The Committee will continue its oversight of operations of 
the House, Legislative Branch agencies, and federal elections 
in the 117th Congress. This oversight work will include various 
forms of Committee activity, including, but not limited to, 
regular oversight meetings with Committee staff, Member-level 
meetings, briefings, hearings, correspondence, studies, 
reports, and cooperation with relevant inspectors general. The 
Committee intends to continue and expand its practice of 
holding both monthly general oversight meetings for House 
Officers and agencies and project-specific recurring oversight 
meetings for Legislative Branch programs and activities that 
require extra Committee attention.
    The Committee's oversight activities will emphasize:
           House Officers and operations;
           Legislative Branch agencies and related 
        entities;
           Security of the Capitol and throughout the 
        legislative branch, including the January 6, 2021, 
        domestic terrorist attack on the U.S. Capitol;
           Operations of the Legislative Branch during 
        the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic;
           Member services;
           Committee funding and activities;
           The Congressional Accountability Act of 
        1995;
           Official communications;
           House technology use and modernization; and
           Federal election law and procedures.

                     HOUSE OFFICERS AND OPERATIONS

    The Committee intends to work with the House Officers to 
develop and implement long term plans to ensure that they are 
well positioned to serve the House community effectively. These 
plans will focus on increasing efficiency, improving management 
practices, diversifying the workforce, promoting physical and 
cybersecurity, and facilitating interoffice cooperation.

House Officers and Operations, Generally

     Oversee collaboration among House Officers and 
other Legislative Branch entities with respect to the 
institutional response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
     Provide general policy guidance to the House 
Officers.
     Provide policy guidance and conduct oversight of 
security and safety issues and congressional entities charged 
with such roles, ensuring coordination among the various 
entities, with an emphasis on the January 6, 2021, domestic 
terrorist attack at the Capitol.
     Review proposals and oversee efforts to recruit 
and retain a more diverse and inclusive workforce.
     Analyze management improvement proposals and other 
initiatives submitted by the House Officers and relevant 
Inspectors General.
     Assure coordination among House Officers and other 
Legislative Branch entities on the continued development and 
implementation of a comprehensive district office support 
program.
     Coordinate with House Officers and officials to 
develop and implement long term plans and goals for the 
financial and administrative functions of the House.
     Coordinate with the Subcommittee on Legislative 
Branch Appropriations on matters impacting operations of the 
House and other Legislative Branch entities.
     Ensure coordination among House Officers and other 
Legislative Branch entities on administrative and technology 
matters, including reviewing and improving existing IT security 
policies.
     Oversee compliance with the House Employees 
Position Classification Act (2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 291 et seq.).
     Review relevant rules, regulations, and statutes 
and, in consultation with the House Officers, revise where 
necessary.
     Work with House Officers to create more cost 
effective and efficient operations within the House, including, 
but not limited to, elimination of any duplicative programs or 
activities.

Chief Administrative Officer (CAO)

     Provide policy direction for the Chief 
Administrative Officer (CAO). Continue the review of functions 
and administrative operations assigned to the CAO.
     Review ongoing process and technology upgrades to 
the House financial management system, ensuring appropriate 
internal controls are in place.
     Oversee the CAO's role in assuring accessibility 
to the House wing of the Capitol, the House Office Buildings, 
and other House facilities consistent with the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA).
     Oversee the House Child Care Center, including 
response to the COVID-19 pandemic and efforts to reduce the 
waitlist and expand admissions.
     Oversee the House Recording Studio, with a focus 
on the execution of remote proceedings.
     Oversee the use of electronic consent forms for 
casework.
     Review of the House's new equipment program.
     Oversee efforts to improve customer service and 
communications across all CAO functions and business units.
     Oversee development and implementation of 
strategies to increase House staff retention.
     Oversee House restaurant operations.
     Oversee the Office of Employee Assistance and 
House Wellness Center, including efforts to increase capacity 
and address the trauma among Members and staff associated with 
the January 6, 2021, domestic terrorist attack on the Capitol.
     Oversee operations and management of the office 
supply store and gift shop.
     Oversee the CAO's customer advocate program.
     Oversee the Student Loan Repayment program and 
recent reforms thereto.
     Oversee House Creative Services.
     Review alternatives to the current mail delivery 
process to strengthen the services and tools available to 
Members and staff.
     Review and provide direction on the CAO's actions 
in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
     Review and help to facilitate efforts to diversify 
the CAO workforce.
     Review existing asset management processes.
     Review House furniture policy, inventory, and 
selection.
     Review House procurement policies and monitor the 
effectiveness of the CAO's procurement and contract management 
functions.
     Review issues related to district office leases.
     Review new technology initiatives to better serve 
Members, committees, and the public.
     Review procedures for processing contracts with 
the House that exceed the threshold of $350,000.
     Review proposals and oversee corresponding efforts 
to convert certain services provided by contractors to in-house 
services.
     Review semi-annual financial and operational 
status reports; oversee implementation of changes in operations 
to improve services and increase efficiencies.
     Review staff benefits offered by the House and 
proposals to modify benefits.
     Review the officially sanctioned ``Congressional 
App Challenge.''
     Review the Wounded Warrior Program and develop 
recommendations, in consultation with veteran's organizations, 
about improvements to the program.
     Review the SFC Sean Cooley and SPC Christopher 
Horton Congressional Gold Star Family Fellowship Program and 
develop recommendations, in consultation with veteran's 
organizations, about improvements to the program.
     Review training offerings available to Members and 
staff through the Congressional Staff Academy, identifying 
additional programming opportunities.
     Review and oversee information technology services 
provided, maintained or hosted by House Information Resources:
           Review of the January 6, 2021, domestic 
        terrorist attack at the Capitol, including 
        cybersecurity implications and response.
           Oversee failsafe procedures to guarantee 
        continuity of operations.
           Oversee House cybersecurity practices, 
        including network security and threat prevention.
           Review of the House Disaster Recovery 
        Program.
           Review of House IT configuration and 
        redundancy posture.
           Oversee web services activities, 
        including new Member website development.
           Oversee pilot and rollout of Quill 
        letter signing platform.
           Oversee development of improvements to 
        CMS experience for Member offices.
           Oversee the Technology Partner Program, 
        including the marketing thereof.
           Oversee efforts to continue movement 
        toward cloud computing.

Clerk of the House

     Review functions and administrative operations 
assigned to the Clerk.
     Oversee official reporter participation in field 
hearings.
     Coordinate on matters under the jurisdiction of 
the House Fine Arts Board and the Capitol Preservation Board.
     Oversee efforts to implement digital signatures in 
the House.
     Oversee legislative process adjustments 
necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, including limited proxy 
voting and the electronic hopper.
     Oversee participation in the Bulk Data Task Force.
     Oversee preparation of congressionally authorized 
publications.
     Oversee the House document repository.
     Oversee the lobbying disclosure process, including 
ways to make data more easily accessible for the general 
public.
     Review and approve contracts and requests for 
proposals by the Clerk that exceed the $350,000 spending 
threshold.
     Review of semi-annual financial and operational 
status reports; recommend changes in operations to improve 
services and increase efficiencies.
     Review other issues related to the COVID-19 
pandemic, including staff vaccination.
     Review standards for the electronic exchange of 
legislative information among the chambers of Congress and 
Legislative Branch agencies.
     Review the application programming interface 
incorporated in the Clerk's website.
     Review the Clerk's current IT configuration and 
redundancy posture.
     Review the printing needs of the Clerk to evaluate 
the potential for eliminating duplication.

House Inspector General

     Review of functions and administrative operations 
assigned to the Inspector General.
     Direct Inspector General to conduct management 
advisories to improve implementation and operation of key House 
functions.
     Ensure that audit prioritization is based upon the 
assessment of risk to the operations of the House.
     Monitor progress of House audits.
     Review and approve proposed audit plan and audit 
reports, including the annual financial statements audit.
     Review comprehensive financial and operational 
audits of the House, investigate any irregularities uncovered, 
and monitor necessary improvements.

House Office of Diversity and Inclusion

     Oversee and support efforts to direct and guide 
House employing offices to recruit, hire, train, develop, 
advance, promote, and retain a diverse workforce.
     Oversee and ensure compliance with the diversity 
survey requirement set forth in House Rule II, clause 
(9)(b)(2).
     Oversee and ensure compliance with the diversity 
report requirement set forth in House rule II, clause 
(9)(b)(3).

House Office of Whistleblower Ombuds

     Oversee efforts to promulgate best practices for 
whistleblower intake for offices of the House set forth in 
House rule II, clause 10(b)(1).
     Oversee the provision of whistleblower intake 
trainings for offices of the House set forth in House rule II, 
clause 10(b)(2).

House Sergeant at Arms (HSAA)

     Review and oversee security operations in the 
House, including the House Chamber, the galleries, the Capitol, 
House Office Buildings, Capitol Grounds, and district offices.
     Review of the events of January 6, 2021, including 
consideration and facilitation of security recommendations made 
by Lt. General Russel Honore (Ret.) and his task force studying 
the January 6, 2021, domestic terrorist attack on the Capitol.
     Consult with the HSAA on policies adopted by the 
Capitol Police Board and other relevant oversight entities.
     Review of functions and administrative operations 
assigned to the HSAA.
     Examine Sergeant at Arms' role in assuring 
accessibility to the House wing of the Capitol, the House 
Office Buildings, and other House facilities consistent with 
the ADA.
     Review and monitor the HSAA amendments to 
protocols to ensure the safety of Members' Washington, D.C., 
and district offices and homes.
     Review and monitor the HSAA emergency preparedness 
and training of all Members, staff, and employees.
     Review and monitor the HSAA implementation of new 
Member, staff, employee, and visitor tracking protocols and 
electronic systems.
     Review and monitor the repair/improvement of 
Capitol security entry and exit pedestrian points.
     Review and oversee initiatives designed to 
increase security and security awareness for Members and staff 
in district offices.
     Review annual financial and operational status 
reports; recommend changes in operations to improve services 
and increase efficiencies.
     Review any and all HSAA improvements to the 
identification and badging of Members, staff, employees, 
contractors, and visitors.
     Review emergency continuity of operations and 
continuity of government plans of action, including plans to 
communicate to Members and staff.
     Review impact of electronic access to controlled 
spaces.
     Review short and long-term crisis mental health 
support for HSAA employees.
     Review the effectiveness of district office 
security program, including the law enforcement coordinator 
program, enterprise-wide security system contract, and 
processes for mail sent to the district offices.
     Review the policies and procedures for visitor 
access to the Capitol.
     Review the security operation of House parking 
facilities, regulations, and allocation of parking spaces.
     Review the use of technology generally in the 
protection of the House of Representatives.

                 LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND OTHER ENTITIES

Architect of the Capitol (AOC)

     Oversee the Cannon House Office Building 
renovation, with an emphasis on Phase III progress.
     Review lessons learned from Phase II of the Cannon 
House Office Building renovation and monitor application to 
Phase III.
     Oversee the closeout of punch list items in the 
Cannon House Office Building renovation, including earlier 
phases.
     Oversee life safety measures, accessibility 
measures, and improved evacuation mechanisms in House 
buildings.
     Oversee restoration and repairs necessitated by 
the January 6, 2021, domestic terrorist attack at the Capitol, 
including, but not limited to review of any proposed 
infrastructure security recommendations made by Lt. General 
Russel Honor (Ret.).
     Oversee efforts to improve diversity within the 
office of the Architect of the Capitol (AOC), with an emphasis 
on senior levels of the agency.
     Oversee hiring practices, with an emphasis on 
increasing diversity and inclusion at the senior levels of the 
agency
     Oversee the continued institutional response to 
the COVID-19 pandemic.
     Oversee the AOC's role in assuring accessibility 
to the House wing of the Capitol and the House Office 
Buildings.
     Oversee the pest management practices of the AOC.
     Oversee AOC's maintenance of House Buildings and 
the House side of the Capitol.
     Oversee caucus and meeting room renovations.
     Oversee efforts to create and maintain a 
professional workplace culture.
     Oversee National Statuary Hall.
     Oversee operations of the Capitol Visitor Center, 
including public tours, the re-design of Exhibition Hall, 
contracting practices and revolving fund status, in conjunction 
with the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.
     Oversee other capital projects, including the 
Rayburn Garage refurbishment.
     Review AOC efforts to improve discipline program 
and accountability systems, including those applicable to 
exempt personnel.
     Review plans and proposals for future projects in 
the House Office Buildings and on the House side of the 
Capitol.
     Review reports by the AOC Inspector General and 
implementation of audit recommendations. Examine options to 
improve operation and structure of the AOC Inspector General's 
office.
     Review the AOC Office of Sustainability's efforts 
to reduce energy and waste consumption in the Capitol Complex 
by, for example, use of waterless and low-flow plumbing 
fixtures in restroom facilities.
     Review relevant rules, regulations, and statutes 
and, in consultation with the agency, revise where necessary.
     Review the electronic and procured services 
provided by the Architect.
     Review the operations and organizational structure 
of the Office of the Architect, considering proposals for 
reorganization provided to the Committee by the Architect.
     Review workplace safety and health efforts.

Government Publishing Office (GPO)

     Continue efforts to reform title 44, United States 
Code, particularly provisions related to the Federal Depository 
Library Program.
     Examine current Government Publishing Office (GPO) 
printing and binding regulations to determine advisability of 
change.
     Monitor implementation of remedial actions taken 
by management to address audit issues identified by the GPO 
Inspector General and outside financial auditors.
     Monitor progress of the GPO committee print 
project.
     Oversee GPO response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
     Oversee operations of the GPO, including the 
Superintendent of Documents.
     Oversee Secure and Intelligent Document (SID) 
production, including production of passports.
     Oversee Superintendent of Documents' sales and 
depository library programs.
     Review agency efforts to recruit a diverse and 
inclusive workforce.
     Review and adopt legislative proposals to reform 
government printing by eliminating redundancies and unnecessary 
printing, increasing efficiency, and enhancing public access to 
government publications.
     Review GPO labor practices and labor agreements.
     Review the printing needs of the House of 
Representatives to identify the potential for eliminating 
duplication.
     Review use of GPO facilities and other assets to 
identify possible alternatives that enhance value to the 
Congress and the public.
     Under the authority set forth in 44 U.S.C. 
Sec. Sec. 101 et seq, review rules and regulations promulgated 
by the Joint Committee on Printing, updating where prudent.

Library of Congress

     Conduct detailed oversight of Congressional 
Research Service operations and consider any need to modify 
management and organizational structure of the service. Areas 
of focus to include:
           Diversity and inclusion;
           Staff morale and attrition rates;
           Work environment;
           Resource allocation; and
           Administrative support for subject 
        matter experts.
     Conduct detailed oversight the Copyright Office:
           Review the use of technology generally 
        in Copyright Office operations, and specifically the 
        office's modernization efforts. This includes continued 
        oversight of the development and implementation of the 
        Enterprise Copyright System, including the recordation 
        and registration systems, updated application process 
        and updated user experience platform.
           Review the Copyright Office's efforts to 
        communicate its modernization efforts to stakeholders.
           Review security measures and processes 
        for e-deposits submitted to both the Copyright Office 
        and Library of Congress.
           Review the Copyright Office's spending 
        authority and its ability to budget for multi-year 
        capital projects.
     Conduct a review of the progress that the Library 
has made in providing public access to government information, 
especially in electronic form.
     Consider legislation proposed by the Library.
     Oversee collection development programs and 
digital collection plans.
     Oversee Law Library operations.
     Oversee Library capital projects.
     Oversee Library IT modernization consistent with 
the guidance from the Government Accountability Office, 
including efforts to overhaul records storage, utilize the 
cloud, stabilize the core IT structure, improve IT governance 
and develop a more centralized and professional IT workforce.
     Oversee the Contracts and Grants Directorate, 
including acquisition workforce training and acquisition 
planning.
     Oversee the implementation of the Library of 
Congress Fiscal Operations Improvement Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-
481, 114 Stat. 2187), the Veterans' Oral History Project Act 
(P.L. 106-380, 114 Stat. 1447), the National Recording 
Preservation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-474, 114 Stat. 2085), and 
the History of the House Awareness and Preservation Act (P.L. 
106-99, 113 Stat. 1330).
     Oversee the Library's technology hosting 
environment transition.
     Oversee the National Library Service's efforts to 
provide the most effective service to their library partners, 
explore ways to increase the number of users under 65, review 
the format and content for those users, and oversee plans to 
move to a new physical headquarters.
     Oversee Library of Congress operations, including 
inventory cataloguing systems, preservation efforts, and plans 
to grow collections.
     Oversee the Library's Visitor Experience 
Initiative, including the Thomas Jefferson Building 
renovations.
     Ensure the continued compilation of educational 
websites and materials tailored for students going to school 
remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
     Oversee gift shop financial management and 
accounting.
     Oversee improvements to the Legislation 
Information Service.
     Oversee Library storage facilities, including the 
shelving replacement project in the Law Library.
     Oversee supervisor and employee conduct, workplace 
environment and culture, discipline, and other human resources 
matters.
     Oversee the Library's Overseas Offices program.
     Oversee the operation of the Library's various 
websites, including Congress.gov and Copyright.gov.
     Review and propose changes to the rules and 
regulations promulgated by the Joint Committee on the Library.
     Review customer order processing procedures.
     Review relevant rules, regulations, and statutes 
and, in consultation with the agency, revise where necessary.
     Review reports by Library of Congress Inspector 
General and implementation of audit recommendations. Examine 
options to improve operation and structure of the Library of 
Congress Inspector General's office.
     Review the use of technology generally in Library 
of Congress operations, and specifically the ongoing work to 
centralize technology operations.

Office of Congressional Accessibility Services (OCAS)

     Oversee management and operations of Office of 
Congressional Accessibility Services, such as the 
implementation of the ADA, in conjunction with Senate Committee 
on Rules and Administration.

Smithsonian Institution

     Oversee efforts to increase collections storage 
capacity, including review of proposed legislation to expand 
collections storage capacity.
     Oversee efforts to publish educational materials 
tailored toward students participating in virtual learning due 
to the COVID-19 pandemic.
     Oversee efforts to reduce the Smithsonian 
Institution's deferred maintenance backlog.
     Oversee general museum and research facility 
operations of the Smithsonian Institution.
     Oversee response to the COVID-19 pandemic, 
including museum operations and workplace safety.
     Oversee Smithsonian science and research 
facilities, including the work being conducted in Panama, 
Hawaii and around the world.
     Oversee the partnership with the Victoria and 
Albert Museum in London.
     Oversee the planning for newly authorized 
Smithsonian facilities, including the National Women's History 
Museum and the National Museum of the American Latino.
     Review and evaluate the Smithsonian Institution's 
use of federally appropriated funds.
     Review relevant rules, regulations and statutes 
and, in consultation with the agency, revise where necessary.
     Review any proposals to charge fees for admission 
to any Smithsonian exhibits.
     Review COVID-19 impacts to Trust finances and 
labor outlook.
     Review efforts to improve diversity and inclusion 
within the Smithsonian, including, diversity in exhibits/
collections and diversity in the workforce, with an emphasis on 
senior levels of the Smithsonian.
     Review operations and conduct oversight of 
Smithsonian Enterprises.
     Review operations of the National Zoo.
     Review proposed appointments of citizen regents to 
the Smithsonian Institution's Board of Regents.
     Review Smithsonian policies regarding initiation 
of planning, design, and construction of projects.
     Review the Smithsonian Inspector General reports 
on the status of the Smithsonian, with a focus on cybersecurity 
and deferred maintenance issues.

United States Capitol Police

     Review the events of and related to the January 6, 
2021, domestic terrorist attack on the Capitol including 
consideration and facilitation of security recommendations made 
by Lt. General Russel Honor (Ret.) and his task force studying 
attack.
     Review and oversee implementation of Inspector 
General recommendations
     Authorize and oversee of the installation and 
maintenance of new security systems and devices proposed by the 
Capitol Police Board and other relevant security entities.
     Oversee national search for a new permanent 
Department leadership, including a new Department Chief.
     Oversee any potential structural reforms to the 
Department.
     Review and monitor the Department's implementation 
of Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Action (IDEA) with 
recruitment, training, and development of all Department 
employees and leadership, with a focus on diversifying the 
ranks of the department.
     Review and monitor the Department's plan of action 
to implement mandatory basic, immediate, and advanced 
leadership training of all supervisory personnel.
     Review short and long-term crisis mental health 
support for Department officers and Civilian Personnel.
     Conduct oversight of the effectiveness of 
Department pre-screeners.
     Conduct oversight of House garages security 
implementation.
     Continually review physical security requirements 
for Members of Congress.
     Examine the Department's role in assuring 
accessibility to the House wing of the Capitol, House Office 
Buildings and other facilities consistent with the ADA.
     Monitor administrative operations of the agency, 
including budgetary management, over-time use, civilian 
components, attrition rates, recruitment efforts and incentive 
programs for officers and civilian employees.
     Oversee efforts to improve Department 
transparency.
     Review all reports authored by the Department 
Inspector General, along with operations and structure of the 
Inspector General's Office.
     Review analysis of uniformed officer post/duty 
assignments to determine and authorize force levels to meet the 
agency's security requirements within the Capitol complex to 
include the Capitol Visitor Center, the Library of Congress, 
and U.S. Botanic Garden.
     Review and consider proposals to improve USCP 
training program, especially to counter bias, for new recruits 
and in-service training, including the Department's use of 
programs at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers.
     Review and monitor the Department IG's immediate 
recommendations to address insider threats within the 
Department.
     Review relevant rules, regulations, and statutes 
and, in consultation with the agency, revise where necessary.
     Review and monitor the revision of the 
Department's Use of Force policy.
     Review and oversee revisions of all Department 
Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) and Memorandums of Agreement 
(MOA) with certain federal, state, local, and Department of 
Defense entities.
     Review Department COVID-19 enhanced testing and 
vaccination programs.
     Review Department security clearance policy.
     Review proposals for additional USCP authorities, 
facilities, and equipment.

                            MEMBER SERVICES

     Oversee Members' Representational Allowance (MRA), 
including amounts, structure, regulations, and calculations to 
ensure that all Members have sufficient resources to 
effectively represent their constituents.
     Oversee the processing of vouchers and direct 
payments, including those for payroll. Continue to monitor the 
implementation of the electronic vouchering system.
     Provide guidance and outreach to congressional 
offices to ensure compliance with Committee regulations.
     Review and, if appropriate, revise the Guide to 
Outfitting and Maintaining an Office, a set of regulations 
governing the acquisition, transfer, and disposal of 
furnishings, equipment, software, and related services.
     Review and, if appropriate, revise the Members' 
Congressional Handbook, a set of regulations governing the 
appropriate use of the Members' Representational Allowance.
     Work with the Officers of the House, the AOC, and 
other Legislative Branch agencies to provide meaningful 
outreach to Member offices and provide that the views of member 
offices are incorporated into their ongoing work.

New Member Orientation

     Plan, implement, and oversee the New Member 
Orientation program for newly elected Members of Congress.
     Oversee the planning and implementation of the 
Congressional Research Service's New Member Issues Seminar.
     Oversee continued implementation of the Transition 
Aide program.
     Oversee implementation of new technologies to help 
facilitate New Member Orientation.
     Work with the Congressional Research Service and 
other support agencies to make available additional on-going 
professional development services for new Members and staff.

Intern Program

     Continue and expand the Gregg and Livingston 
Harper Congressional Internship Program for Individuals with 
Intellectual Disabilities.
     Oversee the House Paid Internship program, 
including oversight of paid interns in district offices.
     In coordination with the Senate Committee on Rules 
and Administration, organize, administer, and oversee the 
intern lecture series.
     Review and consider revising the intern handbook 
and other publications and communication materials used in 
support of the intern program.

                    COMMITTEE FUNDING AND OVERSIGHT

     Review monthly reports on committee activities and 
expenditures.
     Review and, as necessary, revise the Committees' 
Congressional Handbook.
     Review primary and any secondary expense 
resolutions and approve authorization of committee funding 
levels.
     Review committees' franking expenditures.
     Review committees' requests for the use of 
consultant contracts.

                CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1995

     Conduct general oversight of the office of Office 
of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR).
     Conduct specific oversight of the OCWR IT system.
     Ensure compliance with requirements concerning the 
posting of workplace rights and procedures for filing claims.
     Evaluate resources available to OCWR and House 
employing offices to facilitate implementation of the 
Congressional Accountability Act (P.L. 104-1, 109 Stat. 3) 
(CAA).
     Monitor any relevant judicial proceedings to 
determine the impact on the CAA.
     Monitor implementation of the CAA and the reforms 
provided for in the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 
Reform Act (P.L. 115-397, 132 Stat. 5297).
     Monitor the development and deployment of the 
biannual climate survey.
     Oversee updates to the anti-harassment and anti-
discrimination training curriculum, including for district 
offices.
     Oversee the Office of Employee Advocacy.
     Review and introduce, as appropriate, OCWR 
proposed regulations for paid family leave for the Legislative 
Branch.
     Review data on workplace rights information.
     Review model harassment and discrimination 
policies.
     Review regulations adopted by OCWR.
     Review suggestions from OCWR regarding potential 
updates to employment laws, as set forth in OCWR's Section 
102(b) Reports.

                        OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS

     Coordinate with the Clerk of the House and CAO to 
identify and implement new applications, resources, and 
procedures for the House to be more transparent, accountable, 
accessible, and to meet Member and Committee offices' 
obligations related to official communications.
     Coordinate with the Member Services team to 
continue to update, refine, and modernize policies related to 
the official use of communications resources.
     Implement approved procedures to increase 
transparency and improve the accounting of franked mail costs.
     Oversee compliance with current prohibition on 
mass mailings 60 days before a primary or general election.
     Oversee implementation of the regulations 
governing unsolicited mass communications as set forth in the 
COMMS Act (P.L. 116-260) and the House of Representatives 
Communications Standards Manual.
     Oversee the Members' use of the congressional 
frank and other unsolicited mass communications by providing 
guidance, advice, and counsel through consultation or advisory 
opinions.

                 HOUSE TECHNOLOGY USE AND MODERNIZATION

     Continue to consult with the Select Committee on 
the Modernization of Congress and implement recommendations as 
appropriate.
     Oversight of House Information Resources and other 
technology functions of the House to improve technology 
governance, services, and the electronic dissemination of 
information.
     Review and consideration of recommendations made 
by the National Academy of Public Administration regarding 
enhancing technology assessment capabilities within the 
Legislative Branch.
     In cooperation with Member Services team, review 
available technology necessary to support New Member 
Orientation.
     Oversee and continue to implement an enterprise 
House disaster recovery program for House offices, standing and 
select Committees, and Member offices.
     Oversee continuation and streamlining of House 
technology assessment in both new media and cloud services.
     Oversee plan for deployment of 5G (the fifth-
generation technology standard for broadband cellular 
networks).
     Review cybersecurity measures and develop 
strategic plans to improve policies.
     Review procedures and standards for technology 
services provided by outside vendors, individuals, and other 
entities.
     Review technology standards for hearing rooms as 
they relate to the committee broadcast program.
     Work with Legislative Branch agencies to 
communicate available technology services to all Member, 
Committee, and Leadership Offices.

                  FEDERAL ELECTION LAW AND PROCEDURES

     Build the congressional record in support of a 
reauthorized national Voting Rights Act.
     Examine all aspects of election security practices 
and consider proposals to improve and strengthen election 
integrity.
     Examine the impact of amendments made by the Help 
America Vote Act (HAVA) and the Military and Overseas Voter 
Empowerment Act (MOVE Act) to the Uniformed and Overseas 
Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) and consider proposals to 
improve voting methods for those serving and living abroad.
     Review operations of the Election Assistance 
Commission (EAC) and evaluate possible changes to improve 
efficiency and improve implementation of HAVA.
     Examine the role and impact of political 
organizations and non-profit organizations on federal 
elections.
     Recommend disposition of House election contests 
pending before the committee; monitor any disputed election 
counts.
     Review all aspects of registration and voting 
practices in federal elections. Monitor allegations of fraud 
and misconduct during all phases of federal elections and 
evaluate measures to improve the integrity of the electoral 
process.
     Review federal campaign-finance laws and 
regulations, including presidential and congressional public 
financing, and consider potential reforms.
     Review operations of the Federal Election 
Commission (FEC) and evaluate possible changes to improve 
efficiency, improve enforcement of the Federal Election 
Campaign Act, and improve procedures for the disclosure of 
contributions and expenditures. Consider authorization issues 
and make recommendations on the FEC's budget.
     Review state and federal activities under the 
National Voter Registration Act to identify potential for 
improvement to voter registration and education programs and 
reducing costs of compliance for state and local government.
     Use authority under Article 1, Section 4 of the 
United States Constitution to provide equivalent opportunities 
for voters to participate in federal elections.

                   MINORITY OVERSIGHT PRIORITIES 2021

    The Minority appreciates the oversight plan developed by 
the Majority and looks forward to working on many of the issues 
outlined. It was important to also note specific topics and 
areas of interest that the Minority will continue to focus on.
    House Officers and Operations, Generally:
           The Committee must coordinate with House 
        Officers and Legislative Branch entities to develop a 
        detailed plan to physically re-open the campus post-
        COVID-19 pandemic. This plan should be tiered and 
        establish clear benchmarks for progress.
           The Committee should work to encourage the 
        Architect of the Capitol, United States Capitol Police, 
        Capitol Police Board and other Legislative Branch 
        entities to quickly move forward, in a coordinated 
        manner, with plans to enhance the security of the 
        Capitol campus.

Chief Administrative Office [CAO]

     The Committee is encouraged by the CAO's plan to 
move forward with exploring an enterprise-wide CMS procurement, 
development, and launch.
     Based on feedback from Members offices and 
recommendations from the Select Committee on Modernization, the 
Committee believes the roll-out of an office dedicated to 
providing Human Resource support for offices is needed.
     The Congressional Staff Academy has the 
opportunity to be the gold-standard of in-house training and 
development staff needs. The Committee encourages the CAO to 
continue to expand its offerings, and hire instructors that 
have Member office experience.
     The Committee believes that there is a more cost-
effective way to offer the required workplace rights training.

Sergeant at Arms [SAA]

     The Committee believes we must further 
professionalize and independently empower the security experts 
to make security related decisions. Politics currently play too 
much of a role in security related decision making.
     The Committee supports expanding the tracking and 
badging system for visitors on campus.

Clerk

     The Committee is supportive of the Clerk's 
Comparative Print Tool initiative and encourages expanding the 
initiative to all Member offices.

Legislative Counsel

     There continues to be a need to increase the 
bandwidth of the services to support the drafting of 
legislation for Member, Committee and Leadership Offices.

                 LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND OTHER ENTITIES

Architect of the Capitol [AOC]

     The Cannon House Office Building renovation 
continues to be a top priority of oversight. The project is 
improving our oldest House Office Building which needed life 
cycle replacement of all building systems. However, cost over-
runs continue to be an area of concern for the Committee and 
encourages the AOC to incorporate lessons learned from 
completed phases with the goal of limiting total project cost.
     The Committee continues to be frustrated with the 
lack of progress of the Cannon Caucus Room renovation. The 
space is more than two years behind schedule. The AOC and CAO 
must do everything they can do get the space functioning.
     Overall project and contract management within the 
AOC continues to be something the Committee needs to work with 
the Appropriations Committee to monitor.
     CVC Emancipation Hall is an initiative that will 
impact millions of annual visitors, and the Committee 
encourages the AOC to continue to work with stakeholders in 
order to ensure the content of the displays are accurate and 
have bipartisan support.

US Capitol Police [USCP]

     The Committee recognizes that in the wake of the 
January 6th attack on the Capitol there will need to be a 
renewed focus on adjusting the mission and resources of the 
department. That is a top priority for the Committee.
     The Committee supports the proposed regional 
approach to cross-country security. This proposal approved by 
the Capitol Police Board will allow the department to more 
efficiently respond to security threats in the various 
congressional districts across the country.
     The Committee believes that despite the pandemic 
and the events of January 6th, the collective bargaining 
agreement negotiations must continue. The current agreement is 
out of date and in need of updating.

Library of Congress

     The Committee believes there needs to be a focus 
on services offered by the Congressional Research Service. In 
the 116th Congress, the Committee held a hearing to understand 
some of the management challenges faced by CRS. More needs to 
be done in this space and hopefully can be supported in a 
bipartisan way in the current Congress.
     The future of the NLS Headquarters continues to be 
a priority for the Committee.
     The Committee strongly supports the efforts to 
continue to modernize the information technology systems that 
are the backbone of the United States Copyright Office.

Government Publishing Office [GPO]

     Title 44 reform, specifically the Federal Deposit 
Library Program is a top priority for the Committee. The 
program is in need to statutory changes to make it more 
beneficial for local libraries to participate, which in turn 
serves GPO's goal of providing greater access of government 
information by citizens.
     The Committee believes that the current process of 
posting legislation online needs to be reviewed to identify 
ways to speed up the process. Delays result in offices waiting 
several weeks in many instances to read the actual text of 
introduced legislation.

Office of Attending Physician [OAP]

     The Committee believes the OAP needs to develop a 
comprehensive vaccine distribution plan that would make 
available a vaccine for all front-line workers within Congress.
     The Committee looks forward to OAP developing a 
reopening plan with agreed upon criteria for the House's 
physical reopening.

                  FEDERAL ELECTION LAW AND PROCEDURES

     Examine all aspects of election security practices 
and consider proposals to improve and strength election 
integrity.
     Examine the impact of amendments made by HAVA and 
the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE Act) to 
the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act 
(UOCAVA) and consider proposals to improve voting methods for 
those serving and living abroad.
     Examine the role and impact of political 
organizations and non-profit organizations on federal 
elections.
     Recommend disposition of House election contests 
pending before the committee; monitor any disputed election 
counts.
     Review all aspects of registration and voting 
practices in federal elections. Monitor allegations of fraud 
and misconduct during all phases of federal elections and 
evaluate measures to improve the integrity of the electoral 
process.
     Review federal campaign-finance laws and 
regulations, including presidential and congressional public 
financing, and consider potential reforms.
     Review operations of the Election Assistance 
Commission (EAC) and evaluate possible changes to improve 
efficiency and improve implementation of the Help America Vote 
Act (HAVA).
     Review operations of the Federal Election 
Commission (FEC) and evaluate possible changes to improve 
efficiency, improve enforcement of the Federal Election 
Campaign Act, and improve procedures for the disclosure of 
contributions and expenditures. Consider authorization issues 
and make recommendations on the FEC's budget.

  ADDITIONAL MINORITY VIEWS ON OVERSIGHT OF FEDERAL ELECTION LAW AND 
                               PROCEDURES

    The Majority election oversight plan covers the 
jurisdiction of the Committee and we share in most of these 
objectives. However, we differ in the priority of these 
objectives and wish to include additional items. As the 117th 
Congress progresses, we hope to work with the Majority also to 
address:
           The protection and conservation of the 
        primary, constitutional role of States with respect to 
        determining the ``the Times, Places and Manner of 
        holding Elections for Senators and Representatives'', 
        as provided for in Article I, Section 4, of the 
        Constitution, without undue federal regulation or 
        interference.
           The protection and conservation of the 
        States' constitutional role to appoint members of the 
        Electoral College as their Legislatures best determine, 
        as provided for in Article II, Section 1.
           Committee Minority Members continue to 
        believe a prohibition against predatory election 
        tactics such as ballot harvesting is warranted. The 
        Committee should investigate these tactics.
           The examination of burdensome, unfunded, 
        federal elections mandates during a time when local 
        government budgets are under strain from the fiscal 
        effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
           Methods to improve the enforcement of 
        existing federal law that requires States to maintain 
        their voter registration lists in order to improve the 
        accuracy and integrity of the elections process.
           Investigate and monitor HAVA waste, fraud, 
        and abuse (including, but without limitation, 
        allegations of official funds going towards partisan 
        ``get-out-the-vote'' efforts, lack of transparency in 
        the contract bidding process, and ex parte 
        communications between vendors and state contracting 
        officials).
           Consideration of a national standard for 
        transparent HAVA bidding processes and review should be 
        established to prevent corruption.
           Study the appropriate role of partisan firms 
        engaged in ``get-out-the-vote'' efforts in contracts 
        funded using HAVA grants.

                                OVERVIEW

    The Committee is responsible for oversight of House 
operations, House Officers, the Smithsonian Institution, the 
Library of Congress, the Government Publishing Office and the 
United States Capitol Police. The Committee also oversees the 
administration and financing of federal elections.

                            JANUARY 6, 2021

    On January 6, 2021, a violent mob, summoned and dispatched 
by former President Donald J. Trump,\3\ breached the Capitol 
security perimeter, entered and remained in the Capitol with 
deadly weapons, and assaulted and injured more than 140 police 
officers. This was done in an attempt to obstruct, influence, 
and impede an official proceeding to stop the lawful counting 
of electoral votes and overturn the legitimate results of the 
2020 presidential election.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\On December 19, 2020, President Trump tweeted: ``Big protest in 
D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!'' Following this tweet, an 
analyst at the National Capital Region Threat Intelligence Consortium 
observed a tenfold uptick in violent online rhetoric targeting Congress 
and law enforcement, and noticed that previously unaffiliated violent 
right-wing groups had started to coordinate their efforts. See Select 
Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States 
Capitol, Final Report (2022).
    \4\Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell described the attack as 
follows: ``January 6th was a disgrace. American citizens attacked their 
own government. They used terrorism to try to stop a specific piece of 
domestic business they did not like. Fellow Americans beat and bloodied 
our own police. They stormed the Senate. They tried to hunt down the 
Speaker of the House. They built a gallows and chanted about murdering 
the Vice President. They did this because they'd been fed wild 
falsehoods by the most powerful man on earth because he was angry he 
lost an election. Former President Trump's actions preceding the riot 
were a disgraceful dereliction of duty. . . There is no question--
none--that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for 
provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people who 
stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and 
instructions of their President, and having that belief was a 
foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, 
conspiracy theories, and reckless hyperbole which the defeated 
President kept shouting into the largest megaphone on Earth.'' 167 
Cong. Rec. 28 S735 (daily ed. Feb. 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to the Department of Justice (DOJ), as of 
December 6, 2022, ``approximately 900 defendants have been 
arrested in nearly all 50 states and the District of 
Columbia.''\5\ Of those more than 280 defendants have been 
charged with ``assaulting, resisting or impeding officers or 
employees,'' including nearly 100 defendants who have been 
charged with ``using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing 
serious bodily injury to an officer.\6\ DOJ notes that citizens 
from around the world have ``provided invaluable assistance in 
identifying individuals in connection with the January 6 
attack,'' but that the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
``continues to seek the public's help in identifying 
approximately 350 individuals believed to have committed 
violent acts on the Capitol grounds, including over 250 who 
assaulted police officers.''\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\U.S. Dep't of Justice, ``23 Months Since the January 6 Attack on 
the Capitol,'' Dec. 8, 2022, available at https://www.justice.gov/usao-
dc/23-months-january-6-attack-capitol.
    \6\Id. 
    \7\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    One of those brave police officers was United States 
Capitol Police (USCP) Capitol Division Inspector Thomas Loyd, 
who was among the heroes who protected Members, staff, the 
Capitol, and American democracy during the attack. Inspector 
Loyd personally battled the rioters alongside the 350 rank-and-
file officers under his command on the West Front of the 
Capitol. He described the impact of the attack on his officers:

          Several of my officers had to be carried out of the 
        Capitol Building on January 6 due to injuries. Some 
        have returned to a Full Duty Status, others are in a 
        Restricted Duty Status, and a few were not permitted to 
        return to at all due to the severity of their injuries.
          Two Capitol Police Officers perished as a result of 
        the riot. Officer Brian Sicknick faithfully served the 
        United States Capitol Police for 13 years. He fought 
        valiantly for several hours on January 6. He died 
        suddenly at 8:30 p.m. while returning to the office in 
        the United States Capitol Building, not far from where 
        the Defendant led the mob earlier in the day. His body 
        survived an additional day because his fellow officers 
        worked so hard to keep him alive so his family could 
        say goodbye in person on January 7. Despite the 
        official medical report, there was nothing natural 
        about the way Officer Sicknick died. He was 42 years 
        old. Officer Howie Liebengood perished two days later 
        when he took his own life. It is tough enough to bury 
        any of my colleagues, but when the cause is suicide, it 
        makes it that much more heartbreaking. Officer 
        Liebengood faithfully served the Department for 16 
        years. He was 51 years old.
          The ramifications of January 6 will affect all of my 
        personnel for the rest of their lives. As a result of 
        the riot, 20 percent of my team separated from the 
        Department.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\Gov't's Sentencing Supp., U.S.A. v. Jensen, No. 21-cr-6-TJK 
(D.D.C.), (Dec. 13, 2022).

    Thanks to the valor of USCP officers like Inspector Loyd, 
the mob ultimately failed to achieve its unlawful goal: nearly 
15 hours after the Joint Session of Congress convened to count 
electoral votes, Congress finished its job and affirmed then-
President-elect Joe Biden's victory. Astonishingly, however, 
even after the violent attack, which resulted in several 
deaths, countless grievous injuries, psychological trauma, and 
significant damage to the United States Capitol, nearly 140 
House Republicans still refused to accept the results of the 
election and objected to certifying the results.
    As will be discussed in greater detail below, the Committee 
on House Administration (Committee) held more hearings 
examining the United States Capitol Police (USCP) response to 
the attack than any other standing committee in Congress. Based 
on information and evidence presented at these hearings, the 
Committee oversaw a multitude of reforms to the Capitol Hill 
security apparatus, particularly with respect to the United 
States Capitol Police (USCP).

The Committee Directs the Inspectors General of the U.S. Capitol Police 
        and Architect of the Capitol to Commence an Immediate Review of 
        the Attack

    Immediately after the attack, Chairperson Zoe Lofgren 
directed the USCP Inspector General (USCP IG) to set aside his 
team's ongoing work and prioritize an urgent, nonpartisan 
review of the Department's preparations for, and response to, 
the attack. The Committee worked closely with the USCP IG, 
seeking to determine, inter alia: 1) whether the Department 
established adequate measures to ensure the safety and security 
of the Capitol Complex and Members; 2) whether there existed 
adequate internal controls and processes to ensure compliance 
with Department policies; and 3) whether the Department 
complied with all applicable laws, regulations, policies, and 
procedures. Importantly, and as Chairperson Lofgren repeated 
frequently during the 117th Congress, the review of USCP's 
management and performance as a law enforcement organization 
did not diminish the valor of those who bravely fought to 
defend the Capitol on January 6, many of whom suffered serious 
physical and psychological injuries in defense of American 
democracy and the congressional community. They are all heroes, 
and the Committee, the Congress, and the country will forever 
be in their debt.
    In addition to the USCP review, given the key role the 
Architect of the Capitol (AOC) plays in the physical security 
of the Capitol Complex--including the Architect's role as one 
of the three voting members of the Capitol Police Board, which 
directly oversees the Department--Chairperson Lofgren directed 
the AOC Inspector General (AOC IG) to commence an urgent, 
nonpartisan review of the attack. The AOC IG, together with the 
Committee, sought to evaluate, inter alia: 1) AOC's emergency 
preparedness posture; 2) AOC's role in securing the Capitol 
Complex for large public gatherings; and 3) U.S. Capitol window 
security and infrastructure.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\In addition to the Committee and institutional IG 
investigations, the Committee facilitated two additional reviews: 
First, Chairperson Lofgren helped lead a group of Members and Senators 
in requesting that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct a 
review of preparation and coordination for, and response to, the 
January 6, 2021, attack. In addition, following the attack, Speaker 
Nancy Pelosi tasked Lieutenant General Russel Honore (Ret.) with 
leading an immediate, nonpartisan review for the purpose of identifying 
actions or decisions that could be taken immediately to improve the 
security of the Capitol Complex, Members and staff. General Honore's 
task force included a team of professionals with law enforcement, 
legal, personal protection, intelligence, military and Congressional 
experience. The Committee worked closely with the taskforce to provide 
information and facilitate dialogue with nonpartisan institutional 
staff responsible for Capitol security, including USCP, the House 
Sergeant at Arms and others. As with the Committee and institutional IG 
reviews, the GAO and Honore reviews were limited in scope and focused 
solely on short-term reforms to security infrastructure and law 
enforcement preparation and response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The House Passes a Bill to Establish an Independent, 9/11-Style 
        Commission

    While the Committee and respective IG reviews were 
necessary, due to the limits of Committee and institutional IG 
jurisdiction, they were not sufficiently broad in scope as to 
allow a full investigation of the attack in its entirety. As a 
result, in the weeks following the January 6 Joint Session of 
Congress, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced her intention to 
establish an outside, independent Commission to investigate and 
report on the facts and causes of the attack.\10\ Thereafter, 
Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy wrote to Speaker Pelosi, 
demanding that the Commission legislation include three 
elements: an equal 5-5 ratio in appointments by Democrats and 
Republicans; co-equal subpoena power for the Chair and Vice 
Chair of the Commission; and no inclusion of findings or other 
predetermined conclusions which should be rendered by the 
Commission itself.\11\ Leader McCarthy then deputized Committee 
on Homeland Security Ranking Republican Member John Katko to 
negotiate the contours of the Commission bill with his 
Democratic counterpart, Chairman Bennie Thompson.\12\ Every 
single one of Leader McCarthy's requests were granted and 
incorporated into H.R. 3233, the bipartisan ``National 
Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United 
States Capitol Complex Act'' (Commission bill).\13\ Ranking 
Member Katko described the Commission Bill as a ``a solid, fair 
agreement.''\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\Letter from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to Democratic 
Members of the House of Representatives (Feb. 15, 2021), available at 
https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/21521-0.
    \11\Letter from House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to Speaker of 
the House Nancy Pelosi (Feb.22, 2021), available at https://
www.speaker.gov/sites/speaker.house.gov/files/Sharp%20MX-
4141_20210518_081238.pdf.
    \12\Marianna Sotomayor, Karoun Demirjian & Josh Dawsey, Republicans 
divided over whether to support Jan. 6 commission that would put 
Trump's actions in the spotlight, Wash. Post (May 18,2021) https://
www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/mccarthy-oppose-commission-capitol-
attack/2021/05/18/7579c386-b7e0-11eb-a6b1-81296da0339b_story.html.
    \13\National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the 
United States Capitol ComplexAct, H.R. 3233, 117th Cong. (2021).
    \14\Deirdre Walsh & Claudia Grisales, Top House Republican Opposes 
Bipartisan Commission To Investigate Capitol Riot, NPR (May 18, 2021) 
https://www.npr.org/2021/05/18/997836874/top-house-republican-opposes-
bipartisan-commission-to-probe-capitol-riot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Inexplicably, however, Minority Leader McCarthy then 
declared his opposition to the agreed upon, bipartisan 
legislation that included every single one of his demands. 
Ultimately, Leader McCarthy was among the 140 Republicans who 
voted against the Commission bill.\15\ Nevertheless, the bill 
passed the House on a bipartisan basis, including all voting 
House Democrats and 35 of 175 voting House Republicans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Senate Fails to Pass the Commission Bill

    After its consideration in the House, the bill was then 
sent to the Senate. Despite his acknowledgment that the 
attackers ``beat and bloodied our police'' and ``used terrorism 
to try and stop a specific piece of domestic business they did 
not like . . . because they'd been fed wild, falsehoods by the 
most powerful man on Earth,'' Senator Mitch McConnell blocked 
the Commission bill.\16\ In so doing, Senator McConnell 
``ask[ed] wavering senators to support filibustering the bill 
as `a personal favor' to him.''\17\ Regrettably, this doomed 
any prospect of an outside, independent 9/11-type commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\Read McConnell's remarks on the Senate floor following Trump's 
acquittal, CNN (Feb. 13, 2021) https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/13/politics/
mcconnell-remarks-trump-acquittal/index.html.
    \17\Jamie Gangel & Michael Warren, McConnell doubles down to 
pressure Republicans, asking for `a personal favor' to block January 6 
commission, CNN (May 27, 2021) https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/27/politics/
mcconnell-personal-favor-block-january-6-commission/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Senate's abdication of its duty and failure to pass the 
bipartisan legislation only served to increase the significance 
of the investigations conducted by the Committee and IGs. Due 
to Chairperson Lofgren's direction to the USCP IG that his 
office immediately focus all resources on its January 6, 2021, 
related work, the USCP IG began to produce a series of ``flash 
reports'' in February 2021. The AOC IG produced a series of 
similar reports beginning in April 2021.

The Committee Convenes a Series of Hearings

    Due, in part, to the Senate's failure to pass the 
Commission bill and the absence of any other body specifically 
tasked with investigating the entirety of the attack, in April 
2021, the Committee commenced a series of hearings on USCP's 
and AOC's preparations for and response to the attack. As the 
not yet formed Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th 
Attack on the United States Capitol (January 6th Select 
Committee) went on to note in its Final Report, the Committee's 
series of hearings established that there were ``additional 
steps that should have been taken [by USCP and other federal 
law enforcement entities] to address the potential for violence 
on that day.''\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the 
United States Capitol, Final Report, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The hearings centered primarily on the USCP IG and AOC IG 
flash reports. Notably, while each report investigated a 
discrete topic or topics, the series, taken as a whole, laid 
bare the following systemic deficiencies within the Department 
and its management by senior leaders: 1) insufficient training; 
2) inadequate planning, policies, and procedures; 3) little to 
no capability to professionally collect, process, and 
disseminate intelligence; and 4) deficient leadership and poor 
culture. As the series of hearings illustrated, these 
leadership and management deficiencies led to Department-wide 
failures in command and control on January 6, 2021, and greatly 
hindered the ability of scores of brave rank-and-file officers 
to execute their mission. That USCP and partner law enforcement 
agencies were able to eventually clear and secure the Capitol 
and allow the resumption of the Joint Session of Congress is 
indicia of the courageousness of the officers on the line that 
day.
    Incredibly, after the Committee had already held five of 
its eventual six January 6 hearings (described in detail 
below), Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy made the outrageous 
claim that the Committee held ``[n]o hearings about the IG 
report.''\19\ Fact checkers from the Washington Post rated this 
assertion, along with Leader McCarthy's similarly brazen claim 
that Speaker Pelosi turned down National Guard assistance prior 
to the attack, as ``four Pinocchios''--the grade it assigns to 
only the most egregious and blatant of lies.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\Salvador Rizzo, The false GOP claim that Pelosi turned down 
National Guard before Jan. 6 attack, WASH. POST (July 28, 2021) https:/
/www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/07/28/false-gop-claim-that-
pelosi-turned-down-national-guard-before-jan-6-attack/.
    \20\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On April 15, 2021, and April 21, 2021, the Committee held a 
multi-day hearing with the USCP IG entitled, ``Oversight of the 
United States Capitol Police and Preparations for and Response 
to the Attack of January 6th.'' During this hearing, the USCP 
IG discussed his office's first two flash reports, which 
focused specifically on operational planning, intelligence, and 
USCP's Civil Disturbance Unit. Key takeaways from the hearing 
included:
           USCP lacked a comprehensive operational plan 
        for the January 6, 2021, Joint Session of Congress and 
        lacked appropriate guidance for operational planning;
           USCP failed to disseminate relevant 
        intelligence obtained from outside sources;
           There was a lack of consensus within USCP on 
        the interpretation of threat analyses;
           USCP disseminated conflicting intelligence;
           USCP did not have adequate policies and 
        procedures for the Civil Disturbance Unit defining its 
        duties, composition, equipment, and training; and
           USCP failed to update and document its 
        intelligence priorities.
    On May 10, 2021, the Committee held a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight of the January 6th Attack: United States Capitol 
Police Threat Assessment and Counter-Surveillance Before and 
During the Attack.'' During this hearing, the USCP IG discussed 
his office's third flash report. Key takeaways from the hearing 
included:
           Counter Surveillance (CS) and Threat 
        Assessment (TA) Operations had outdated and vague 
        guidance;
           USCP lacked a dedicated CS entity; and
           Both CS and TA were inadequately resourced.
    On May 12, 2021, the Committee held a hearing with the AOC 
IG entitled, ``Oversight of the January 6th Attack: Review of 
the Architect of the Capitol's Emergency Preparedness.'' During 
this hearing, the AOC IG discussed his office's first flash 
report. Key takeaways from the hearing included:
           The AOC lacked updated emergency management 
        policies and procedures for active shooter, protests 
        and riot/civil disturbance activities; and
           The AOC failed to conduct all-inclusive 
        joint exercises with other Legislative Branch 
        Organizations.
    On May 24, 2021, the Committee held a hearing entitled, 
``Reforming the Capitol Police and Improving Accountability for 
the Capitol Police Board.'' As part of this hearing, the 
Committee received witness testimony from newly installed 
Sergeant at Arms Major General William Walker and Architect of 
the Capitol Brett Blanton, who as Architect is one of three 
voting members of the Capitol Police Board and served in that 
role prior to and during the January 6 attack. The Committee 
also received a written statement from the also newly installed 
Senate Sergeant at Arms, Karen Gibson--who had also served on 
the Honore task force--resulting in a hearing record with 
testimony from all voting members of the Capitol Police Board. 
The Committee also received testimony from experts in force 
protection, physical security, and law enforcement from 
entities including U.S. Secret Service and National Guard. This 
hearing examined the structures, deficiencies, and culture of 
the Capitol Police Board and USCP. Key takeaways included:
           USCP should shift from a law enforcement 
        model to a proactive force protection model;
           January 6th included failures in equipment, 
        training, intelligence, command and control, and 
        communication;
           The need for a regulation to allow the Chief 
        of Police to call upon the D.C. National Guard in cases 
        of emergency was vital (by this time, Speaker Nancy 
        Pelosi had approved just such a regulation);
           The Capitol Police Board should be more 
        transparent and accountable, and should have a 
        permanent staff; and
           USCP needs to change its culture to become a 
        learning organization and overcome its leadership 
        challenges.
    On June 15, 2021, the Committee held a hearing with the 
USCP IG entitled, ``Oversight of the January 6th Attack: United 
States Capitol Police Containment Emergency Response Team and 
First Responders Unit.'' During this hearing, the USCP IG 
discussed his office's fourth flash report. In addition, the 
Committee received testimony from Dr. Gretta Goodwin, the 
Director of Justice and Law Enforcement Issues at the 
Government Accountability Office. Key takeaways from this 
hearing included:
           USCP must increase oversight and define the 
        missions of the Containment Emergency Response Team 
        (CERT) and the First Responders Unit (FRU);
           CERT should have used the USCP Training 
        Services Bureau rather than seeking training on its own 
        from outside contractors;
           FRU did not have the proper resources, 
        including equipment, training, and physical access 
        management;
           USCP did not have adequate access to the 
        Capitol's physical security infrastructure;
           Officers were not qualified to use their 
        weapons even though law enforcement practice is that 
        officers are taken offline until all qualifications and 
        requirements are met; and
           The CERT Commander deployed with his unit 
        rather than stay in the command center to coordinate 
        responses by other tactical units.
    On February 17, 2022, the Committee held a hearing 
entitled, Oversight of the January 6th Capitol Attack: Ongoing 
Review of the United States Capitol Police Inspector General 
Flash Reports. During this hearing, the USCP IG discussed his 
final four flash reports. These flash reports concerned the 
Command and Coordination Bureau (CCB), Hazardous Incident 
Response Division (HIRD), Canine Unit, Dignitary Protection 
Division (DPD), and Human Capital. The final flash report 
provided a summary of recommendations and security enhancements 
since the attack. Key takeaways from this hearing included:
           CCB had several deficiencies, including 
        inadequate guidance, non-compliance with existing 
        guidance, lack of direction from the chain of command, 
        lack of law enforcement coordination, and inadequate 
        incident management training;
           Coordination between HIRD and USCP 
        leadership was flawed, resulting in misinformation 
        among officers;
           HIRD lacked the necessary personnel and 
        equipment to complete its mission;
           Not all Canine Unit officers received canine 
        training or operational experience;
           DPD's training program was inadequate, as 
        was its equipment, as officers experienced problems 
        with ballistic vests; and
           DPD lacked a Plan of Action for the January 
        6, 2021, Joint Session of Congress and experienced 
        equipment failure with its issued ballistic vests.

The Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the 
        United States Capitol is Formed and Committee Oversees Ongoing 
        Reforms to the U.S. Capitol Police

    Soon after the Committee's June 15, 2021, hearing, the 
House passed H. Res. 503, establishing the January 6th Select 
Committee.\21\ The Committee on House Administration continued 
to conduct vigorous oversight of the Congressional security 
apparatus, including implementation of reforms at USCP, while 
simultaneously supporting the work of the January 6th Select 
Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\Establishing the Select Committee to Investigate the January 
6th Attack on the United States Capitol, H. Res. 503, 117th Cong. 
(2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Examples of Department reforms implemented during the 117th 
Congress include:
           Hired a new Chief of Police;
           Provided the Chief of Police authority to 
        call upon the D.C. National Guard in the event of an 
        emergency;
           Held USCP's first ever comprehensive active 
        shooter training;
           Trained with National Capital Region law 
        enforcement partners;
           Developed an action plan to improve USCP's 
        ability to effectively collect, process and disseminate 
        intelligence;
           Established retention bonuses and increased 
        salaries to address personnel shortages;
           Established a Contract Security Officer 
        (CSO) pilot program to ease the strain on officers 
        associated with personnel shortages;
           Reformed operational planning by 
        implementing a new process for publishing Incident 
        Action Plans;
           Revised standard operating procedures 
        related to sourcing, production and evaluation of 
        analytical products;
           Moved CDU riot shields to temperature-
        controlled areas to comply with manufacturer 
        guidelines;
           Used the Federal Bureau of Investigation's 
        Behavioral Analysis Unit Task Force for in-depth 
        analysis of priority subjects;
           Hired experts, including the Director of 
        Intelligence for the New York Police Department, to 
        serve in the same role and a U.S. Secret Service expert 
        in major events.
           Established the Howard ``Howie'' C. 
        Liebengood Center for Wellness, a new mental health 
        center to support of USCP officers.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\Officer Liebengood died after heroically defending the Capitol 
during the attack on January 6. In the 117th Congress, legislative 
action was taken both to ensure that, in general, resources and 
disability benefits are available to public safety officers who 
experience post-traumatic stress disorder following traumatic events in 
the line of duty. Within the USCP, a wellness center to support 
officers was named in memory and honor of Officer Liebengood. See e.g., 
Luke Broadwater, ``Capitol Officer's Suicide After Jan. 6 Qualifies for 
Line-of-Duty Death Benefit,'' N.Y. Times, Nov. 21, 2022, available at 
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/21/us/politics/officer-suicide-jan-6-
benefits.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           FEDERAL ELECTIONS

    The Committee conducted extensive oversight of the federal 
elections process during the 117th Congress. Examining all 
facets of the voting experience, the Committee and Subcommittee 
on Elections held numerous hearings and sent oversight letters 
gathering critical information on the U.S. election process. 
The Committee held four election-related Committee hearings, 
examining ways to strengthen our democracy, including through 
enactment of H.R. 1, the For the People Act; constitutional 
interpretation and congressional exercise of legislative and 
oversight authority under the Elections Clause of the U.S. 
Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 4, cl. 1); election subversion; and 
the independent state legislature theory's potential to disrupt 
our democracy. All told, through hearings before the Committee 
and Subcommittee on Elections, nearly 100 expert witnesses were 
called and provided testimony. Additionally, the Committee 
engaged in oversight of the Election Assistance Commission and 
Federal Election Commission (FEC), including by sending an 
extensive oversight letter to the FEC. During the 117th 
Congress, the Committee and Subcommittee on Elections published 
three staff reports: H.R. 1, The For the People Act, as 
Introduced in the 117th Congress (Mar. 2, 2021), Voting in 
America: Ensuring Free and Fair Access to The Ballot (July 
2021), The Electoral Count Act of 1877: Proposals for Reform 
(Jan. 2022).\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\Comm. on H. Admin. website, http://www.cha.house.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Moreover, the Committee shepherded through House passage 
four major pieces of election-related legislation: H.R. 1, the 
For the People Act; H.R. 5746, the Freedom to Vote: John R. 
Lewis Act; H.R. 8873, the Presidential Election Reform Act; and 
S. 3969 (the Senate companion to H.R. 7326), Protection and 
Advocacy for Voting Access Program Inclusion Act. These bills 
addressed critical election issues such as equitable access to 
American democracy, strengthening election infrastructure, 
combatting foreign interference in American elections, reducing 
barriers for voters with disabilities, and updating the over 
135-year-old Electoral Count Act, the procedural deficiencies 
of which contributed to the January 6th attack on the Capitol.
    In addition, the Subcommittee on Elections held eight 
hearings and additional roundtables on barriers to voting the 
dangers of and mis- and disinformation, particularly focusing 
on the disparate impact on communities of color. These hearings 
enabled the American people to relate their experiences in 
voting and gathered evidence of the ongoing discrimination and 
voter-suppression efforts happening throughout the country, 
especially efforts enabled by the United States Supreme Court 
decision in Shelby County v. Holder.\24\ The Committee issued a 
report prepared by staff of the Subcommittee on Elections, 
which was chaired by Chairman G. K. Butterfield, Voting in 
America: Ensuring Free and Fair Access to The Ballot, which was 
included in the report accompanying H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis 
Voting Rights Advancement Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\570 U.S. 529 (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     LEGISLATIVE BRANCH OPERATIONS

    House Officers are provided for in the U.S. 
Constitution.\25\ During the 117th Congress, the Committee 
worked extensively with the House Officers and other 
Legislative Branch agencies to facilitate the operations of the 
institution while keeping Members and staff safe while 
addressing two generational challenges: the January 6 attack on 
the Capitol and the continued COVID-19 pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\U.S. Const. art. I, sect. 2, cl. 5 (``The House of 
Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other officers'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While tackling these unique challenges, the Committee also 
worked with its institutional partners to reform House 
operations and strengthen the institution, particularly in the 
context of human capital and staff working conditions.
    One of the House's most enduring challenges has been its 
ability to recruit and retain talented, diverse staff. High 
staff turnover has traditionally weakened the Legislative 
Branch and deprived Members of the institutional knowledge and 
policy expertise required to make informed decisions on behalf 
of their constituents and provide effective oversight of the 
Executive Branch. Staffers who leave the House have generally 
cited the low compensation, lack of human resources 
infrastructure, and burnout as primary motivations for seeking 
employment elsewhere.
    To address this longstanding issue, the Committee 
spearheaded a series of reforms aimed at improving working 
conditions for House staff. According to Demand Progress, a 
nonpartisan, non-governmental organization focused on 
strengthening democracy, the House ``improve[d] the working 
conditions for its staff in the 117th Congress than Congress 
has over the last three decades combined.''\26\ The 
improvements to working conditions included:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\Demand Progress, Statement on House Unionization (Vote + 
Establishment of Minimum Wage) May 7, 2022 https://demandprogress.org/
statement-on-house-unionization-vote-establishment-of-minimum-wage/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Imposing of a play floor of $45,000 for 
        full-time House staff;
           Decoupling of Member pay and staff pay;
           Raising the staff pay cap;
           Increasing the lifetime maximum for the 
        Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) to $80,000;
           Exempting SLRP payments from the cap 
        established in the Speaker's Pay Order;
           Adoption of regulations recommended by the 
        nonpartisan Office of Congressional Workplace Rights 
        (OCWR) providing for unionization and collective 
        bargaining for House staff who choose to exercise such 
        rights;
           Adoption of regulations recommended by OCWR 
        relating to application of rights under the Family and 
        Medical Leave Act for House staff;
           Adoption of regulations recommended by OCWR 
        relating to application of rights under the Fair Labor 
        Standards Act for House staff;
           Extending the House Paid Internship Program 
        to committees;
           Expanding the Congressional Staff Academy 
        and launching the CAO Coach Program;
           Launching the House of Representatives Human 
        Resources Hub;
           Expanding the House Child Care Center; and
           Increasing the capacity of the Office of 
        Employee Assistance, which has seen historic 
        utilization of its services.
    In addition to the above, and as discussed in greater 
detail throughout this report, the Committee conducted robust 
oversight of House Officers and Legislative Branch agencies. 
The remainder of this section includes brief highlights of the 
Committee's oversight activities. More detailed summaries 
follow.
    The Committee's oversight of the Office of the Chief 
Administrative Officer (CAO) included, but was not limited, to, 
reviewing processes pertaining to asset management, 
procurement, contract management, financial management, payroll 
and benefits, information technology, Member and staff 
training, customer service, the House gift shop, restaurants, 
mail, furniture, accessibility, and staff benefits. As 
described later in this report, the Committee also worked 
closely with the CAO to develop several new tools for staff, 
including the House Human Resources Hub and a new system to 
streamline the expense reimbursement process.
    The Committee also worked closely with House Information 
Resources (HIR), a CAO business unit dedicated to information 
technology and cybersecurity of the House. The Committee 
oversaw the introduction of Quill, a new e-signature platform 
that facilitates the drafting, sharing, signing, and tracking 
of Congressional letters. It also oversaw a large-scale data 
center migration, modernization of the House's cybersecurity 
tools, and the creation of the House Digital Service, a team 
dedicated to delivering innovative new services to the House.
    The Committee's oversight activities with respect to the 
Office of the Clerk included the launch of an updated e-Hopper, 
continued implementation of proxy voting during the public 
health emergency and, critically, the new Comparative Print 
Suite. The Comparative Print Suite allows Members and staff to 
see legislative changes in context, including how a bill may 
change current law and where different versions of legislation 
diverge from one another.
    The Committee's oversight activities with respect to the 
Sergeant at Arms (SAA) included the launch of the Residential 
Security Program, expansion of the District Security Service 
Center, enhancements to garage security and safety trainings 
for Members and staff. The Committee also oversaw enhancements 
to security of the Capitol Complex after the January 6, 2021, 
attack at the Capitol.
    The Committee also conducted oversight over Legislative 
Branch agencies, offices, and cultural institutions, including 
the Library of Congress (Library), Government Publishing Office 
(GPO), United States Capitol Police (USCP), Architect of the 
Capitol (AOC), Smithsonian Institution, and the Office of 
Congressional Accessibility Services (OCAS).
    The Committee's oversight activities with respect to GPO 
included continued monitoring of COVID-19 prevention policies 
to ensure continuity of operations, visits to libraries that 
were part of the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), and 
efforts to protect personally identifiable information in GPO 
publications.
    The Committee's oversight of the Library of Congress 
included monthly meetings with Congressional Research Service 
(CRS) leadership to address management issues raised by CRS 
staff and oversight of the Visitor Experience enhancement 
project, a public-private partnership which includes 
renovations to the Thomas Jefferson Building; creation of a 
Treasures Gallery; and establishment of a Youth Center. The 
Committee also oversaw the continued modernization of the 
United States Copyright Office, including the launch of an 
Enterprise Copyright System.
    The Committee's oversight of the AOC included oversight of 
the multiyear Cannon House Office Building Rehabilitation 
project, with floors one through four of Phase III turned over 
by the end of the Congress, notwithstanding challenges 
associated with the January 6 attack on the Capitol and the 
myriad complications brought on by COVID-19 pandemic, which 
both presented challenges for keeping workers and contractors 
safe and created historic disruptions to the global supply 
chain. The Committee also directed that free feminine hygiene 
products be available in all women's restrooms in House 
controlled spaces, coordinated moves based on updated room 
assignments and oversaw the office lottery, among other 
oversight activities.
    The Committee's activities with respect to the Smithsonian 
Institution included convening a hearing on the impact of 
climate change on the Smithsonian's collections, addressing 
deferred maintenance issues and overseeing the establishment 
and site selection process for the National Museum of the 
American Latino and Women's History Museum.
    The Committee also conducted oversight of the Office of 
Congressional Accessibility Services (OCAS), including 
monitoring implementation of the Americans with Disabilities 
Act, providing for a Capitol that is accessible to all--
including Members, staff, and visitors alike, and ensuring that 
constituents with were able to contact their elected 
representatives through accessible websites. The Committee 
wishes to recognize the substantial contributions made by David 
Hauck, who retired in the 117th Congress after a lengthy 
career, for his leadership of this important office and his 
many contributions to ensuring that the Congress is truly open 
and accessible to all. At this time, following Mr. Hauck's 
retirement, OCAS is currently operating under an acting 
director. The Committee looked forward to promptly naming a 
permanent director during the 117th Congress and is 
disappointed that the Senate's delay in engaging on this 
important matter did not allow for such an appointment.

                           COMMITTEE FUNDING

    The Committee reports a biennial primary expense resolution 
by which standing and select committees of the House (except 
the Committee on Appropriations) are authorized operating funds 
for each Congress. During the first three months of each new 
Congress, clause 7 of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives authorizes interim funding authority for 
committees to operate until the House adopts a primary expense 
resolution. This funding authority is based upon funding levels 
from the second session of the previous Congress.
    The funding process begins at the beginning of each new 
Congress when each House committee introduces a separate House 
resolution requesting a specific funding level for committee 
operations. These resolutions are referred to the Committee on 
House Administration.
    On March 12, 2021, the Committee held a hearing entitled, 
``Committee Funding for the 117th Congress.'' By prior 
agreement between Chairperson Lofgren and Ranking Member Davis, 
it was determined that committees that submitted a bipartisan 
budget request would not be required to appear before the 
Committee. Vice-Chair Madeleine Dean and Ranking Member Jim 
Jordan of the Committee on the Judiciary appeared as witnesses 
regarding their committee's budget request.
    On April 14, 2021, Chairperson Lofgren introduced H. Res. 
316, Providing for the expenses of certain committees of the 
House of Representatives in the One Hundred Seventeenth 
Congress.\27\ The resolution was reported by the Committee on 
April 16, 2021, and agreed to by the House on April 20, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\Providing for the expenses of certain committees of the House 
of Representatives in the One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, H. Res. 
316, 117th Cong. (2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The amounts provided to each committee under H. Res. 316 
were as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Committee                            1st Session        2nd Session           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee on Agriculture...............................         $6,144,497         $6,144,497        $12,288,994
Committee on Armed Services............................          8,917,992          9,237,992         18,155,984
Committee on the Budget................................          5,449,723          5,449,723         10,899,446
Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.................          1,915,000          1,950,000          3,865,000
Committee on Education and Labor.......................          7,863,825          7,863,825         15,727,650
Committee on Energy and Commerce.......................         11,417,377         11,417,377         22,834,754
Committee on Ethics....................................          3,507,696          3,507,696          7,015,392
Committee on Financial Services........................          8,965,878          8,965,878         17,931,756
Committee on Foreign Affairs...........................          8,653,430          8,653,430         17,306,860
Committee on Homeland Security.........................          8,036,701          8,036,701         16,073,402
Committee on House Administration......................          5,590,190          5,892,211         11,482,401
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.............          6,543,075          6,543,075         13,086,150
Committee on the Judiciary.............................          8,406,115          8,406,115         16,812,230
Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress......            971,250            971,250          1,942,500
Committee on Natural Resources.........................          7,295,361          7,295,361         14,590,722
Committee on Oversight and Reform......................         13,896,964         13,896,964         27,793,928
Committee on Rules.....................................          3,410,369          3,444,469          6,854,838
Committee on Science, Space and Technology.............          5,816,818          5,816,818         11,633,636
Committee on Small Business............................          3,253,055          3,253,055          6,506,110
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.........          9,597,173          9,597,173         19,194,346
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.........................          4,791,977          4,791,977          9,583,954
Committee on Ways and Means............................          9,800,104          9,800,104         19,600,208
Reserve Fund...........................................          1,500,000          2,500,000          4,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 15, 2022, President Joe Biden signed into the law 
the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 (Act). Division I 
of the Act provided an increased in funding to Committees that 
exceeded what had been previously authorized by the Committee 
pursuant to House Resolution 316. Pursuant to the Committee's 
authority in clause 6 of House Rule X. The Committee reported 
and the House agreed to a subsequent resolution adjusting 
certain committees' funding levels for the Second Session of 
the 117th Congress.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\Adjusting the amount provided for the expenses of certain 
committees of the House of Representatives in the One Hundred 
Seventeenth Congress, H. Res. 1035 (117th Cong.) (2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The adjusted levels are reflected in the chart below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2nd session,
             Committee                 117th Total          adjusted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture.......................        $12,903,444         $6,758,947
Armed Services....................         19,499,783         10,381,791
Budget............................         11,444,418          5,994,695
Select Committee on the Climate             4,060,000          2,145,000
 Crisis...........................
Education and Labor...............         16,514,033          8,650,208
Energy and Commerce...............         24,276,492         12,559,115
Ethics............................          7,366,162          3,858,466
Financial Services................         18,828,344          9,862,466
Foreign Affairs...................         18,172,203          9,518,773
Homeland Security.................         16,877,072          8,840,371
House Administration..............         12,071,622          6,481,432
PSC on Intelligence...............         13,740,458          7,197,383
Judiciary.........................         17,862,842          9,356,727
Select Committee on the                     2,146,625          1,145,375
 Modernization of Congress........
Natural Resources.................         15,320,258          8,024,897
Oversight and Reform..............         29,183,624         15,286,660
Rules.............................          7,199,285          4,167,807
Science, Space, and Technology....         12,215,318          6,398,500
Small Business....................          6,831,416          3,578,361
Transportation and Infrastructure.         20,154,063         10,556,890
Veterans' Affairs.................         10,063,152          5,271,175
Ways and Means....................         20,880,218         10,780,114
                                   -------------------------------------
    Totals........................       $317,610,832       $166,815,153
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  MRA

    The Members' Representational Allowance (MRA) is the annual 
authorization made to each Member of the House to obligate U.S. 
Treasury funds. These funds may be used by the Member to pay 
ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred by the Member 
and his or her congressional office employees in support of the 
Member's official and representational duties. In the 117th 
Congress, the Committee oversaw the use of appropriations from 
the accounts of the U.S. House of Representatives for the MRA 
as well as official travel by Members and staff. In addition, 
the Committee oversaw the compensation, retirement, and 
administration of benefits of Member office employees. 
Permissible uses of the MRA are outlined in the Members' 
Congressional Handbook, the body of regulations promulgated by 
the Committee.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\H. Comm. on H. Admin., Members' Congressional Handbook, 117th 
Cong., available at https://cha.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/
cha.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/
2022_117th_members_congressional_handbook_10_19_v296.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The annual MRA is available for one legislative year (i.e., 
January 3 of one year through January 2 of the following year). 
In March 2022, after substantial efforts to increase to the MRA 
to support the recruitment and retainment of a diverse 
workforce and to communicate with constituents more 
effectively, the Committee oversaw a 21% increase in the MRA 
for legislative year 2022. This increase strengthened the 
capacity of all Congressional offices to conduct their official 
and representational duties and allowed for an increase in 
available personnel budgets to implement the historic pay floor 
and decoupling of Member and staff pay that the Committee 
oversaw during the 117th Congress.

                  COMMUNICATIONS STANDARDS COMMISSION

    The House Communications Standards Commission (Commission), 
colloquially known as the Franking Commission, was established 
by Public Law 93-191 (87 Stat. 737). It is composed of six 
Members appointed by the Speaker of the House: three from the 
majority, and three from the minority. The Speaker designates 
the Chairperson of the Commission who must be: (1) one of the 
Members appointed to the Commission, and (2) a Member of the 
Committee on House Administration.
    In the 117th Congress, the Commission was chaired by Rep. 
Mary Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania, with Rep. Kat Cammack serving 
as Ranking Member. The Chairperson and Ranking Member were 
joined by Commission Members Rep. Brad Sherman, Rep. Mondaire 
Jones, Rep. Robert E. Latta, and Rep. Bryan Steil. The primary 
functions of the Commission, are as follows:
    1. To prescribe regulations governing the proper use of the 
franking privilege and other official communications resources 
by those entitled to use the privilege under 39 U.S.C. sections 
3210, 3211, 3212, 3213(2), 3218, 3219 or in connection with the 
operation of section 3215; in connection with any other Federal 
law (other than any law which imposes any criminal penalty), or 
in connection with any rule of the U.S. House of 
Representatives relating to official communications resources 
(2 U.S.C. Sec. 501(d)).
    2. Upon the request of any person entitled to use the 
franking privilege and other official communication resources, 
to provide guidance, assistance, advice, and counsel, through 
advisory opinions or consultations, in connection with the 
distribution or contemplated distribution of franked mail or 
official communications regarding the application and/or 
compliance with applicable Federal statutes and House rules and 
regulations. The staff assigned to the Commission are delegated 
authority by the Commission to perform advisory and counseling 
functions, subject to review by the Commission (2 U.S.C. 
Sec. 501(d), House rule XXIV, and the Regulations of the 
Committee on House Administration).
    3. To investigate, decide, and dispose of complaints 
regarding the misuse of the franking privilege and other 
official communications resources (2 U.S.C. Sec. 501(e)).
    As of December 5, 2022, the Commission staff reviewed 
17,087 requests throughout the 117th Congress. In addition, the 
Commission approved 19 frankable stamps for retroactive 
approval.
    The Commission also reviewed a number of complaints during 
the 117th Congress.
    On May 24, 2021, the Commission conducted Commission Poll 
117-1. Based on a Complaint submitted to the Commission on 
April 22, 2021, by Rep. Earl L. ``Buddy'' Carter against Rep. 
Zoe Lofgren and Rep. Lofgren's Answer to the Complaint, 
submitted to the Commission on May 6, 2021, this Commission was 
asked to decide if a violation of the House of Representatives 
Communications Standards Manual occurred.
    The vote was as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Representative                      Yes         No        Present            Representative               Yes         No        Present
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Scanlon...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Ms. Cammack.....................  ..........  ..........  ..........
Mr. Sherman...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Latta.......................  ..........  ..........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Steil.......................  ..........  ..........  ..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By order of the Chairwoman, no violation was found.
    The Commission held two business meetings during the 117th 
Congress. The first took place on June 16, 2021, with an agenda 
to discuss open staff issues, template opportunities, social 
media, and the Commission's procedures and penalties. Initial 
discussions included how the Commission should address sources 
when referring to a congressional committee, and to address how 
the rules were written to regulate criticism against 
ideologies. Next, the Commission instructed staff to build a 
means for the Democratic Caucus and Republican Conference to 
submit template requests on behalf of each's respective 
delegations. Staff were also instructed to conduct 
informational meetings with the Select Committee on the 
Modernization of Congress (Modernization) and the Committee on 
Ethics (Ethics) to learn about each Committee's views on 
official social media, complaints, and the varying 
jurisdictions on such matters. Upon completion of said 
meetings, staff were directed to produce abipartisan report on 
their findings to the Commission.
    On February 1, 2022, Commission staff released the report 
``Bipartisan Staff Findings on Social Media'' to the 
Commission. The findings included feedback from the staff of 
both Modernization and Ethics and from a bipartisan staff focus 
group meeting. The report also included both short-term and 
long-term bipartisan staff recommendations for the Commission 
to consider to address jurisdictional andregulatory concerns 
related to the official use of social media profiles.
    The Commission received a complaint from Americans for 
Public Trust against Representative Val Demings on February 1, 
2022, which alleged a violation of the rules governing official 
communications. This complaint was adjudicated by three 
Commission Polls: 117-2, 117-3, and 117-4.
    The Commission conducted Commission Poll 117-2 on the 
matter of the Complaint submitted to the Commission on February 
1, 2022, by the Americans for PublicTrust against 
Representative Val Demings (Respondent); and considering 
Representative Demings's February 11, 2022 Answer to the 
Complaint; Ranking Member Cammack's February 22, 2022 Letter to 
Chair Scanlon, requesting additional information from the 
Respondent; and Chair Scanlon's February 23, 2022, response 
letter to Ranking Member Cammack; the Commission was asked to 
request from the Respondent the additional information noted in 
Ranking Member Cammack's letter.
    The vote was conducted by written submission from February 
23 to February 25, 2022, and ended in a 3-3 tie as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Representative                      Yes         No        Present            Representative               Yes         No        Present
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Scanlon...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Ms. Cammack.....................          X   ..........  ..........
Mr. Sherman...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Latta.......................          X   ..........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Steil.......................          X   ..........  ..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the question failed to receive majority support from the 
members of the Commission, the Ranking Member's request for 
additional information was not submitted to the Respondent.
    After this vote, the Commission conducted Commission Poll 
117-3 on the matter of the Complaint submitted to the 
Commission on February 1, 2022, by the Americans for Public 
Trust against Representative Val Demings (Respondent); and 
considering Representative Demings's February 11, 2022, Answer 
to the Complaint; Ranking Member Cammack's February 22, 2022, 
Letter to Chairwoman Scanlon, requesting additional information 
from the Respondent; Chairwoman Scanlon's February 23, 2022, 
Response Letter to Ranking Member Cammack; and Ranking Member 
Cammack's February 28, 2022, Letter to Chairwoman Scanlon, 
requesting a hearing; the Commission was asked if the 
Commission should conduct a hearing on this matter?
    The vote was conducted by written submission from February 
28, 2022, to March 1,2022, and ended in a 3-3 tie as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Representative                      Yes         No        Present            Representative               Yes         No        Present
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Scanlon...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Ms. Cammack.....................          X   ..........  ..........
Mr. Sherman...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Latta.......................          X   ..........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Steil.......................          X   ..........  ..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the Commission's rules of procedure, the 
question failed to receive majority support from the members of 
the Commission and the Commission did not conduct a hearing on 
this matter.
    The Commission conducted Commission Poll 117-4 on the 
matter of the Complaint submitted to the House Communications 
Standards Commission (Commission) on February 1, 2022, by the 
Americans for Public Trust against Representative Val Demings 
(Respondent), where the Commission was asked to decide if a 
violation of the House of Representatives Communications 
Standards Manual occurred.
    The vote was conducted by written submission from March 1, 
2022, to March 3, 2022, and ended in a 3-3 tie.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Representative                      Yes         No        Present            Representative               Yes         No        Present
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Scanlon...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Ms. Cammack.....................          X   ..........  ..........
Mr. Sherman...................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Latta.......................          X   ..........  ..........
Mr. Jones.....................................  ..........          X   ..........  Mr. Steil.......................          X   ..........  ..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Rule 14 of the Rules of Practice and Procedures 
of the House Communications Standards Commission, the 
Commission determined that no violation was found on this 
matter.
    The Commission also received two other formal complaints. 
The first was received on May 20, 2022, submitted by Steve 
Sheldon against Representative Young Kim. The second was 
received on June 16, 2022, submitted by Kurt Angermeier against 
Representative Steve Chabot. The Commission determined that 
there was no basis to continue to a proceeding on either of 
these matters.
    On July 19, 2022, the Commission held its second Business 
Meeting of the 117th Congress. By voice vote it unanimously 
voted to adopt Commission Resolution 117-1, which addressed 
several conforming and technical changes to the Commission 
Handbook, as well as updates related to sourcing, hashtags, and 
disclaimers. Additionally, by voice vote, the Commission also 
unanimously voted to implement templates from the Democratic 
Caucus and Republican Conference which would be available for 
each corresponding delegation, and to develop an online 
complaint form. Members also discussed further updates to the 
Commission's rules.
    All written staff Advisory Opinions issued on or after 
January 3, 1996, are available for public review and 
photocopying. In addition, mass mailings issued prior to that 
date are available for inspection. The Legislative Resource 
Center has made these materials available to the public. 
Currently, all new Advisory Opinions are available online, 
along with uses of templates and notices of unsolicited mass 
emails that did not receive Advisory Opinions. As of December 
5, 2022, the Legislative Resource Center had received four in-
person requests to review Advisory Opinions during the 117th 
Congress. According to analytics on the public disclosure web 
page, there have been 16,225 unique page views since its launch 
on January 7, 2020.

                            JOINT COMMITTEES

Joint Committee of Congress on the Library

    Established in 1802, the Joint Committee of Congress on the 
Library (JCL) is the oldest continuing joint committee in the 
history of the Congress and is made up of certain Members of 
the Committee, the chair of the Legislative Branch 
Appropriations Subcommittee, and certain members of the Senate 
Committee on Rules and Administration.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\2 Stat. 129, 7th Congress (1802).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chairing the JCL switches between chambers each Congress 
with the House helming it for the 117th Congress. Members of 
the JCL are appointed by resolutions agreed to by the 
respective chambers. For the 117th Congress, the House 
component of the JCL was comprised of Chairperson Zoe Lofgren 
along with Ranking Member Rodney Davis and Representatives Tim 
Ryan, G.K. Butterfield, and Barry Loudermilk.\31\ Senators Amy 
Klobuchar, Patrick Leahy, Mark Warner, Roy Blunt, and Richard 
Shelby were elected to the JCL.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\Electing Members to the Joint Committee of Congress on the 
Library and the Joint Committee on Printing, H. Res. 321, 117th Cong. 
(2021).
    \32\A resolution providing for members on the part of the Senate of 
the Joint Committee on Printing and the Joint Committee of Congress on 
the Library, S. Res. 244, 117th Cong. (2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subsequent to each chambers' adoption of their respective 
appointment resolutions, the JCL met to formally organize on 
June 23, 2021, and elected Chairperson Lofgren as Chairperson 
of the Joint Committee for the 117th Congress.
    Per statute, the JCL is responsible for acceptance and 
oversight of works of fine art in the Capitol collection as 
well as supervision of the National Statuary Hall Collection 
(Statuary Hall) For the 117th Congress, the JCL approved the 
following state requests, each at varying stages of the statue 
replacement process:
           Amelia Earhart Final Statue and Pedestal 
        (Kansas)
           Billy Graham Replacement to replace Charles 
        Aycock (North Carolina)
           Barbara Rose Johns Statue to Replace Robert 
        E. Lee (Virginia)
           Edmund Kirby Smith Statue Removal (Florida)
           Mary McLeod Bethune Final Statue and 
        Pedestal (Florida)
           Mary McLeod Bethune Statue Location 
        (Florida)
           Harry Truman Statue Clay Model (Missouri)
           Harry Truman Statue and Pedestal (Missouri)
           Billy Frank Jr. Statue to Replace Marcus 
        Whitman (Washington)
           Daisy Lee Gatson Bates Statue to Replace 
        Uriah Rose Statue (Arkansas)
           Willa Cather Statue and Location (Nebraska)
           Johnny Cash Statue and Location (Arkansas)
           Martha Hughes Cannon Clay Model and Pedestal 
        (Utah)
           Alexander Hamilton\33\ Statue Relocation to 
        Facilitate Harry Truman Installation (Missouri)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\The Alexander Hamilton statue is not part of the National 
Statuary Hall Collection. It was moved from the Rotunda to the Hall of 
Columns to facilitate the installation of the Harry Truman statue. 
Traditionally, statues of former presidents receive priority for 
placement in the Rotunda.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Relocation of John Gorrie Statue (Florida)
    The JCL also approved the following matters under its 
jurisdiction:
           Landing of Columbus Painting Conservation
           Reopening of U.S. Botanic Garden's National 
        Garden
           Reopening of U.S. Botanic Garden's 
        Conservatory
           Library of Congress Hearing Room 
        Reprogramming
           Bob Hope Gallery Reprogramming
           Library of Congress Visitor Experience and 
        Exploring Early America Exhibition Reprogramming

Joint Committee on Printing and the Government Publishing Office

    In addition to the oversight authority of the Government 
Publishing Office (GPO) and congressional printing generally as 
provided to the Committee by House rule X(k)(8), some members 
of the Committee also serve on the Joint Committee on Printing 
(JCP). By statute, the JCP is granted broad discretionary 
oversight power over GPO's operations.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \34\44 U.S.C. Sec. 103.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like the JCL, members of the JCP are approved pursuant to 
resolution agreed to by each chamber. H. Res. 321 provided that 
Ranking Member Rodney Davis, along with Representatives Jamie 
Raskin, Teresa Leger Fernandez, and Barry Loudermilk, would 
serve on the JCP on behalf of the House for the 117th 
Congress.\35\ The Senate's analogue resolution, S. Res. 244, 
appointed Senators Angus King, Alex Padilla, Roy Blunt, and 
Roger Wicker along with Senator Amy Klobuchar, who was 
appointed chair of the JCP at the joint committee's formal 
organizational meeting on June 23, 2021.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\H. Res. 321, supra note 31.
    \36\S. Res. 244, supra note 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On February 16, 2022, at a hearing entitled ``Big Data: 
Privacy Risks and Needed Reforms in the Public and Private 
Sectors,'' the Committee received testimony from the GPO 
Director about the agency's efforts through its Privacy Program 
to protect any personally identifiable information of customers 
or the general publication that the agency may find in its 
possession.

                      CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

    The Office of the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) is a 
nonpartisan House office that provides support services and 
business solutions to Members and staff. The 750+ employee 
organization is tasked with supporting the finance, 
procurement, logistics, and information technology needs of the 
House. The Committee oversees and provides policy direction to 
the CAO, which in the 117th Congress was led by Chief 
Administrative Officer Catherine Szpindor, an officer of the 
House and the first woman to ever serve in this key role.
    Together with the Committee, the CAO entered the 117th 
Congress with a shared vision of continued innovation and 
modernization of House business processes, along with improved 
customer service. Thanks to the organization's expertise, 
professionalism, and dedication, the CAO successfully executed 
on this vision during an unprecedented and uniquely challenging 
time on Capitol Hill. CAO staff--many of whom were unable to 
work remotely due to the nature of their positions--were in the 
Capitol Complex during both the January 6th attack on the 
Capitol and the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to experiencing 
the trauma of the attack firsthand and braving a still-raging 
pandemic, CAO staff, together with the Committee and other 
Legislative Branch partners, helped lead the institutional 
response to these two unprecedented challenges.

House Information Resources

    House Information Resources is the CAO business unit 
responsible for designing, securing, advancing, and supporting 
the House network. During the 117th Congress, the Committee 
worked closely with HIR to streamline House business processes, 
improve the House's cybersecurity posture, and improve 
technology services.
    The Committee is particularly enthusiastic about its 
collaboration with the CAO to create the House Digital Service. 
In consultation with the Committee, this team identifies, 
develops, and incubates products and services that solve unique 
technology challenges for Members and Committees. Using user-
centered design, product management and agile development 
practices, the House Digital Service delivered new, cutting 
edge services to the House community.
    The Digital Service managed Quill, a new e-signature 
platform that allows House staff to easily create, share, sign, 
and track Congressional letters. Thanks to Quill, the days of 
staff walking the halls of House Office Buildings to physically 
collect signatures ended during the 117th Congress. The 
platform was adopted by nearly all Member offices, and more 
than 300 offices used the system to author or lead a letter. 
During the FY2023 appropriations cycle alone, over 2,000 new 
letters were created with Quill. While significantly increasing 
efficiency in any environment, Quill was particularly important 
when, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the House was in a maximum 
telework posture and Members and staff were physically apart 
from one another.
    In addition to managing Quill, the Digital Service created 
the Robotic Process Automation Program. This program automated 
manual and time intensive tasks, allowing HIR and the CAO to 
reallocate staff to provide additional support to the House 
community.
    The Committee also oversaw HIR's efforts to address issues 
raised directly by House staff. For example, the Campus Data 
Network team continued to improve Wi-Fi service in the Rayburn 
and Longworth House Office Buildings by boosting signal in 
nearly 200 locations.
    HIR's Server Infrastructure team manages thousands of 
virtual and physical servers across multiple geographically 
diverse data centers. The team completed Phase III of its vital 
Primary Data Center Migration Project. This effort included 
migrating more than 14 web and constituent management system 
vendors, House websites, over 300 servers, and more than 20 
critical House applications, including the House Financial 
system. The systems and services were migrated to the new data 
center without any disruption to operations.
    At the direction of the Committee, the House Web Services 
team continued to modernize House websites, with a particular 
focus on accessibility. This work, which included use of an 
accessibility checker providing continuous monitoring, ensured 
that American citizens are able to access the websites of their 
elected officials regardless of disability status.
    Like any governmental entity, the House must be mindful of 
the constantly changing nature of cybersecurity threats. In 
consultation with the Committee, the HIR Cybersecurity team, 
through its Security Operations Center, continued to maintain a 
high level of defense against the evolving threat landscape 
during the 117th Congress. The team continued to modernize its 
detection methods and generated more than 50 new detection 
methods each month. Enhanced toolsets and technologies 
containing artificial intelligence and data analysis technology 
improved endpoint and network monitoring and reduced the risk 
of ransomware attacks. Moreover, the Active Directory team 
continued to expand deployment of the advanced authentication 
client, used for multi-factor authentication and domain 
administration. Through December 2022, more than 280,000 
authorizations were completed using the new client. This 
significantly improved the security of the House network.
    In addition, in August 2022, House Information Resources 
(HIR) issued an advisory to the House community cautioning 
users against use of the TikTok application on House devices 
due to security and privacy concerns. Following additional 
review, HIR recommended that the House ban the use of TikTok on 
official devices. The Committee concurred in that 
recommendation. This decision mirrors policies at a number of 
Executive Branch agencies and is in response to concerns that 
the Chinese-owned app poses a national security risk.
    Individual employees unfamiliar with cybersecurity best 
practices are among the most significant threats to any 
organization. Accordingly, at the Committee's behest, the 
Communications, Awareness, and Policy team produced a variety 
of new resources to help educate House network users about 
information security, updates to key House policies, and 
procedures for addressing cybersecurity threats. HIR also held 
monthly information sessions on cybersecurity at the House. 
Topics covered included remote workspace security, social media 
safety, international travel, phishing, and ransomware threats. 
An average of approximately 70 staffers attended each session.
    Further, throughout the 117th Congress, the Committee 
worked with the CAO to reduce costs by facilitating effective 
and efficient operations within the House. Among the many 
examples of cost savings was the Network Engineering and 
Operations team's acquisition of new services to support the 
House network and enhance connectivity between the Capitol 
Complex, House data centers, and internet services located 
outside the National Capital Region. This acquisition resulted 
in both increased resiliency and a cost savings of 
approximately $2 million.

House Human Resources Hub and Resume Bank

    The Committee was pleased to have closely collaborated with 
the CAO to launch the House Human Resources Hub (HR Hub), a 
one-stop shop of human resource best practices. Designed to 
help managers hire, develop, and retain staff, the HR Hub 
provides access to best practices, tips, tools and customizable 
templates designed specifically for the needs of Member 
offices. A small sample of available resources includes: job 
profiles for Member office positions; sample writing tests; 
recruitment guides; staff pay resources; the House Compensation 
and Diversity study; guides to setting up a new office; 
performance evaluation templates; tips providing performance 
feedback; office retreat guides and much more. The HR Hub 
quickly became a key resource for staff. In the sixteen months 
since it launched, 12,859 visitors--including 1,559 unique 
visitors--have visited the HR Hub. The 135 resources available 
on the HR Hub have been downloaded or accessed more than 6,500 
times.
    In addition to the HR Hub, the Committee oversaw the 
creation of the House Resume Bank, which provides resumes for 
House offices seeking to fulfill hiring needs in both 
Washington, D.C., and district offices. Creation of the House 
Resume Bank was a prime example of the CAO's ability to bring 
together various business units to achieve a goal, as it 
involved support from House Information Resources, 
Communications and Marketing, CAO Coaches, and House Creative 
Services. The House Resume Bank was also widely used. In the 
twenty months since it launched, more than 8,400 resumes were 
received, with 100 resume requests from Member and Committee 
offices.

Congressional Staff Academy and CAO Coach Program

    The Committee continued its oversight of the Congressional 
Staff Academy, which dramatically expanded its offerings during 
the 117th Congress to meet the evolving needs of House staff. 
Management and Leadership courses were particularly popular, as 
were hybrid courses which brought together geographically 
dispersed teams, including those working remotely due to the 
COVID-19 pandemic, Washington, D.C., office staff and district 
office staff. Overall, during the 117th Congress, the Staff 
Academy held 1,437 non-mandatory course sessions for 25,322 
attendees.
    Among the most significant Staff Academy initiatives was 
the establishment of the CAO Coach Program. The CAO hired a 
bipartisan group of four former Chiefs of Staff and two former 
District Directors to serve as CAO Coaches. These individuals 
leveraged a combined 113 years of experience in the House to 
offer resources, advice, and programming to House staff.
    Coaches hosted highly attended professional development 
programs, facilitated retreats, recorded a series of 10 
podcasts, and provided 62 customized trainings at the request 
of Member offices. They also conducted more than 1,200 one-on-
one confidential coaching sessions with individual staffers on 
a range of topics, including, but not limited to, managing 
staff and budgets, introducing bills, managing difficult 
casework, establishing an effective internship program, and 
responding to constituent outreach. They also hosted 48 live 
programs for more than 6,500 staff, and recorded the 101 
Series, short informational videos specific to each staff 
position that cover the basics of the job. Jobs included in the 
101 Series were Chiefs of Staff, District Directors, Field 
Representatives, Scheduler/Operations Managers, Caseworkers, 
Legislative Assistants, Legislative Directors, Staff 
Assistants, and Communications staff.
    CAO Coaches also collaborated with CAO Customer Advocates 
to host the first ever bipartisan orientation program for new 
staff, which introduced 345 staffers to the House's workplace 
culture, operations, benefits, and more. They also, together 
with the Committee, launched the District Office Conference 
Program to support district office training. District Office 
Conferences were held in both Washington, D.C., and Chicago. 
Nearly 1,000 attendees participated in these District Office 
Conferences.
    Additionally, CAO Coaches launched a new internal House 
website that hosted more than 550 documents, templates, and tip 
sheets as well as 50 hours of video content. The site had more 
than 4,250 users and 40,520 page views since it launched.
    Finally, for the first time ever, the Staff Academy, 
through the CAO Coaches, partnered with the Committee to plan 
and execute New Member Orientation (NMO) for the 118th 
Congress. These efforts, which included 43 live panels, are 
detailed later in this Report.

Logistics and Support

    The Office of Logistics and Support is responsible for 
building, installing, and breaking down furniture; facilitating 
office moves; and managing House equipment assets. The 
Committee was particularly proud of its work with the Asset 
Management Team to establish and refine the Equipment 
Modernization Program and House TV Program.
    The Equipment Modernization Program successfully provided 
Member, Committee, and Leadership offices with a steady 
inventory of computers and related equipment from which to 
select when setting up their offices. For the first time, 
offices were able to conveniently purchase equipment directly 
from the House through the Office Supply Store website, 
allowing them to buy in bulk and receive equipment quickly.
    In addition, under the Equipment Modernization Program, the 
Asset Management team regularly evaluated new equipment 
offerings to ensure they met House technical standards. These 
evaluations ensured that Members and staff had regular access 
to state-of-the-art equipment.
    The House TV Program was developed to make the hundreds of 
office moves during transitions between Congresses more 
efficient and cost effective. In general, CAO and Architect of 
the Capitol (AOC) employees facilitate these moves by moving 
personal items and equipment from suite to suite. Among the 
most taxing items to move are TVs, which must be uninstalled, 
moved carefully, and reinstalled. The House TV Program 
centralized the installation of TVs across the House, assigning 
TVs to specific office suites as opposed to individual Members. 
This change eliminated the risks and challenges associated with 
relocating TVs from one suite to another, thereby eliminating 
the wait Members experience for TV installation after they 
move. It also allowed the Logistics and Support Team to 
allocate its own resources to other transition 
responsibilities. The Program also centralized the purchasing 
of House TVs, which are now eligible for replacement every six 
years, thereby ensuring compliance with updated equipment 
standards.
    In all, the House TV Program saves the House approximately 
$1.3 million over several years.

House Office of Employee Assistance and Center for Well-Being

    The January 6 attack on the Capitol was a traumatic 
experience for the entire House community. In the aftermath of 
the attack, the Office of Employee Assistance (OEA) provided 
vital support for members of the House community, including 
Members, staff, families, U.S. Capitol Police officers and, 
based upon direction from the Committee, House contract 
employees. OEA also launched a secure online video counseling 
option for employees working in district offices or remotely 
due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
    OEA also continued to provide its standard counseling 
sessions, trainings, and retreats. The team also created 
extensive resources on trauma and resilience, self-care, 
healthy teleworking, and productive management of employees.
    OEA far surpassed its utilization rate across its range of 
support services during the 117th Congress. Participating in 
24,233 interactions, 1,775 client counseling cases, 286 
training sessions with 7,249 attendees, 70 team retreats with 
1,085 attendees and 927 online mental health screenings.
    In consultation with the Committee, the House Wellness 
Center officially changed its name to the House Center for 
Well-Being and opened a storefront in the basement of the 
Longworth House Office Building. As many House staffers, 
particularly in the beginning stages of the 117th Congress, 
worked remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Center for 
Well-Being offered webinars that staff could access from their 
home offices. It also launched a new website and hosted a Well-
Being Fair. In addition, it launched a House-wide complimentary 
premium subscription to a popular meditation and mindfulness 
app. Over 2,000 House staffers registered for this new service 
within two months of its launch. Other activities included a 
Wellness Champions Program and personalized guidance to staff 
in one-on-one coaching sessions.

Finance

    During the 117th Congress, the Office of Finance played a 
key role in implementing the Committee's historic reforms to 
working conditions for House staff. Based upon the 
recommendation of Chairperson Lofgren, on August 12, 2021, 
Speaker Pelosi issued an updated Speaker's Pay Order (SPO) 
which decoupled staff pay from Member pay. The change to the 
SPO increased the maximum rate of pay for House staff from 
$173,900 to $199,300, and, subsequently, to $203,700. Also 
based on Chairperson Lofgren's recommendation, on May 6, 2022, 
Speaker Pelosi established a salary floor of $45,000 for all 
full-time staff. These increases, which enable the House able 
to recruit and retain first-rate, diverse talent, required 
processing by the Payroll and Benefits team, which rapidly 
implemented the changes to the SPO.
    Along similar lines, the Committee, pursuant to its 
authority under the House Employees Position Classification Act 
(HEPCA), issued a revised House Wage Schedule (HWS) for 
employees of the House Officers and Office of Inspector 
General. The updated HWS, which lessened the pay compression at 
the top of the schedule and reflected the updated Speaker's Pay 
Order, was implemented by the Payroll and Benefits team.
    The Committee also amended the regulations governing the 
Student Loan Repayment Program to raise the lifetime maximum to 
$80,000 and exempt student loan payments from the Speaker's Pay 
Order limit. Payroll and Benefits also implemented these 
changes and released special edition newsletters, informing 
House staff of the updated program regulations to ensure newly 
eligible employees had the tools needed to take advantage of 
the changes.
    Moreover, the Committee continued efforts from prior 
Congresses to modernize the Office of Finance. For example, as 
noted in the HIR section, the Office of Finance partnered with 
the Committee and HIR to roll out the MyExpenses pilot program. 
MyExpenses helps Members and staff more easily pay official 
expenses and request reimbursement without the need to keep 
physical copies of receipts. Staff feedback on MyExpenses was 
excellent, and the majority of participating staff indicated 
that the tool made their job easier and that they would 
recommend it to a colleague.
    The Office of Finance also deployed a new e-forms 
application that employs electronic signatures to automate 
administrative forms. This new system provided Member, 
Committee and Leadership offices the ability to electronically 
prepare, route, approve, and submit payroll transactions. These 
transactions were validated in real-time against House Rules 
and other Committee regulations, which provided considerable 
time savings to offices. The e-forms application also saved 
time, improved security, and reduced paper stock and costs for 
offices.

Food Services

    In compliance with protocols and guidance established by 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Office 
of the Attending Physician, House Food Services operations 
returned to pre-pandemic levels of service during the 117th 
Congress. In addition, together with the Committee, the CAO 
collaborated with local vendors to introduce pop-up offerings 
in the Longworth and Rayburn cafeterias, including food from 
local barbeque, Peruvian, and Greek restaurants. The CAO also 
introduced a new coffee cart in the basement of the Cannon 
Rotunda. The Cannon Coffee Cart was a popular destination for 
Members and staff who enjoyed its sustainably sourced coffee, 
tea, espresso, and pastries.

COVID-19 Pandemic Response Activities

    As the COVID-19 pandemic continued during the 117th 
Congress, the Committee worked with the CAO to maintain 
continuity of operations and ensure the safest possible work 
environment for Members and staff. The CAO continued to support 
increased information technology requirements associated with 
remote work. For example, the CAO expanded its mobile 
management and House device distribution portal to include 
additional mobile service vendors. This enabled the CAO to 
reduce the time needed for the mobile device deployment process 
from several hours to thirty minutes and enabled staff working 
remotely to have devices delivered directly to their homes.
    The CAO, at the Committee's direction, also distributed 
COVID-19 test kits at no charge to offices, conducted office 
safety workspace consultations and, as discussed above, 
provided vital counseling and trauma support through OEA.

Workplace Rights and Responsibilities Training

    Together with the Committee and the Office of House 
Employment Counsel (OHEC), the CAO continued to provide 
Workplace Rights and Responsibilities Training, including 
separate courses designed for non-supervisory staff, 
supervisory staff and Members. In 2021 alone, the program team 
trained more than 14,834 House personnel.

                           CLERK OF THE HOUSE

    The Clerk is an officer of the House and plays a vital role 
in a wide range of House operations. In the 117th Congress, 
Cheryl Johnson continued to serve as Clerk. The Clerk's primary 
responsibilities involve overseeing and administering the 
legislative operations of the House. This includes managing 
bills originating in the House and overseeing the electronic 
voting system. The Office also performs a variety of 
administrative functions under the oversight of the Committee. 
The Office of the Clerk is comprised of eight divisions, in 
addition to the Clerk's Immediate Office. These divisions 
include: Office of Legislative Operations, Office of Art and 
Archives, Office of Official Reporters, Office of House 
Employment Counsel, Legislative Resource Center, Legislative 
Computer Systems, Office of Communications, and Capitol Service 
Groups.
    During the 117th Congress, the Committee conducted monthly 
oversight meetings with the Clerk and her senior staff on all 
aspects of the Clerk's operations, including oversight of 
vacant offices, election certifications, financial disclosures, 
and overall IT posture. The Committee also worked closely with 
the Clerk to publish an updated edition of Black Americans in 
Congress\37\ book covering the years 1870 to 2022. This project 
was undertaken by the Office of Art and Archives, together with 
the House Historian and the Government Publishing Office, and 
featured a foreword by Chairperson Lofgren.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\Black Americans in Congress, 1870-2022, prepared under the 
direction of the Committee on House Administration of the United States 
House of Representatives, by the Office of the Historian and Office of 
the Clerk, United States House of Representatives, U.S. Government 
Publishing Office, Washington, DC, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee worked closely with the Office of the Clerk 
to ensure legislative operations continued to run smoothly 
despite the numerous challenges posed by the ongoing COVID-19 
pandemic. A major part of the House's success was its continued 
use of the e-Hopper. The e-Hopper, launched in April 2020 under 
the direction of Speaker Pelosi, allows Members and authorized 
staff to electronically submit bills, resolutions, co-sponsors 
and extensions of remarks. This capability has been critical to 
continuing legislative operations throughout the pandemic. The 
updated e-Hopper was launched House-wide on May 2, 2022. The e-
Hopper application guides the user step-by-step and includes 
integrated help to ensure documents meet the submission 
requirements. A brief video highlighting its features was 
created and made available on-demand through the Congressional 
Staff Academy. From the beginning of the 117th Congress through 
December 23, 2022, the Bill Clerk team processed 11,445 pieces 
of legislation, the vast majority of which (10,596, or 93 
percent of all measures filed) were submitted via the e-Hopper 
system.
    The continued use of proxy voting also allowed the House to 
perform its constitutional duties amid the COVID-19 pandemic. 
Authorized by House Resolution 965,\38\ proxy voting allows 
Members to submit a signed letter to the Clerk designating a 
specific Member to serve as the Member's proxy during voting. 
This meant that Members were not required to physically be in 
Washington, D.C., to vote, an important allowance in the midst 
of a public health crisis. The Clerk maintained a list of 
designated proxies and helped facilitate the voting process on 
the House Floor. From the start of the 117th Congress, through 
December 23, 2022, there were 987 roll call votes with proxies 
and a total of 49,470 proxy votes cast. Notably, proxy voting 
was used by both parties, with at least 166 Republican shaving 
submitted proxy letters since the House adopted the practice. 
Confoundingly, many of the Republican Members who have voted by 
proxy had previously joined a lawsuit seeking to block the 
practice of proxy voting during a public health emergency; more 
than 150 Republicans ultimately removed their names from the 
suit. A federal district court ruled against the Republican 
plaintiffs, a decision that in turn was upheld by a unanimous 
decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia, and the United States Supreme Court declined to hear 
the case.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \38\Adopting the Rules of the House of Representatives for the One 
Hundred Seventeenth Congress, and for other purposes, H. Res. 8, 117th 
Cong. (2021).
    \39\Katherine Tully-McManus, Supreme Court denies Kevin McCarthy's 
challenge to proxy voting in House, POLITICO (Jan. 24, 2022) https://
www.politico.com/news/2022/01/24/supreme-court-proxy-voting-house-
00001243.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 117th Congress also saw the launch of the Comparative 
Print Suite, a set of applications that display legislative 
changes in context, including how a bill might change current 
law and how two versions of a legislative proposal are 
different. Prior to the launch of this multi-year effort, the 
project team worked with a Committee Pilot User Group comprised 
of more than 150 committee staff. All Members and House staff 
were granted immediate access to the Basic Edition with access 
to the Bill-to-Bill Differences and the Bill Viewer tools. An 
Advanced Edition, granting access to two versions of the How a 
Bill Changes Current Law tool as well as the ability to upload 
files to generate comparative print reports, was made available 
to users who completed an online course available through the 
Congressional Staff Academy. To date, approximately 250 House 
staff have completed the online course and have been granted 
access to the Advanced Edition. This figure does not include 
the staff in the Offices of Law Revision Counsel and the 
Legislative Counsel--which have access as advanced users for 
the entire staff.
    The Clerk also continued to co-chair the Bulk Data Task 
Force, which the Committee directed be renamed the 
Congressional Data Task Force in 2022. The Task Force is a 
partnership of representatives from various Legislative Branch 
Agencies including the House of Representatives, the Senate, 
the Library of Congress, the Government Publishing Office, and 
the Government Accounting Office. In her capacity as co-chair, 
the Clerk worked with Committee staff to increase transparency 
by digitizing legislative material, leading and participating 
in a virtual, public meeting of the Bulk Data Task Force on 
March 10, 2022. The meeting included presentations from the 
House of Representatives, the Government Publishing Office, and 
the Congressional Budget Office on each agencies' transparency 
efforts and areas of potential collaboration in the future.

                            SERGEANT AT ARMS

    In April 2021, District of Columbia National Guard Major 
General William J. Walker was sworn in as the 38th House 
Sergeant at Arms (HSAA), the first Black American to serve in 
this position. The HSAA is the House's principal law 
enforcement and protocol official and is responsible for the 
security of the House campus, its office buildings, as well as 
Members of Congress, staff, and visitors. HSAA directs 
emergency responses and continuity of government operations for 
the House, maintains order and decorum in the House Chamber and 
coordinates special events for the House of Representatives in 
conjunction with Legislative Branch partners. The HSAA, the 
Senate Sergeant at Arms, and the Architect of the Capitol make 
up the Capitol Police Board (CPB), which oversees the U.S. 
Capitol Police (USCP).
    During the 117th Congress, the HSAA, in collaboration with 
the Committee, took steps to improve security after the January 
6 attack on the Capitol and at a time when threats to Members 
reached unprecedented levels. These improvements were designed 
to protect Members in Washington, D.C., their districts and 
while in transit.

Residential Security Program

    At the Committee's direction and in an ongoing effort to 
strengthen the security of Members of the House and their 
families, the HSAA established the Residential Security Program 
during the 117th Congress. Under this program, the HSAA assumed 
the cost of Member residential security upgrades up to $10,000, 
in addition to monthly monitoring and maintenance costs of up 
to $150 per month per Member. To utilize the program, Members 
selected a security system company and furnished an itemized 
quote to the HSAA for review, approval, and additional 
guidance. The HSAA also added capabilities for Members to use 
current cellular communication methods to monitor their 
residences and ensured use of appropriate glass breakage 
technology.

District Security Service Center

    Together with the Committee, HSAA oversaw the District 
Security Service Center (DSSC), which assisted with security 
needs of all district offices. Staffed with a team of Security 
Specialist, the DSSC served as a single point of contact for 
all district office security needs. DSSC security specialists 
ensured each district office was provided appropriate guidance, 
monitored information received from district offices to better 
address threats, provided outreach during natural disasters and 
other potential disruptions to operations, and assisted offices 
in managing COVID-19 related issues. DSSC also provided risk 
assessments for in-district events, assisted with mail 
handling, helped Members select district offices and provided 
trainings in Event and Travel Security, Active Shooter 
Response, Mail Safety Hood Training, and Safety/Security 
Awareness.
    The DSSC also oversaw the Residential Security Program 
discussed above, as well as the Law Enforcement Coordinator 
(LEC) Program. LECs were district office employees that served 
as the district office liaison with law enforcement agencies 
and USCP. LECs enhanced communication with law enforcement, 
identified unusual incidents or threats, coordinated district 
office security assessments, and managed the installation of 
district office security systems. During the 117th Congress, 
HSAA Walker personally lobbied Members to encourage them to 
designate an LEC for their district offices, resulting in 96% 
of Members employing an LEC.

Garage Security Enhancement

    The Committee oversaw the HSAA's completion of the Garage 
Security Enhancement Project. The goal of this project was to 
establish a secure perimeter around the House Office Buildings 
that would allow for a comprehensive screening protocol. With 
the project completed, there was comprehensive security 
screening in all House Office Buildings and garages. The 
completion of this project also allowed USCP to reallocate its 
limited resources to other sensitive security locations.
    In addition, after the January 6 attack on the Capitol, the 
HSAA worked with USCP and the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) to 
harden and redesign several House Office Building entryways and 
vehicle checkpoints.

                            FINE ARTS BOARD

    The House Fine Arts Board consists of the House members of 
the Joint Committee on the Library and is chaired by the 
Chairperson of the Committee on House Administration. The Board 
is primarily charged with supervision of fine arts on display 
in House-controlled areas of the Capitol complex and in the 
House collection generally. The Board also administers the 
portraiture process for Committee chairs for display in the 
House's committee rooms. During the 117th Congress, 10 
portraits were completed and an additional 10 were initiated 
and still in progress. In addition, the Fine Arts Board oversaw 
the House Curator's work to install and/or move 551 objects in 
the House Collection.

                        ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

    The Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is responsible for the 
maintenance, operation, development, and the preservation of 
the entire Capitol Complex, which includes 17.4 million square 
feet of building space and 460 acres of land. The Committee 
oversees the AOC with respect to the House side of the Capitol 
campus, except for certain decisions that affect the House 
Office Buildings and fall under the purview of the House Office 
Building Commission (HOBC). In addition, federal law designates 
the Architect as one of three voting members of the U.S. 
Capitol Police Board, which plays
    The AOC continued to coordinate with the Office of 
Attending Physician and the Committee to implement COVID-19 
mitigation measures which ensured the health and safety of AOC 
employees.

Cannon House Office Building Renewal Project

    The Committee continued its vigorous oversight of the 
Cannon House Office Building Renewal Project (Cannon Project). 
On August 5, 2021, the Committee held a hearing entitled, 
``Oversight of the Renovations to the Cannon House Office 
Building: Lessons Learned.'' The hearing complemented the 
Committee's 2019 Cannon oversight hearing, which was the first 
hearing on the Cannon Project since 2009, when Democrats held 
the majority. During the eight years the Republicans held the 
majority, the Committee did not convene a single hearing on the 
Cannon Project. During that time, the project cost increased 
from the original $753 million estimate\40\ to $890 
million.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \40\Necessary Renovations to House Office Buildings: Hearing Before 
the H. Committee on H. Admin., 111th Cong. (2009), statement of Stephen 
T. Ayers.
    \41\Architect of the Capitol, Integrated Cost-Schedule Risk 
Analysis Final Report (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thanks, in large part, to the oversight direction provided 
by the Committee during that hearing and the continued 
oversight during the 117th Congress, the Cannon Project was 
characterized by the AOC Inspector General as being managed 
well.
    The January 6 attack on the Capitol delayed Phase III of 
the Cannon Project by at least 45 days, as the National Guard 
occupied the Phase III wing of the building as part of their 
efforts to maintain order, provide relief to the Capitol 
Police, and secure the Capitol. The COVID-19 pandemic and 
historic supply chain delays also presented significant 
challenges. However, thanks to the work of AOC employees and 
robust oversight by the Committee, floors one through four were 
turned over on time. The fifth floor was negotiated separately 
from the other floors due to fifth floor window material delays 
associated with the pandemic. Even with these material delays, 
however, the fifth floor is scheduled to be turned over within 
a week of the start of the 118th Congress.
    Moreover, at the direction of the Committee, the AOC took 
early operational steps to prepare for Phase IV of the Cannon 
Project by preplanning work that would have closed House 
parking lots and streets on the Capitol Campus. As a result, 
the Phase IV wing was cleared out without any interruption to 
services. Also, all inground work, security trailers, fencing, 
and cameras were completed prior to the Phase III, which also 
minimized disruption to Members.
    The roof of the Cannon Rotunda was originally intended to 
be repaired during Phase I, which was completed in 2018. 
However, due to complications with the Temporary Roof 
Enclosure, this repair was delayed. The Committee aggressively 
pushed to ensure the Cannon Rotunda was repaired during Phase 
III. The Committee authorized a full copper repair to the dome 
so a consistent warranty, color, and lifespan would protect all 
the work just completed underneath the roof.
    As part of the Cannon Project, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs hearing room (VA Hearing Room) was renovated. Part of 
the renovation included the installation of updated lighting. 
Unfortunately, after the updated lighting was installed in 
2019, the AOC and CAO determined that while the new lighting 
was a significant improvement, it lacked the versatility of new 
standards. This delayed delivery of the VA Hearing Room 
significantly. The Committee on House Administration was not 
notified in a timely manner by the AOC. The Committee directed 
that communication between all stakeholders improve and 
facilitated communication and collaboration among the various 
interested parties. The VA Hearing Room is scheduled to be 
completed by March 2023.
    Finally, the updated Cannon Caucus Room was delivered and 
fully commissioned with state-of-the-art audio-visual 
technology during the 117th Congress. Now the most advanced 
hearing room on the Capitol Campus, the room hosted nearly all 
Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the 
United States Capitol televised hearings, which were the most 
significant and widely viewed hearings since Watergate.
    To honor her historic, ceiling shattering service to the 
House, the room was renamed the ``Speaker Nancy Pelosi Caucus 
Room,'' pursuant to a resolution introduced by Chairperson 
Lofgren and adopted by the House.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\Designating the caucus room in the Cannon House Office Building 
as the ``Speaker Nancy Pelosi Caucus Room,'' H. Res. 1495, 117th Cong. 
(2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Activities

    Other Committee achievements included:
           Successfully worked to transfer the O'Neill 
        House Office Building from the Department of Health and 
        Human Services (HHS) to the House and coordinated with 
        the CAO and HHS on a phased approach that helped HHS 
        retain working space for senior staff while tracking 
        for a full departure by the end of 2022.
           Coordinated moves based on updated room 
        assignments for select committees, House Officers, 
        military liaisons, and more.
           Authorized and ensured free feminine hygiene 
        products in all women's restrooms in all House 
        controlled space.
           Led the process for updated security 
        screening of employee badges to assist USCP in 
        identifying staff, with a full prototype ready for 
        testing.

Inspector General Investigation into Architect Brett Blanton

    In March 2021, the AOC Inspector General (AOC IG) informed 
the Committee of an investigation into Architect of the Capitol 
Brett Blanton (the Architect), who was appointed by former-
President Donald Trump and confirmed by the Senate in 2020.
    After receiving an anonymous tip through its hotline, the 
AOC Inspector General (AOC IG) initiated an investigation into 
the Architect's use of his official AOC vehicle. Ultimately, 
the AOC IG investigation concluded that the Architect abused 
his authority, misused government property, and wasted taxpayer 
money, among other substantial violations, including the 
outrageous behavior of impersonating a law enforcement 
officer.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\Architect of the Capitol Office of Inspector General, 2021-
0011-INVI P: J. Brett Blanton, Architect of the Capitol, Abused His 
Authority, Misused Government Property and Wasted Taxpayer Money, Among 
Other Substantiated Violations (Investigative Summary) (2022), 
available at https://www.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/oig-reports/
AOC/2021-0011-INVI-P-Oversight-Post-Final-0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In October 2022, the AOC Inspector General provided 
congressional committees with a more than 800-page report 
summarizing an 18-month investigation of Architect Brett 
Blanton. According to the IG's report, within two months of 
receiving the March 2021 complaint, the IG had found sufficient 
evidence to refer the matter to the Department of Justice 
(DOJ). DOJ and the IG conducted a joint investigation for more 
than 15 months. Although DOJ ultimately referred the matter 
back to the IG, the investigation found evidence of substantial 
violations of law, including criminal violations, as well as 
violations of AOC policies and ethical standards. According to 
the report, within months of being sworn in as Architect, 
Blanton began a practice of pervasive personal misuse of 
official vehicles provided to him for official purposes. The IG 
estimates that Blanton's impermissible use of official vehicles 
has totaled nearly 19,000 miles during his time in office, 
worth more than an estimated $12,000 in unreported taxable 
noncash fringe benefits.
    In response, Chairperson Lofgren, along with other relevant 
committee chairs in both the House and Senate, wrote to the 
Architect demanding his resignation.
    According to the AOC IG's report,\44\ the facts may be 
summarized as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \44\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           On March 7, 2021, the AOC IG received a 
        hotline complaint from a private citizen concerning the 
        misuse of an AOC vehicle. According to the complainant, 
        at approximately 1:15 p.m. ET, March 6, 2021, a vehicle 
        with AOC tags was observed in the parking lot of a 
        Virginia Walmart being driven approximately 65 miles 
        per hour (mph) in a 30-MPH zone by a woman in her 20s 
        or 30s.
           The vehicle, which included emergency 
        equipment such as lights and sirens, was assigned to 
        the Architect for home-to-work use only. The driver, 
        who was observed directing an obscene gesture to the 
        complainant, was later identified as the Architect's 
        daughter. Such use of the vehicle would be a violation 
        of applicable rules and regulations.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\See AOC Order 34-2, Fleet Management (Mar. 10, 2017) (``3.16. 
Home-to-Work Transportation. The use of an AOC motor vehicle to 
transport employees between their home and place of work. This includes 
the use of an AOC motor vehicle solely for the purpose of supplementing 
part or all of an employee's commute.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           While investigating the complaint, the AOC 
        IG learned of a previous complaint filed with the 
        General Services Administration (GSA) on December 18, 
        2020. The complaint was filed by another ``concerned 
        citizen'' and alleged a vehicle bearing the same AOC 
        license plate was being used for ``personal reasons'' 
        in Burke, Virginia, on Thursday, December 17, 2021.
           As part of the investigation, the AOC IG 
        interviewed the Architect, who declined his right to 
        counsel. The Architect stated that he can waive AOC 
        policies at any time and that he always needs the 
        vehicle with him for continuity of government purposes. 
        Notably, despite being a member of the Capitol Police 
        Board, the Architect did not use his vehicle to come to 
        the Capitol during the January 6, 2021, or during any 
        incident that has taken place at the Capitol during his 
        tenure. Moreover, the fact that the Architect's 
        daughter used the vehicle further belies the 
        Architect's claim that he needed to be ``tethered'' to 
        the vehicle in case he needed to respond to an 
        emergency.
           In May 2020, within weeks of taking office, 
        the Architect was involved in an accident at a brewery 
        in Leesburg, Virginia. The Architect told the other 
        party involved that it was a government vehicle, he was 
        an ``agent'' and he did not have insurance information 
        because the government would handle the insurance 
        claim.
           In June 2020, the Architect used his AOC 
        vehicle to pursue a suspect involved in a hit and run 
        that took place near his residence. The vehicle struck 
        belonged to the boyfriend of the Architect's daughter. 
        The police report obtained from that incident 
        identified Architect as an ``off-duty DC police 
        officer,'' and in-car video footage obtained from the 
        Fairfax County Police Department depicted the Architect 
        and a vehicle matching the AOC vehicle parked on the 
        street in front of the residence of the suspect. The 
        suspect's counsel corroborated the information in the 
        police report, stating that because of his belief that 
        the Architect was off-duty law enforcement, he did not 
        object to the Architect's presence at the pretrial 
        meetings. He then described the Architect as making 
        ``an affirmative action'' when asked if he was law 
        enforcement during the meetings. Additional testimony 
        obtained from multiple interviews stated that the 
        Architect advised the witnesses he had ``activated the 
        emergency equipment'' when pursuing the suspect that 
        struck the vehicle belonging to his daughter's 
        boyfriend.
           As a member of the Capitol Police Board, 
        Blanton is issued credentials because he is charged 
        with oversight and support of the U S. Capitol Police. 
        The credentials allow the holder access to police 
        information and secured areas without delay while 
        carrying out their official duties. The credentials 
        specifically do not delegate law enforcement authority.
           Digital forensic and testimonial evidence 
        obtained by the AOC IG confirmed the AOC vehicle 
        traveled to both South Carolina and Florida during the 
        time the Architect was on annual leave in August 2020. 
        The vehicle was used for a family vacation and accrued 
        2,679 miles. The vehicle was also issued a red-light 
        citation during this trip that has still not been paid.
           Throughout the investigation, the AOC IG 
        obtained multiple social media posts created by the 
        Architect's spouse, including photographs of 
        congressional license plates and a photograph of her 
        and the Architect on September 30, 2020, from the dome 
        of the Capitol with a comment stating, ``This is 
        happening!!!'' and ``All PATRIOTS welcome . . . PM 
        me.'' On the same date, an additional photograph taken 
        from the Capitol was posted with the comment, ``Contact 
        me for a private tour. All PATRIOTS accepted!'' While 
        it is not against AOC policy to post photographs from 
        the Capitol, the Architect's spouse openly offered 
        tours of the building while it was closed to the public 
        due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, on December 
        28, 2021, M. Blanton publicly published images and 
        comments on social media stating she took her swim team 
        on a tour of the U.S. Capitol while it was still closed 
        to the public.
           The Architect's daughter transported both 
        her friends and boyfriend in the vehicle, referring to 
        fuel from the AOC as ``free gas.''
           The AOC IG identified at least $12,434 in 
        unreported, taxable noncash fringe benefits to Blanton 
        that was not reported to the Internal Revenue Service 
        (IRS). The AOC IG also identified at least $13,926 of 
        net questioned costs associated with the Architect's 
        use of AOC vehicles.
           In addition to these significant violations, 
        the AOC IG also found that Blanton provided false and 
        misleading information throughout the course of the 
        investigation. Moreover, during the investigation--even 
        after being questioned by both IG and DOJ investigators 
        about the allegations--Blanton continued to use 
        official vehicles for personal purposes.
           The AOC IG may also refer allegations 
        relating to possible appropriations law violations to 
        the Government Accountability Office and relating to 
        possible tax violations to the Internal Revenue 
        Service. The AOC IG has also said there are additional 
        possible violations that the IG may yet investigate, 
        and also that a number of senior managers at AOC may be 
        investigated for their actions or omissions related to 
        the handling of Blanton's conduct.
           On November 1, 2022, Chairperson Lofgren, 
        along with House Appropriations Committee Chair Rosa 
        DeLauro, Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patrick 
        Leahy, Senate Legislative Branch Appropriations 
        Subcommittee Chair Jack Reed, and Senate Rules and 
        Administration Committee Chair Amy Klobuchar, wrote to 
        the Architect and demanded his resignation due to the 
        serious allegations detailed in the AOC IG's report. 
        Disappointingly, Committee Ranking Member Rodney Davis, 
        along with the other Ranking Republicans on relevant 
        committees, declined an invitation to join the letter, 
        even though they all received the AOC IG's report and 
        were briefed on its findings.
           As of December 2022, the Architect has not 
        resigned or provided congressional oversight committees 
        with any response to the IG's report and findings.

Capitol Visitor Center

    The Committee continued to, in conjunction with the Senate 
Committee on Rules and Administration, conduct oversight of the 
Capitol Visitor Center (CVC). A significant portion of the 
Committee's oversight efforts focused on the redesign work 
associated with the Exhibition Hall. The physical renovation 
began in the spring of 2019 and was completed during the 117th 
Congress. The updated Exhibition Hall is a state-of-the-art 
facility that fully and actively engages visitors, with 
exhibits dedicated to telling the story of Congress and the 
U.S. Capitol. A 40-foot-wide screen displaying an orientation 
film welcomes visitors. Three digital interactives challenge 
visitors to pass a bill, invites them on a virtual tour of the 
U.S. Capitol, and prompts them to discover the history of and 
connections between landmark laws. Exhibition Hall also debuted 
a new space called the Democracy Lab. Designed with students in 
mind, this hands-on educational area offers an array of 
activities for students and others visiting the Capitol.
    The Committee also oversaw the gradual resumption of 
Capitol tours, which are organized by the CVC. The CVC began 
Phase I of a limited reopening in March 2022 and launched Phase 
2 of the reopening plan in May 2022. Phase III began in 
September 2022 with the opening of the House and Senate 
Galleries. During this time, the CVC continued to provide 
support and training for staff, included updated safety 
trainings in light of the January 6 attack on the Capitol.
    Admirably, the CVC also provided tours to members of the 
National Guard stationed at the Capitol after the January 6, 
2021, attack.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

    Throughout the 117th Congress, the Committee held monthly 
meetings with the House of Representatives Office of the 
Inspector General (OIG) to implement its annual Committee-
sanctioned workplan for the continued improvement of House 
operations. This year, the workplan focused on performance and 
financial audit services, information systems, and management 
advisory services. This year, the OIG completed a total of 
eighteen (18) reports regarding House-wide support (e.g. audits 
of district office leases, the House Student Loan Repayment 
Program, and House Emergency Communications), back-office 
efficiencies (e.g. audits of accounts payable for equipment and 
supplies, Financial Counseling Metrics, and CAO Human 
Resources), physical safety, cybersecurity, and post-pandemic 
planning. These reports were transmitted to the Committee and 
the relevant House officers. Additionally, the OIG produced a 
special advisory project for the CAO on Member Office Structure 
and Staff Compensation in response to a request from the Select 
Committee on the Modernization of Congress. The OIG also 
continued ongoing management advice assistance to the House 
Legislative Counsel and CAO payroll. In addition to these 
reports, the OIG worked closely with the Committee and the CAO 
to significantly reduce the number of open recommendations to 
focus its efforts on those deemed higher risk and emphasized 
the importance of open recommendations to House officers and 
the Committee throughout monthly reporting and periodic 
discussions.
    Regarding internal operational items, the OIG expanded the 
use of internal audit systems and improved its SharePoint site 
with new workflow software, improving the office's efficiency 
and controls in processing various forms. The OIG modified its 
onboarding processes to address changes in the work environment 
and established a remote work policy and infrastructure support 
to maintain and enhance staff productivity throughout the 
ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The OIG was able to maintain 
consistency in its internal processes and staff productivity 
despite the office's changes in leadership this year. The OIG 
issued an internal employee morale survey, the results of which 
will be shared with OIG staff in February 2023. Finally, the 
House IG worked to resurrect regular meetings of all Inspectors 
General operating within the Legislative Branch.

                      UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE

    As detailed throughout this report, Capitol security was a 
substantial focus of the Committee during the 117th Congress. 
In addition to both the various United States Capitol Police 
(USCP) oversight activities discussed in the January 6th 
section and other sections herein, the Committee draws 
attention to the additional items of note below.

Capitol Police Board Reform

    As the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol elucidated, 
USCP governance required significant reform. The entity 
primarily responsible for USCP governance has been the Capitol 
Police Board (Board), which has a broad oversight role and 
shares management responsibilities with the USCP Chief. The 
Board consists of three voting members: the House and Senate 
Sergeants at Arms and the Architect of the Capitol (Architect). 
The USCP Chief is an ex-officio, non-voting member.\46\ The 
Board's duties include appointing the Chief and Inspector 
General, setting pay schedules, and approving terminations of 
USCP employees and officers. The Board, which had only one 
permanent employee, is unique among law enforcement oversight 
entities, as such entities are typically responsible for 
setting strategic and policy direction but do not have 
authority over day-to-day matters like officer 
terminations.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\Pub. L. 108-7, div. H, title I, Sec. 1014, Feb. 20, 2003, 117 
Stat. 361.
    \47\See generally U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO 17-
112, Capitol Police Board: Fully Incorporating Leading Governance 
Practices Would Help Enhance Accountability, Transparency, and External 
Communication, (2017), available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-17-
112.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee provided oversight of the Board through its 
authority to oversee the House Sergeant at Arms and Architect. 
The Committee's oversight authority notwithstanding, however, 
the Board has historically tried to resist efforts for 
meaningful oversight. For example, the Board had previously 
refused the Committee efforts to obtain a copy of its Manual of 
Procedures and denied Committee staff's request to attend Board 
meetings.
    As a means of facilitating change to the Board and USCP 
governance, on May 24, 2021, the Committee convened a hearing 
entitled, ``Reforming the Capitol Police and Improving 
Accountability for the Capitol Police Board.'' The Committee 
invited both the full Board and external experts to testify. 
The Board was represented by House Sergeant at Arms Major 
General (Ret.) William Walker and Architect Brett Blanton. The 
Senate Sergeant at Arms was also invited but submitted a 
statement for the record rather than testify; it is unusual for 
Senate officials to testify at House hearings. The Committee 
also received testimony from experts in force protection, 
physical security, and law enforcement, including: Major 
General (Ret.) Dr. Linda Singh, former adjutant general of the 
Maryland National Guard; Lynda Williams, the former Deputy 
Assistant Director of the United States Secret Service; and Lt. 
General (Ret.) Jeff Buchanan, who served as the commander of 
both the United States Army North and the United States Army 
Military District of Washington/Joint Force Headquarters-
National Capitol Region.
    Many of the takeaways from this hearing are discussed in 
the January 6 section of this report, supra. Among the most 
important takeaways was the need for the Board to be more 
transparent and accountable, and for it to have a permanent 
staff. In addition, virtually all witnesses at the hearing 
noted the need for USCP to shift from a law enforcement agency 
to a protective agency. This change was also recommended by the 
USCP IG in other Committee hearings and by Lt. General Russel 
Honore in his Task Force 1-6 Report. The distinction between 
the two models lies in the fundamental mission of the 
organization. While both share the common goal of finding bad 
actors and preventing attacks, a law enforcement agency's goal 
is to prosecute crimes by building a case with admissible 
evidence. A protective agency's purpose, on the other hand, is 
to protect the grounds and Members without regard to 
prosecution. For example, during the 2018 calendar year, USCP 
issued 8,735 traffic citations.\48\ It also responded to 
reports of criminal activity off the Capitol campus. If USCP 
was a protective agency, it would shift its focus from general 
law enforcement both on and off the Capitol campus to strictly 
protecting the Capitol campus and its occupants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \48\United States Capitol Police Letter to H. Comm. on H. Admin. 
Chairperson Zoe Lofgren, dated May 9, 2019, response to April 12, 2019, 
Request for Information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Although Board and USCP transformation is still a work in 
progress, meaningful changes began to take place during the 
117th Congress. For example, witnesses at this hearing noted 
the need for a regulation to allow the USCP Chief to call upon 
the D.C. National Guard in cases of emergency. At the time of 
this hearing, Speaker Nancy Pelosi had already approved such a 
regulation. Moreover, during the 117th Congress, Board meetings 
were opened to relevant oversight committees and documents like 
the Manual made available. The Committee looks forward to 
continuing to work in the 118th Congress and beyond to increase 
transparency and accountability of the Board and to continue to 
reform USCP.

Northern Red Training Center

    While conducting its Committee-directed investigation into 
the January 6, 2021, attack, the USCP Inspector General (USCP 
IG) identified a matter of immediate concern, prompting the 
issuance of a Management Advisory.\49\ Namely, the USCP 
Containment and Emergency Response Team (CERT) contracted with 
an entity called Northern Red, a private company located in 
North Carolina founded by former special forces operators that 
provided a variety of military and firearms training services. 
The IG found that Northern Red had disturbing content on its 
website, including prominently displayed symbols with 
connections to Nazi Germany that have been appropriated by 
white supremacy groups in North America and Europe. For 
example, it featured a ``Devil's Guard'' patch in several 
locations on its website and social media. This symbol is based 
upon a 1971 book of the same name that follows a Nazi SS 
officer who, as World War II ends, flees Germany, joins the 
French Foreign Legion and creates a unit made up of fellow SS 
officers. According to the Washington Post, although it is 
characterized as a true and historical account, there are many 
aspects of the book that are dubious and the book is ``overly 
sympathetic to the Nazis, especially the SS.''\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\Management Advisories are issued when the IG determines a 
matter to be time sensitive and of such vital import that agency 
management must address it immediately.
    \50\Thomas Gibbons-Neff, This is the Nazi-apologia war novel that 
apparently inspired SEAL Team 6 combat tactics, Wash. Post (Jan. 10, 
2017), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/01/10/
this-is-the-nazi-apologia-war-novel-thatapparently-inspired-seal-team-
6-combat-tactics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The website also contained other imagery utilized by neo-
Nazis and other white supremacists. The company logo, which 
appeared on every page of the Northern Red website, is a 
combination of two Nordic runes known as the Tyr rune and 
Othala rune. According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), 
``The Tyr rune is one of many ancient European symbols 
appropriated by the Nazis in their attempts to create an 
idealized `Aryan/Norse' heritage . . . Nazi Germany used the 
Tyr rune as a symbol for a number of Nazi entities, including 
the leadership schools (Reichsfuarerschulen) of Hitler's 
brownshirts, the Sturmabteilung, and a Waffen SS of infantry 
division, among others.''\51\ Moreover, ``Nazis in Germany 
adopted the Othala rune, among many other similar symbols, as 
part of their attempt to reconstruct a mythic `Aryan' past. 
Nazi uses of the symbol included the divisional insignia of two 
Waffen SS divisions during World War II. Following World War 
II, white supremacists in Europe, North America, and elsewhere 
began using the Othala rune.''\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \51\Anti-Defamation League, Hate on Display Hate Symbols Database: 
Tyr Rune, available at https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-
symbols/tyr-rune.
    \52\Anti-Defamation League, Hate on Display Hate Symbols Database: 
Othala Rune, available at https://www.adl.org/education/references/
hate-symbols/othala-rune.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During 2018 and 2019, USCP spent nearly $100,000 for CERT 
to train with Northern Red. It is notable that Northern Red is 
headquartered in North Carolina and its training facility is in 
Danville, Virginia, about 250 miles and a ten-hour round trip 
from Washington, DC. By comparison, the Federal Law Enforcement 
Training Center (FLETC) facility in Cheltenham, Maryland, is 
about 16 miles from Capitol Hill; the U.S. Secret Service 
training facility in Belleville, Maryland, is about 15 miles 
from Capitol Hill; and the FBI Academy in Aquatic, Virginia, is 
about 40 miles from Capitol Hill.
    Based on this disturbing finding, the USCP IG issued the 
above-referenced Management Advisory and recommended that USCP 
immediately review the appropriateness of utilizing Northern 
Red for further training. Notably, the USCP IG believed this 
matter was so urgent that it could not wait for the flash 
report itself to be issued to USCP less than one week later. In 
addition, the USCP IG provided information about this issue to 
the Department of Justice Inspector General, in light of the 
possibility of other federal entities using the company.

Assault on Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Husband, Paul Pelosi

    In the early morning hours of October 28, 2022, a man broke 
into the San Francisco, California, home of Speaker Nancy 
Pelosi and viciously assaulted her husband, Paul Pelosi, 
causing injuries so severe that Mr. Pelosi required emergency 
surgery hours after being attacked. The suspected assailant was 
indicted by federal prosecutors with charges that make clear 
the attack targeted the Speaker's home and family specifically 
because of her government position. The criminal complaint 
noted that the suspect had ``zip ties, tape, rope, and at least 
one hammer with him,'' when he broke into the Speaker's home. 
After breaking into the Speaker's home, according to 
prosecutors, the suspect specifically asked where the Speaker 
was and said he that intended to hold the Speaker hostage and 
``show other Members of Congress there were consequences to 
actions.''\53\ The Speaker was not at her home at the time of 
the attack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\Complaint, U.S. vs. DePape, Case No. 3:2022cr00426 (N.D. Cal.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On November 1, 2022, Chairperson Lofgren sent a letter to 
USCP Chief Thomas Manger with a number of questions about 
USCP's strategic plan for its San Francisco field office, 
USCP's memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the San Francisco 
Police Department (SFPD), USCP reviews of the physical security 
posture for members of the presidential line of succession, and 
more.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \54\Comm. on H. Admin. Chairperson Zoe Lofgren letter to U.S. 
Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger, dated November 1, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On November 15, 2022, Chief Manger responded to Chairperson 
Lofgren's letter. The Committee was not satisfied with this 
response. While Chairperson Lofgren's letter sought specific 
answers to specific questions, the response to the letter 
provided generalities that were of little use to the 
Committee.\55\ As such, Chairperson Lofgren responded with an 
additional letter on November 29, 2022, asking more detailed 
questions. These questions pertained to the following subject 
areas: 1) USCP security monitoring protocols for the Speaker's 
home; 2) USCP Field Office and other USCP standard operating 
procedures; 3) USCP communications regarding the Memorandum of 
Understanding with the San Francisco Police Department; 4) USCP 
collaboration with the United States Secret Service on physical 
security countermeasures for the protection of the Capitol and 
other venues; 5) USCP security policies and practices for 
Members in the presidential line of succession and their 
families; 6) USCP threat assessment analysis protocols and 
prosecution referrals, 8) USCP intelligence exchanges with the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); and 9) USCP internal 
security review processes.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \55\U.S. Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger letter to Comm. on H. 
Admin. Chairperson Zoe Lofgren, dated November 15, 2022.
    \56\Comm. on H. Admin. Chairperson Zoe Lofgren letter to U.S. 
Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger, dated November 29, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On December 8, 2022, Chief Manger responded to Chairperson 
Lofgren's November 15, 2022, letter. Once again, USCP failed to 
provide answers beyond vague generalities, citing security 
concerns with providing detailed information in its written 
response to the Committee.\57\ This was, put plainly, 
completely unacceptable. A would-be assassin broke into the 
home of the Speaker of the House--second in the line of 
presidential succession--and, unable to find the Speaker, 
assaulted her husband in an act of political violence. It is 
improper for USCP to deny its primary oversight committee with 
detailed responses to valid requests for information about the 
attack. The Committee will continue to conduct vigorous 
oversight over USCP during the 118th Congress and expects to 
receive all information necessary to ensure such an attack 
never occurs again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \57\U.S. Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger letter to Comm. on H. 
Admin. Chairperson Zoe Lofgren, dated December 8, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CBA Reinstatement and Ratification

    Finally, the Committee is pleased that, at the Committee's 
urging, USCP reinstated its collective bargaining agreement 
(CBA) with frontline officers, and, for the first time in more 
than a decade, ratified a new CBA.
    The Committee did not support the USCP's unilateral 
suspension of the CBAs during the 116th Congress, and the 
Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR) found that this 
action constituted an unfair labor practice. As such, the 
Committee repeatedly urged USCP to reinstate its CBA with the 
Fraternal Order of Police (FOP). Thanks to pressure from the 
Committee, the CBA was reinstated in April 2021. The 
reinstatement of the CBA led directly to the reopening of 
negotiations on a new CBA. The new CBA was ratified in February 
2022 and replaced the long-expired 2010 CBA. The new CBA was a 
breakthrough after years of court battles and included advanced 
notice to officers for scheduled additional duty, enhanced 
wellness/resiliency services, and several other key updates to 
USCP policies.

                              SMITHSONIAN

    The Committee serves as the primary legislative and 
oversight body for the Smithsonian Institution (Smithsonian) a 
quasi-federal institution of 19 museums, 21 libraries, the 
National Zoo, numerous research centers, and several education 
centers. Approximately two-thirds of the Smithsonian's funding 
is provided by federal appropriations. The Smithsonian is 
overseen by a Board of Regents, which is composed of the Chief 
Justice, Vice President, Members of the House and Senate, and 
other private citizens known as ``Citizen Regents'' who are 
appointed to six-year terms by joint resolution of Congress. 
The Institution's day-to-day operations are led by the 
Secretary of the Smithsonian. The current Secretary, Lonnie G. 
Bunch III, assumed his position on June 16, 2019. Secretary 
Bunch was previously the founding Director of the Smithsonian's 
National Museum of African American History and Culture.
    On December 16, 2021, the Committee held an oversight 
hearing entitled ``Oversight of the Smithsonian Institution: 
Protecting Smithsonian Facilities and Collections Against 
Climate Change.'' Witnesses at the hearing included Nancy 
Bechtol, Director of Smithsonian facilities since 2012; Cathy 
L. Helm, the Smithsonian's Inspector General since 2014; and 
Phetmano Phannavong, a Senior Project Manager at Atkins North 
America with 20 years of experience in water resources 
engineering, project and program management, national flood 
resilience policies, and the Washington, D.C., floodplain. In 
convening the hearing, the Committee sought to build a 
legislative record on the risks climate change poses to the 
Smithsonian, its facilities, and collections, as well as the 
actions the Smithsonian had already taken or planned to take to 
address the threat. During the hearing, witnesses characterized 
the problem climate change posed to the Smithsonian and its 
collections as being twofold--the risk of rising sea levels and 
other flooding, along with the increasing challenge of safely 
maintaining collections and facilities. Witnesses also 
discussed the Smithsonian's 2021 Climate Change Action Plan, 
which focused on priority areas of public programs, research, 
collections, management, and facilities in the Smithsonian's 
efforts to address the climate change threat and offered 
updated assessments of the Smithsonian's vulnerabilities to 
flooding and other natural disasters.
    During the 117th Congress, the Committee participated 
heavily in the site selection process for two new Smithsonian 
museums authorized by Congress. The enacted versions of the 
Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act and the 
National Museum of the American Latino Act directed the 
Smithsonian to consult with the Committee, among others, as 
part of the site selection process.\58\ The Smithsonian 
reviewed more than 25 potential sites for the new museums and 
narrowed its search to four sites for further consideration: 
the Arts and Industries Building, the Northwest Capitol Site, 
South Monument Site, and the Tidal Basin Site. However, there 
is conflict within the authorizing legislation which has caused 
ambiguity regarding site selection. The authorizing legislation 
directs the Smithsonian to consider the South Monument Site for 
both museums. This site sits in ``the Reserve,'' a no-build 
zone on the National Mall established in 2003 to maintain open 
space. However, the legislation also contains a prohibition on 
locating either museum in the Reserve. The Committee 
recommended addressing the Reserve issue by amending the law to 
mirror the language in the initial House-passed museum bills 
which did not contain such a prohibition. Unfortunately, the 
Senate ignored the overwhelming public support for locating the 
museums on the National Mall and blocked legislation removing 
the prohibition. The Committee hopes that the Senate will 
reconsider its position during the 118th Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \58\Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, H.R.133, 116th Cong. 
(2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee also continued its oversight of renovations 
to the National Air and Space Museum (NASM). The museum started 
a seven-year renovation in 2018 and included the redesign of 
all 23 exhibitions and presentation spaces, complete refacing 
of the building exterior, replacement of outdated mechanical 
systems and more. Prior to the much-needed renovations, NASM 
has regularly been one of the most-visited museums in the 
United States. Although the project is not scheduled for 
completion until 2025, in October 2022 the museum partially 
reopened with eight new and renovated galleries in the west 
wing of the building
    In addition, the Committee continued to hold regular 
bipartisan oversight meetings with the Smithsonian throughout 
the 117th Congress. Topics of discussion during these monthly 
meetings included the Smithsonian's major capital projects 
(e.g., Pod 6 Construction for additional Smithsonian and 
National Gallery of Art storage and Revitalization of the 
Smithsonian's Historic Core), funding of the Smithsonian and 
trends in Smithsonian operations. The Committee also met with 
the Smithsonian Office of the Inspector General (Smithsonian 
OIG) on a regular basis to discuss audits on topics like 
acquisition management, the Smithsonian's Privacy Office and 
collections management.

                          LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

    The Committee met regularly with the Library of Congress 
(Library) management and the Library Office of Inspector 
General during the 117th Congress to monitor and review 
operations, services and planning initiatives. Areas of focus 
for the Committee included information technology (IT) 
modernization, reimagination of the Library visitor experience, 
the Copyright Office modernization, and the operations of the 
Congressional Research Service (CRS).

Information Technology

    In response to a 2015 Government Accountability Office 
(GAO) finding that the Library's IT needed to be improved, the 
Library, with oversight from the Committee, continued its IT 
modernization effort throughout the 117th Congress.
    This modernization effort includes an overhaul of records 
storage, utilization of both the cloud and a new data center, a 
more stabilized core IT structure, improved IT governance, and 
a more centralized and professionalized IT workforce.
    The office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) supports 
the overall IT Service management framework in identifying, 
characterizing, quantifying, and prioritizing potential IT 
services as sources of strategic, financial, operational, or 
technical value. Among OCIO's responsibilities is the 
management of Congress.gov, which celebrated its tenth 
anniversary in September 2022. Maintenance of Congress.gov is a 
joint effort between the OCIO, the Congressional Research 
Service, the Law Library of Congress, and other Congressional 
data partners. Maintenance includes continuous site development 
and updating the sites content and features every three weeks 
based on user feedback. OCIO also launched the Application 
Programing Interface (API), which provides automated access to 
many of the Congress.gov collections, and GitHub, which 
provides a community space for users to engage with the 
Congress.gov team. In September of this year, the Library 
hosted the third Congress.gov Virtual Public Forum, 
highlighting the new site enhancements and API and including 
panels with Congressional data partners. There were 144 unique 
attendees and 50% of the three-hour forum was dedicated to user 
feedback.

Visitor Experience and Thomas Jefferson Building Renovations

    During the 117th Congress, the Committee provided oversight 
as the Library continued its renovation of the Thomas Jefferson 
Building and its Visitor Enhancement (VE) Initiative. The 
overall objective of the VE Initiative is to democratize and 
elevate the Library's experiential storytelling via exhibitions 
emphasizing the Library's history and collections. Underlying 
the VE Initiative is the idea that the Library's collections, 
art, and architecture should be experienced by the many, not 
the few.
    This project includes the creation of a Youth Center, 
improvement to exhibit infrastructure through the creation of a 
Treasures Gallery, and the means to provide more collection-
based civics and history education to visitors. The Youth 
Center will be made up of ``learning labs'' that will let young 
people interact with the Library's collections. In addition, 
the Library is constructing a new orientation space for 
visitors. The VE project is funded through a public-private 
partnership in which appropriated funds are matched by private 
funds raised by the Library. This year, the Library continued 
its project of remaking the visitor experience for all those 
who travel to the world's largest library.
    In July 2022, the Library closed the Northwest Gallery, 2nd 
floor of the Thomas Jefferson Building, to re-design and 
relocate the Exploring the Early Americas exhibition, and 
prepare the space for the Treasures Gallery. A fabrication 
contract was awarded for new display cases, which will be 
installed next year. The inaugural theme of the space will be 
remembrance. In December 2022, the Library completed 100% of 
its exhibit design development for the Youth Center while 
making continued progress on content development and 
audiovisual/interactive development work. The Library also 
completed 75% of its exhibit design development for the 
Orientation Gallery/Welcome Area. Designs were also completed 
for the LOC Entry, which includes the Capitol Visitors Center 
Tunnel Entry, Carriage Entry/Security Vestibule, Welcome Area 
and Spine, a Donor Recognition Wall, and the Congressional 
Crossroads area.

United States Copyright Office

    During the 117th Congress, the United States Copyright 
Office (USCO) contributed to the broader Library's 
modernization efforts by developing a new enterprise IT system 
that integrates and improves all USCO technology. The 
Enterprise Copyright System (ECS) will include USCO 
registration, recordation, public record, and licensing IT 
applications. The ECS pilot program was launched in April 2020 
and made available to the general public in August 2022. Since 
the 2020 launch of the ECS, the USCO has received 10,450 
documents and recorded 408,117 works. The USCO has reported 
that processing time for online submissions is markedly less 
than that of paper submissions. For next steps, the USCO plans 
to design and develop additional document type submission 
options, to focus on direct integration of this system with the 
new Copyright Public Record System, and to improve the 
useability of the system.

Congressional Research Service

    The Congressional Research Service (CRS) operates under the 
Library of Congress and serves Congress throughout the 
legislative process by providing comprehensive and reliable 
legislative research and analysis, thereby contributing to an 
informed national legislature. CRS services come in many forms, 
including reports on major policy issues; tailored confidential 
memoranda, briefings and consultations to the requesting 
office; seminars and workshops; expert Congressional testimony; 
and responses to individual inquiries. Throughout the 117th 
Congress, CRS met regularly with the Committee to discuss its 
effectiveness and efficiency in serving members of Congress, 
diversity and inclusion within the various CRS departments, and 
to clarify CRS' working relationship with the Library's Office 
of Inspector General (OIG).
    In the Second Session of the 117th Congress, the Committee 
collaborated closely with CRS to plan New Member Seminar (NMS) 
for new incoming Members, which is to be held in Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania, in January 2023. This is the first time in 
decades that NMS will be held in a location other than 
Williamsburg, Virginia. NMS will offer an opportunity for the 
newly sworn-in House members to get to know one another, hear 
from inspiring speakers, and participate in moderated 
discussions across various policy areas, including reproductive 
rights, pharmaceutical prices, foreign policy, and immigration, 
among others.

                OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL WORKPLACE RIGHTS

    The Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR) was 
created by the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) to 
facilitate the application of fourteen workplace, health, 
safety and accessibility laws applied Congress by the CAA. 
Bipartisan Committee staff meets monthly with OCWR leadership 
to discuss the office's work and initiatives and any issues 
arising in the course of its operations.
    The CAA had its first major reform in 115th Congress, with 
passage of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 Reform 
Act (CAA Reform Act), an important reform measure championed by 
the Committee on a bipartisan basis. Despite several workplace 
reforms prescribed by the Act, such as expanding certain 
protections to unpaid staff, and mandating a biennial survey of 
the legislative branch workplace environment the Committee had 
not performed an assessment of the Act since its enactment in 
December 2018.
    Exercising the committee's oversight jurisdiction and its 
commitment to improving the Congressional workplace, the 
committee held a series of hearings on improving the workplace. 
The first held during the 117th Congress examined how the 
impact of the workplace protection reforms enacted in 2019. The 
second hearing explored the historic issue of unionization and 
collective bargaining in Member and committee offices.

CAA Reform Oversight Hearing

    The first hearing, ``Oversight of the Office of the 
Congressional Workplace Rights: Lessons learned from the 
Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 Reform Act'', was held 
October 29, 2021. This hearing dealt with gaining insight as to 
how implementation of the CAARA reforms were working, any 
notable changes pre-versus post-reform, any challenges that 
OCWR may have encountered in the implementation of reforms, and 
whether OCWR has any recommendations for strengthening the 
reforms.
    Three witnesses testified, all from OCWR: two OCWR Board 
Members, Chair Barbara Childs Wallace and Board Member, Barbara 
Camens, and OCWR Deputy Executive Director for the House, 
Teresa M. James.
    The then-Executive Director of OCWR, Susan Tsui Grundmann, 
who served as Executive Director of OCWR since January of 2017, 
shepherded the agency through media interest surrounding a 
series of hearings on sexual harassment in Congress and 
successfully oversaw the implementation of workplace reforms 
resulting from those hearings that culminated in the CAA Reform 
Act. Ms. Grundmann was nominated by President Joe Biden to 
serve as a member of the Federal Labor Relations Authority and 
was confirmed by the Senate. Ms. James was appointed as the 
interim Executive Director during the transition resulting in 
her appearance as a witness. The committee appreciates Ms. 
Grundmann's dedication to improving workplace conditions for 
employees as well as leading her agency through important and 
groundbreaking reforms.
    During the November 9, 2021, hearing the Committee also 
asked about issues related to of unionization for Congressional 
staff. During the hearing, Ms. Camens, a member of the OCWR 
Board, testified that OCWR's Board recommended proposed 
regulations to Congress in 1996 to govern the unionization of 
House and Senate offices. Ms. Camens also testified that, 
``those regulations were issued by our board 25 years ago, 
before the current iteration of the board . . . We have not 
looked at them, we have not reexamined them, and we have not 
taken a position on them.''

Unionization

    In response to the November hearing finding that no 
meaningful review of the regulations had occurred since 1996, 
Chairperson Lofgren sent a letter dated February 8, 2022, to 
the Chair of the OCWR Board requesting the Board review the 
1996 regulations. OCWR responded February 22, 2022, and stated 
that OCWR had reviewed the 1996 regulations as proposed and 
continued to support their adoption by Congress. Between the 
exchange of those letters, on February 9, 2022, Representative 
Andy Levin introduced legislation to approve the 1996 
regulations recommended by OCWR for House offices.
    The Committee held a hearing on the specific topic of 
unionization on March 2, 2022, titled, ``Oversight of Section 
220 of the Congressional Accountability Act: Implementing the 
Rights of Congressional Staff to Collectively Bargain.'' CHA 
heard testimony from two witnesses, John Uelmen, General 
Counsel for the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, and 
Mark Strand, President of the Congressional Institute.
    Among other findings at the hearing, the legislative text 
as introduced by Representative Levin did not comply with the 
technical requirements specified in the CAA and would need to 
be changed before consideration by the full House. 
Subsequently, Representative Levin introduced a similar 
resolution that addressed the technical issues and the House 
approved it it the same day, on May 10, 2022, becoming the only 
chamber in Congress to provide Congressional employees in 
Member offices and committees with the option to be represented 
by a union. Since then, staff in a number of Members' offices 
have opted to exercise their rights under the CAA to take steps 
to form unions.

Climate Survey

    As a continued effort to ensure the Congressional workplace 
is a more fair and equitable place to work, the Committee 
worked with OCWR to approve the launch of the second House 
climate survey. The voluntary biennial survey measures the 
workplace experience of employees, focusing primarily on issues 
of harassment and discrimination. This year's edition also 
covered questions on how well offices responded to employees 
throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was open to House 
employees from September 14, 2022, through November 18, 2022.
    The House achieved a margin of error of +/-2.4 percent, 
which exceeds best practices. The results are being compiled 
and will be delivered to the Committee in early 2023.
    The committee also worked with OCWR to develop and provide 
a executive summary of results from the prior survey. Those 
results from the 116th survey for the House have been posted on 
the OCWR website per the Committee's request. The results 
summary can be found in the reports section of the website.

                     OFFICE OF WHISTLEBLOWER OMBUDS

    The Committee continued its oversight of the Office of the 
Whistleblower Ombuds (Ombuds).\59\ In its second year since 
establishment, the Ombuds made significant progress in 
advancing its mandate to institutionalize within the House best 
practices for working with whistleblowers from the public and 
private sectors. Notably, the Ombuds' flagship training 
resource, Best Practices for Working with Whistleblowers, is 
one of the longest running and most viewed programs featured by 
the Congressional Staff Academy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \59\House Rule II, clause 10(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The work of the Ombuds has enhanced the House's Article I 
oversight responsibilities of Members and Committees and 
allowed these offices to better support their whistleblower 
constituencies. To further facilitate the Ombuds' mission, the 
Committee authorized a higher employee ceiling for the office 
during the 117th Congress. The Committee looks forward to 
working with the Ombuds in the coming Congress.

                   OFFICE OF DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION

    The House Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI) was 
established during the 116th Congress with the objectives of 
fostering diversity among House employing offices, studying 
existing diversity and barriers to diversity in the House, and 
advising both diverse job candidates searching for work on 
Capitol Hill, and House employing offices searching for diverse 
job candidates. During 117th Congress, the Committee managed 
the national search for a new permanent ODI Director. 
Ultimately, Dr. Sesha Joi Moon was selected to lead ODI.
    Under the leadership of Dr. Moon, ODI continued 
establishing itself within the Capitol Hill community through 
its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Barrier Analysis, which 
saw an external contractor, under the direction of ODI and in 
consultation with the Committee, conduct 20 focus groups with 
approximately 100 House staffers on topics such as the lack of 
diversity at senior job levels, advancement ceilings for 
diverse staffers, and limited knowledge of existing diversity, 
equity, and inclusion resources within the House. ODI also 
built its reputation beyond Capitol Hill by participating in 
the Society for Human Resource Management Inclusion Conference, 
the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute Leadership 
Conference, and the White House HBCU Initiative. For fiscal 
year 2022, House appropriators validated and endorsed ODI's 
work by expanding its budget, allowing the office to add two 
Professional Staffers and a Research and Data Analyst to its 
team and expand its national outreach operations.

                           FEDERAL ELECTIONS

Overview

    During the 117th Congress, the Committee continued to 
prioritize its historic role in conducting oversight of federal 
elections, election administration, campaign finance, the 
integrity and security of U.S. elections, and ensuring access 
to the franchise for all Americans. Building upon the 
Committee's extensive oversight and legislative work during the 
116th Congress, in this Congress, the Committee held four 
election-related Committee hearings, examining ways to 
strengthen our democracy, including through enactment of H.R. 
1, the For the People Act, constitutional interpretation and 
Congressional exercise of legislative and oversight authority 
under the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Art. I, 
Sec. 4, cl. 1), election subversion, and the independent state 
legislature theory's potential to disrupt our democracy.
    The Committee shepherded through House passage four major 
pieces of elections-related legislation: H.R. 1, the For the 
People Act; H.R. 5746, the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis 
Act,''; and H.R. 8873, the Presidential Election Reform Act, 
and S. 3969 (H.R. 7326), Protection and Advocacy for Voting 
Access Program Inclusion Act. These bills addressed critical 
election issues such as equitable access to American democracy, 
strengthening election infrastructure, combatting foreign 
interference in American elections, reducing barriers for 
voters with disabilities, and updating the over 135-year-old 
Electoral Count Act. Additionally, during the 117th Congress, 
the Committee and Subcommittee on Elections published three 
staff reports: H.R. 1, The For the People Act, as Introduced in 
the 117th Congress (Mar. 2, 2021), Voting in America: Ensuring 
Free and Fair Access to The Ballot (July 2021), The Electoral 
Count Act of 1877: Proposals for Reform (Jan. 2022).
    The Committee conducted oversight over the two federal 
agencies under its purview, the Federal Election Commission 
(FEC) and the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), held 
multiple hearings on the history and purpose of the Elections 
Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and administered an extensive 
election observer program, which included sending observers to 
more than 24 Congressional races during the 2022 general 
election in 10 states, including Arizona, California, Colorado, 
Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, 
and Virginia.
    The Committee continued to respond to the once-in-a-
generation challenges of voting during a global pandemic by 
conducting virtual and hybrid hearings throughout the 117th 
Congress, bringing together witnesses from around the country 
to share their expertise with the Committee and the American 
public.
    The Subcommittee on Elections conducted extensive oversight 
of federal elections administration and access to the 
franchise, taking Congress to the American people by convening 
eight hearings and additional roundtables during the 117th 
Congress.

Legislation

    The Committee marked-up and reported, and the House passed, 
three significant pieces of election reform legislation in the 
117th Congress.
    H.R. 1, the ``For the People Act of 2021,'' is 
comprehensive, democracy reform legislation that will advance 
the democratic promise by eliminating barriers to voting for 
all eligible Americans, combatting dark money in politics, 
enhancing transparency in campaign finance while empowering 
small donors, ending partisan gerrymandering, and strengthening 
ethical standards in government.
    H.R. 5746, the ``Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act,'' a 
historic legislative package that combined key reforms from 
H.R. 1, the ``For the People Act of 2021'' with H.R. 4, the 
``John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021,'' a bill 
that restores the protections and enforcement of the Voting 
Rights Act of 1965.
    H.R. 8873, the ``Presidential Election Reform Act,'' which 
aims to reform the 13-year-old Electoral Count Act by making 
certain improvements to the electoral process of appointing 
Presidential electors and counting electoral votes.
            H.R. 1--For the People Act of 2021
    H.R. 1, the ``For the People Act of 2021'', was introduced 
during the 117th Congress by Representative John P. Sarbanes of 
Maryland on January 4, 2021. This comprehensive legislation to 
advance American democracy is a collection of reforms 
introduced over the years by various Members of Congress that 
would expand access to the ballot box, protect the right to 
vote, bolster the integrity of our democracy, and boost sorely 
needed confidence in self-government. An earlier version of the 
bill was first introduced by Rep. Sarbanes during the 116th 
Congress on January 3, 2019.
    The Federalist No. 57 states:

          Who are to be the electors of the federal 
        representatives? Not the rich, more than the poor; not 
        the learned, more than the ignorant; not the haughty 
        heirs of distinguished names, more than the humble sons 
        of obscurity and unpropitious fortune. The electors are 
        to be the great body of the people of the United 
        States.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \60\The Federalist No. 57, in The Federalist Papers, available at 
https://guides.loc.gov/federalist_papers/text-51-60#s-lg-box-wrapper-
25493433. A series of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James 
Madison, and John Jay, appeared anonymously in New York newspapers 
under the pen name ``Publius.'' Federalist No. 57 is considered to be 
the work of either Alexander Hamilton or James Madison.

    H.R. 1 advances this bedrock principle of American 
democratic self-governance. It is legislation for the ``great 
body of the people'' to hold government accountable and to 
protect the precious right to vote for all Americans.
    Too many Americans feel shut out of the electoral process, 
face barriers at the ballot box, or choose not to vote. About 
two-thirds of the voting eligible population voted in the 2020 
general election.\61\ Despite the historically exceptional 
turnout in 2020, the 2020 general election was fraught with 
long-standing challenges in our electoral system: legal and 
structural efforts to disenfranchise voters, especially 
African-American, Native American, and Latino voters; extreme 
partisan gerrymandering; outsized spending by wealthy special 
interests; the continued proliferation of dark money; deceptive 
practices; and disinformation campaigns about election results. 
Further, following the 2020 general election, some states 
rushed to enact voter restrictive laws, which were in effect 
for the 2022 midterms, that restricted access to the ballot 
box, such as by making it harder to vote by mail, requiring 
documentary proof of citizenship to vote, establishing new ID 
requirements, making it difficult for people who do not have 
traditional addresses to vote, and imposing faulty voter 
purges.\62\ In 2022, only about one-half of the voting eligible 
population voted in the 2022 midterm elections.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \61\Kevin Schaul, Kate Rabinowitz & Ted Mellnik, 2020 turnout is 
the highest in over a century, Wash. Post (Nov. 5, 2020), https://
www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/elections/voter-turnout/.
    \62\Voting Laws Roundup: October 2022, The Brennan Center for 
Justice, Oct. 6, 2022, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-
reports/voting-laws-roundup-october-2022.
    \63\2022 November General Election Turnout Rates, US Elections 
Project (Last updated: 11/23/2022), https://www.electproject.org/2022g.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 1 would combat these threats to our democracy. It 
includes key provisions from the late Rep. John Lewis' ``Voter 
Empowerment Act'' that would modernize voter registration 
systems by implementing online voter registration, automatic 
voter registration, and same-day voter registration, set 
nationwide standards that expand access to absentee and early 
voting, improve access to voting for individuals with 
disabilities, prohibit deceptive practices, combat voter 
intimidation, protect against faulty purges from voter 
registration lists, and restore the federal voting rights of 
Americans with felony convictions who are no longer 
incarcerated. It would also combat voter ID laws that restrict 
voting by eligible Americans, end partisan gerrymandering, 
provide grants to states to replace outdated voting infra 
structure, and require the disclosure of dark, undisclosed 
money so that Americans know who is influencing their votes and 
their views. Further, the legislation would establish a small 
dollar financing system for congressional campaigns which would 
empower small donors. Finally, it would introduce an array of 
new reforms to raise ethical standards in government.
    Prior to the passage of H.R. 1, on February 25, 2021, the 
Committee held a one-panel, full Committee hearing, entitled 
``Strengthening American Democracy'' to review the structural 
and administrative barriers to voting following the 2020 
elections and examine the need for Congress to pass H.R. 1. The 
following witnesses testified: Stacey Abrams, Founder and 
Chair, Fair Fight Action; The Honorable Shenna Bellows, 
Secretary of State, Maine; Guy-Uriel Charles, Edward and Ellen 
Schwarzman Professor of Law, Duke Law School; and Ricky Hatch, 
CPA, County Clerk/Auditor, Weber County, Utah.
    When H.R. 1 was considered on the House floor, 56 
amendments were offered by more than 50 Representatives. H.R. 1 
passed the House on March 3, 2021, by a vote of 220 to 210.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \64\U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk, Roll Call 
62, Bill Number: H.R. 1, 117th Cong., 1st Session, available at https:/
/clerk.house.gov/Votes/202162.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            H.R. 5746--Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act
    On January 13, 2022, H.R. 5746, the ``Freedom to Vote: John 
R. Lewis Act'', was introduced on the House Floor through a 
motion by Rep. G. K. Butterfield that the House agree to a 
House amendment to a Senate amendment. The House amendment 
moved by Rep. Butterfield replaced the text of the Senate 
amendment with the full text of the ``Freedom to Vote: John R 
Lewis Act.''
    H.R. 5746 is a historic legislative package of democratic 
reforms that combines key provisions from H.R. 1, the ``For the 
People Act,'' described above, with H.R. 4, the ``John R. Lewis 
Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021,'' which modernizes and 
restores the preclearance formula in the Voting Rights Act of 
1965, codifies standards for vote dilution and vote denial 
federal cases, and protects the voting rights of Native 
Americans by incorporating the Native American Voting Rights 
Act.
    The motion made by Rep. Butterfield was agreed to on 
January 13, 2022, by a vote of 220 to 203\65\ and the amended 
bill was sent to the Senate for consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \65\U.S. House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk, Roll Call 
9, Bill Number: H.R. 5746, 117th Cong., 2nd Session, available at 
https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/20229.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            H.R. 8873, the Presidential Election Reform Act
    The Electoral Count Act of 1887 (ECA) governs Congress's 
certification of presidential elections every four years. The 
ECA is outdated, vague, and confusing, as was demonstrated when 
former President Trump's surrogates in Congress attempted to 
exploit the law's arcane provisions, culminating in the January 
6 attack on the Capitol. ECA reform is necessary to reaffirm 
that neither Congress nor any individual has the constitutional 
authority to overturn the will of the people in presidential 
elections.
    To achieve this goal, Chairperson Lofgren and 
Representative Liz Cheney, Vice Chair of the Select Committee 
to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States 
Capitol, introduced H.R. 8873, the Presidential Election Reform 
Act (PERA). PERA makes several critical reforms to protect the 
integrity of presidential elections.
    PERA enacts a new set of clear, comprehensive counting 
rules that reaffirm that the vice president's role at the count 
is ministerial, raises the objection threshold during the count 
to one-third of each house (rather than a single Member of each 
House), and lists the explicit Constitutional grounds upon 
which Members may object to a state's electoral votes.
    PERA also ensures that Congress receives a single, accurate 
electoral certificate from each state. PERA achieves this by 
setting a deadline by which governors must transmit their 
states' appointments to Congress. If a governor fails to do so, 
or if he or she transmits inaccurate certificates of 
appointment, PERA authorizes candidates to obtain a federal 
court order requiring the governor to transmit the state's 
lawful certificate. If the governor refuses, then the court 
must order another appropriate state official to issue the 
lawful certificate. The governor's certificate (or the 
certificate of the other state official, as the case may be) 
shall be conclusive for Congress's purposes at the electoral 
count.
    PERA also requires states to select electors pursuant to 
state laws as they exist prior to Election Day. This reaffirms 
and clarifies that there is no legal authority allowing state 
legislatures to ``take back'' their electoral appointment power 
after the election if they do not like the results, as the 
former president falsely suggested to his supporters.
    PERA also ensures that presidential elections are only 
extended for genuine catastrophic event. The bill amends the 
ECA's ``failed elections'' provision to provide that a state's 
presidential election can only be extended if a federal court 
agrees that the state has experienced a genuine catastrophic 
event affecting enough ballots to swing the outcome of the 
state's election.
    Lastly, PERA prohibits state and local election officials 
from refusing to certify presidential elections. The Equal 
Protection and Due Process clauses of the United States 
Constitution prohibit election officials from willfully 
refusing to count ballots or certify elections in accordance 
with state election laws that exist on Election Day. PERA 
allows presidential candidates to seek federal injunctive 
relief against election officials to enforce these 
constitutional requirements in presidential elections if 
necessary.
    The House passed PERA on September 21, 2022, by a vote of 
229 to 203. A Senate version of the bill was included in the 
omnibus spending bill signed into law at the end of the 117th 
Congress.

Additional Legislative Activities

            S. 3969 (H.R. 7326)--Protection and Advocacy for Voting 
                    Access Program Inclusion Act
    Representative Ruben Gallego reintroduced the bipartisan 
PAVA Inclusion Act in the 117th Congress (H.R. 7326), with 
Reps. Tom O'Halleran (D-AZ), Gregorio Sablan (D-MP), Teresa 
Leger Fernandez (D-NM), and John Curtis (R-UT) as original 
cosponsors on March 31, 2022. The bill was referred solely to 
the Committee on House Administration. The Senate companion (S. 
3969) was introduced by Senator Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), along 
with Senators Roy Blunt (R-MO), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Tina 
Smith (D-MN), and Martin Heinrich (D-NM).
    When Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 
2002, the law authorized funding for the Protection and 
Advocacy for Voting Access (PAVA) program. The PAVA program 
advocates for voters with disabilities to have access to all 
aspects of the voting process and is administered by the HHS 
Administration on Disabilities. PAVA funds are currently 
awarded to eligible Protection and Advocacy (P&A) Systems. P&As 
are federally mandated programs working at the state level to 
protect individuals with disabilities. There are 57 P&As across 
all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. 
Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of 
the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), as well as the American 
Indian Consortium, also known as the Native American Disability 
Law Center, which serves Native Americans with disabilities in 
the Four Corners region of the Southwest U.S. Because of an 
interpretation of the law under HAVA, the P&As in CNMI and the 
American Indian Consortium do not receive PAVA funding because 
they are not considered ``states'' under the HAVA definition.
    The PAVA Inclusion Act makes a technical fix to HAVA to 
explicitly include the CNMI and the system serving the American 
Indian Consortium as eligible recipients of funding under the 
PAVA program. The bill does not change the program's overall 
authorization level or other elements of the PAVA program. 
Language providing for the inclusion of CNMI and the American 
Indian Consortium as recipients of PAVA funding was included in 
the For the People Act, passed by the House in 2021, and in the 
``Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act,'' passed by the House in 
2022. Revisiting the limitation on PAVA funds was also included 
as a recommendation in the Report of the Interagency Steering 
Group on Native American Voting, published by the White House 
in 2022.
    The PAVA Inclusion Act passed the Senate by unanimous 
consent on March 31, 2022. The bill passed the House by voice 
vote on September 29, 2022, and was signed into law by 
President Biden on September 30, 2022, as Public Law No. 117-
182.

Hearings

    The Committee held four elections-related hearings in the 
117th Congress, including two historic hearings on 
constitutional interpretation and congressional exercise of 
authority under the Elections Clause.
    Prior to the passage of H.R. 1, on February 25, 2021, the 
Committee held a one-panel, full Committee hearing, entitled 
``Strengthening American Democracy'' to review the structural 
and administrative barriers to voting in our elections 
following the 2020 elections and examine the need for Congress 
to pass H.R. 1. The following witnesses testified: Stacey 
Abrams, Founder and Chair, Fair Fight Action; The Honorable 
Shenna Bellows, Secretary of State, Maine; Guy-Uriel Charles, 
Edward and Ellen Schwarzman Professor of Law, Duke Law School; 
and Ricky Hatch, CPA, County Clerk/Auditor, Weber County, Utah 
(minority witness).
    On July 12, 2021, the Committee held a hearing entitled, 
``The Elections Clause: Constitutional Interpretation and 
Congressional Exercise.'' The hearing examined the Congress' 
broad constitutional authority to regulate and legislate under 
the Elections Clause and historical precedents of federal 
legislation enacted under such powers. The expert witnesses 
that testified were Jack Rakove, Coe Professor of History and 
American Studies, Stanford University; Daniel P. Tokaji, Fred 
W. & Vi Miller Dean and Professor of Law, University of 
Wisconsin Law School; Franita Tolson, Professor of Law and Vice 
Dean for Faculty and Academic Affairs, University of Southern 
California Gould School of Law; and the Honorable Michael G. 
Adams, Secretary of State, Commonwealth of Kentucky.
    The Elections Clause is a source of vast federal power that 
has been significantly under-utilized in the two centuries long 
battle over the regulation of federal elections. Under the 
Clause, states can set procedural regulations, but Congress can 
also enact its own laws and, more importantly, veto state 
regulations at will. Despite this unique structure, some 
Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court and legal scholars tend to 
view exercises of federal authority under the Clause as a 
somewhat unwelcome intrusion on the states' authority to 
legislate with respect to federal elections.
    Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Constitution states:

          The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for 
        Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in 
        each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress 
        may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, 
        except as to the Places of chusing Senators. (emphasis 
        added).

    The Elections Clause thus allows states to prescribe rules 
for the conduct of congressional elections, as the Supreme 
Court has stated, ``only so far as Congress declines to pre-
empt state legislative choices.''\66\ Dean Franita Tolson, 
Professor of Law and Vice Dean for Faculty and Academic 
Affairs, University of Southern California Gould School of Law, 
specifically addressing the constitutional authority of 
Congress to enact H.R. 1, observed that, ``H.R. 1 is a 
constitutional use of Congress'' authority under the Elections 
Clause,'' and that ``[m]ost of its provisions does not approach 
the outer limits of Congress'' power under the Elections 
Clause, which empowers that body to make or alter state law; 
commandeer state law, state officials, and state offices; and, 
in certain circumstances, regulate voter qualifications 
standards.''\67\ This Committee continued examining the meaning 
and purpose of the Elections Clause in a subsequent hearing in 
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \66\Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67, 69 (1997).
    \67\See The Elections Clause: Constitutional Interpretation and 
Congressional Exercise, Hearing Before H. Comm. on H. Administration, 
117th Cong. (2021), written testimony of Vice Dean Franita Tolson at 
22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Following the 2020 election, a survey of election workers 
commissioned by the Brennan Center for Justice found that one 
in three election workers feels unsafe because of their job, 
and nearly one in five listed their lives being threatened as a 
job-related concern.\68\ On July 28, 2021, the Committee held a 
hearing examining the growing threat of election subversion, 
entitled ``Election Subversion: A Growing Threat to Election 
Integrity.'' Witnesses included the Honorable John P. Sarbanes 
(D-MD); the Honorable Nikema Williams (D-GA); and the Honorable 
Burgess Owens (R-UT) on a Member panel, followed by a second 
panel which included Adrian Fontes, former County Recorder, 
Maricopa County, Arizona; Gowrin Ramachandran, Senior Counsel, 
Brennan Center for Justice; Janice Winfrey, City Clerk, 
Detroit, Michigan; and Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, Chairman, 
Election Transparency Initiative. The hearing focused on 
Representative John Sarbanes' bill, H.R. 4064, the Preventing 
Election Subversion Act of 2021, the ways misinformation and 
disinformation undermine the public's confidence in American 
elections, and the safety and security of the individuals 
supporting our democracy. Notably, several provisions of H.R. 
4064 were adopted by the House through passage of the H.R. 
5746, the ``Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \68\Election Officials Under Attack, The Brennan Center for Justice 
and Bipartisan Policy Center, (June 16, 2021) at 3-4, https://
www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2021-06/BCJ-
129%20ElectionOfficials_v7.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On July 28, 2022, the Committee held a hearing titled ``The 
Independent State Legislature Theory and its Potential to 
Disrupt our Democracy.'' The hearing examined the independent 
state legislature theory, which claims that state legislatures 
have unfettered authority to regulate federal elections 
pursuant to Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 and Article 2, 
Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The hearing 
witnesses were Richard Pildes, Sudler Family Professor of 
Constitutional Law, New York University School of Law; Carolyn 
Shapiro, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Academic 
Administration and Strategic Initiatives, Chicago-Kent College 
of Law; and Eliza Sweren-Becker, Counsel, Democracy Program, 
Brennan Center for Justice. In their testimonies and during 
questioning at the hearing, all three witnesses disagreed with 
the premise of the independent state legislature theory and 
noted that the theory lacks historical and legal support. The 
witnesses also explained that the theory contradicts 
traditional principles of federalism and checks and balances.

Additional Oversight

    The Committee engaged in oversight activities, including 
meeting with EAC and FEC staff, and sending a lengthy and 
comprehensive oversight letter to the FEC. For example, the 
Committee conducted a bipartisan oversight meeting with 
majority and minority committee staff with the Inspector 
General of the FEC, and staff from the Inspector General's 
office. This meeting informed several questions posed to the 
Commission in the Committee's oversight letter.
    The Committee also sent an oversight letter to the FEC in 
July 2022 posing more than 53 questions to the agency regarding 
its operating posture, key vacancies at the agency, challenges, 
and enforcement actions, among others. The FEC's response 
spanned 68 pages and included an additional 58 pages of 
supplemental material.

Subcommittee on Elections

    During the 117th Congress, Representative G. K. Butterfield 
chaired the Subcommittee on Elections. In exercising the 
Committee's powers to conduct oversight of federal elections, 
throughout the 117th Congress the Subcommittee on Elections 
undertook a series of investigative hearings to examine the 
state of voting in America. During the 116th Congress, the 
Subcommittee's extensive investigative hearings identified 
voting and election administration practices that exhibited the 
most significant evidence of discriminatory impact. In the 
117th Congress, the Subcommittee investigated those practices 
further. In doing so, the Subcommittee determined that a number 
of specific practices warranted a more in-depth examination, 
specifically: (1) voter list maintenance and discriminatory 
voter purges; (2) voter identification (``voter ID'') and 
documentary proof of citizenship requirements; (3) lack of 
access to multi-lingual voting materials and language 
assistance; (4) polling place closures, consolidations, 
reductions, and long wait times; (5) restrictions on additional 
opportunities to vote; and (6) changes to methods of election, 
jurisdictional boundaries, and redistricting.
    During the initial five investigative hearings, the 
Subcommittee received hours of testimony from more than 35 
witnesses and collected numerous reports and documents, 
culminating in a Subcommittee report Voting in America: 
Ensuring Free and Fair Access to the Ballot, in which the 
testimony and data show definitively that the voting and 
election administration practices examined can and do have a 
discriminatory impact on minority voters and can impede access 
to the vote and provided the evidence underpinning the 
inclusion of the known covered practices components of H.R. 4, 
the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \69\H. Comm. on H. Admin., Subcomm. on Elections, staff print, 
Voting in America: Ensuring Free and Fair Access to the Ballot, 117th 
Cong., 1st Sess. (2021), available at https://cha.house.gov/sites/evo-
subsites/cha.house.gov/files/2021_Voting%20in%20America_v5_web.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Following this series of hearings, the Subcommittee held an 
additional three hearings on the state of voting in America, 
specifically discussing the states of Texas, New Mexico, and 
Florida, as well as a Committee roundtable in Pennsylvania. 
Furthermore, following a Committee roundtable in Miami, 
Florida, the Subcommittee convened three hearings examining the 
growing threat of election-related misinformation, 
disinformation, and malinformation (MDM) and its impact on 
American democracy.

Examining Voting in America

    Following the Supreme Court's 2013 decision in Shelby 
County v. Holder, which held the preclearance formula of the 
Voting Rights Act to be unconstitutional, numerous states 
across the country enacted restrictive and discriminatory 
voting laws. The increases in voter turnout in both the 2018 
and 2020 elections were not met with celebration in statehouses 
across the country but instead with backlash and false claims 
of fraud--claims that were used to justify voter suppression 
and the passage of laws that disenfranchise voters.
    During the Subcommittee's first hearing of the 117th 
Congress, ``Voting in America: Ensuring Free and Fair Access to 
the Ballot,'' Allison Riggs, Interim Executive Director/Chief 
Counsel, Voting Rights, Southern Coalition for Social Justice; 
SonjaDiaz, Founding Director, Latino Policy & Politics 
Initiative, UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs; Marcia 
Johnson-Blanco, Co-Director, Voting Rights Project, Lawyers' 
Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Debo P. Adegbile, 
Partner, WilmerHale, LLP; and the Honorable Kim Wyman, 
Secretary of State, State of Washington (minority witness) 
testified regarding the 2020 election, the perpetuation of 
barriers to voting, structural, legal, and administrative 
barriers to voting faced by Black, brown, Indigenous, and other 
communities of color, as well as voters with disabilities. This 
hearing began a series of five hearings that gathered testimony 
to continue building the record of contemporaneous data called 
for by the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder, and to 
inform the crafting of a fulsome restoration of the protections 
of the Voting Rights Act.
    Next, the Subcommittee held a hearing examining the 
practice of voter list purges and the potential for this 
practice to disproportionately burden minority voters. At the 
virtual hearing, ``Voting in America: The Potential for Voter 
List Purges to Interfere with Free and Fair Access to the 
Ballot,'' the Honorable Josh L. Kaul, Attorney General, State 
of Wisconsin; Sophia Lin Lakin, Deputy Director, Voting Rights 
Project, American Civil Liberties Union; Marc Meredith, 
Associate Professor, University of Pennsylvania Department of 
Political Science; and Kaylan Phillips, Litigation Counsel, 
Public Interest Legal Foundation (minority witness), testified 
about the key federal statutes and regulations governing state 
maintenance of voter registration rolls, the recent efforts by 
states and localities to remove tens of millions of registrants 
from their rolls, the potential for such efforts to 
disproportionately (and perhaps intentionally) burden minority 
voters, and recent litigation matters related to state voter 
purge efforts.
    At the third hearing in the series--``Voting in America: 
The Potential for Voter ID Laws, Proof-of-Citizenship Laws, and 
Lack of Multi-Lingual Support to Interfere with Free and Fair 
Access to the Ballot''--witnesses across two panels discussed 
voter identification laws, proof-of-citizenship laws, and lack 
of access to multi--lingual voting materials. On the first 
panel, Dr. Lonna Rae Atkeson, Professor, University of New 
Mexico; Matthew L. Campbell, Staff Attorney, Native American 
Rights Fund; Dr. Nazita Lajevardi, Assistant Professor, 
Michigan State University; Andrea Senteno, Regional Counsel, 
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund | MALDEF; 
and Lori Roman, President, American Constitutional Rights Union 
(minority witness) testified about voter identification and 
proof-of-citizenship laws. Witnesses for the majority testified 
as to how these requirements disproportionately burden minority 
voters. Discriminatory strict voter ID laws were some of the 
first voting laws implemented in the wake of Shelby County. 
Studies have consistently demonstrated that minority voters are 
disproportionately likely to lack the forms of ID required by 
voter ID laws and are disproportionately burdened by the time 
and expense of acquiring the underlying documents and IDs. The 
consequence is a negative impact on turnout amongst minority 
voters.\70\ On the second panel, Dr. Matt Barreto, Professor, 
University of California, Los Angeles; Terry Ao Minnis, Senior 
Director of Census and Voting Programs, Asian Americans 
Advancing Justice | AAJC; Kira Romero-Craft, Managing Attorney, 
Southeast Office, Latino Justice PRLDEF; and Harmeet Dhillon, 
Founding Partner, Dhillon Law Group, Inc. (minority witness) 
discussed access to multi-lingual voting materials and 
assistance. Failure to provide these materials and services can 
negatively impact millions of potential voters, a 
disproportionate number of whom are minority voters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \70\H. Comm. on H. Admin., Subcomm. on Elections, staff print, 
Voting in America: Ensuring Free and Fair Access to the Ballot, 117th 
Cong., 1st Sess. (2021), available at https://cha.house.gov/sites/
evo_subsites/cha.house.gov/files/2021_Voting%20in%20America_v5_web.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At the fourth hearing, ``Voting in America: The Potential 
for Polling Place Quality and Restrictions on Opportunities to 
Vote to Interfere with Free and Fair Access to the Ballot,'' 
witnesses testified as to how each of these practices 
disproportionately burden minority voters and can be 
implemented in a discriminatory manner. The hearing's first 
panel, Dr. Stephen Pettigrew, Director of Data Sciences, 
University of Pennsylvania; Jesselyn McCurdy, Interim Executive 
Vice President for Government Affairs, Leadership Conference on 
Civil and Human Rights; Kevin Morris, Quantitative Researcher, 
Democracy, Brennan Center for Justice; Mimi Marziani, 
President, Texas Civil Rights Project; and Donald Palmer, 
Chair, U.S. Election Assistance Commission (minority witness), 
followed by a second panel consisting of Dr. Michael C. Herron, 
Professor, Dartmouth College; Gilda Daniels, Director of 
Litigation, Advancement Project; Danielle Lang, Director, 
Voting Rights, Campaign Legal Center; Isabel Longoria, 
Elections Administrator, Harris County, Texas; and Ashlee 
Titus, Board Member and Corporate Secretary, Lawyers Democracy 
Fund (minority witness) provided testimony on various changes 
to opportunities to vote. The Subcommittee examined the impacts 
of changes that reduce, consolidate, or relocate voting 
locations; wait times; changes made to early, absentee, and 
election-day voting locations; and reductions in days or hours 
of in person voting on weekend early voting, and the potential 
for such changes to disproportionately burden minority voters. 
Issues related to polling place locations, quality, 
accessibility, and the ensuing long wait times to vote are 
pervasive. Over the past decade, it has been well documented 
that racial minorities wait longer to vote on election day than 
White voters.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \71\See e.g., Voting in America: The Potential for Polling Place 
Quality and Restrictions on Opportunities to Vote to Interfere with 
Free and Fair Access to the Ballot: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on 
Elections, 117th Cong. (2021), written testimony of Kevin Morris at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The fifth hearing in the Voting in America series, ``Voting 
in America: A National Perspective on the Right to Vote, 
Methods of Election, Jurisdictional Boundaries, and 
Redistricting,'' examined issues related to changes to method 
of election, changes to jurisdictional boundaries, and changes 
made through the redistricting process, and the potential for 
all these practices to disproportionately burden or 
disenfranchise minority voters. This hearing also included a 
national-level discussion on the discriminatory and suppressive 
impact of voting laws post-Shelby County. The first panel of 
witnesses, which included Jerry Vattamala, Director, Democracy 
Program, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund 
(AALDEF); Patty Ferguson-Bohnee, Director, Indian Legal Clinic, 
Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University; 
Eric H. Holder, Jr., former Attorney General of the United 
States & Chairman, National Democratic Redistricting Committee; 
and Thor Hearne, Founding Partner, True North Law Group 
(minority witness) primarily discussed issues related to 
methods of election, redistricting, and jurisdictional boundary 
practices, and how they can be wielded to disenfranchise and 
dilute the voting power of minority voters. On the second 
panel, Thomas A. Saenz, President & General Counsel, Mexican 
American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (AALDEF); Janai 
Nelson, Associate Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and 
Educational Fund, Inc.; Michael Waldman, President, Brennan 
Center for Justice; Wade Henderson, Interim President & CEO, 
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; and Sara 
Frankenstein, Partner, Gunderson, Palmer, Nelson & Ashmore 
(minority witness) extrapolated on the discussion of these 
practices and the others the Subcommittee discussed throughout 
the hearing series. The panel included a discussion of the 
national litigation landscape in the post-Shelby County era and 
how the claim that the suppressive laws and tactics the 
Subcommittee has discussed this Congress are necessary for 
``election integrity'' was false.
    Following completion of the Subcommittee report, the 
Subcommittee held additional hearings continuing to focus on 
the state of voting in America. The State of Texas has a long 
history of restricting access to the ballot and was covered in 
its entirety under the Voting Rights Act prior to Shelby County 
v. Holder decision. Most recently, despite no evidence of 
irregularity or fraud, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 
1, a sweeping, restrictive elections bill that placed numerous 
new barriers on voting and rolled back several of the voting 
opportunities utilized during the 2020 election. Following the 
March 2022 primary election, reports across the state showed 
widespread issues and significant increases in mail-in 
application and ballot rejection rates, some shortages of poll 
workers, and issues with some voting equipment. The 
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Voting in America: 
Ensuring Free and Fair Access to the Ballot in Texas''' to 
discuss these issues. Gary Bledsoe, President, Texas NAACP 
State Conference; Andy Brown, County Judge, Travis County, 
Texas; Hani Mirza, Legal Director, Voting Rights Program, Texas 
Civil Rights Project; Nina Perales, Vice President of 
Litigation, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund 
| MALDEF; and Cindy Siegel, Chair, Harris County, Texas 
Republican Party (minority witness) provided testimony at the 
hearing.
    The Subcommittee traveled to Santa Fe, New Mexico, to hold 
a field hearing on ``Voting in America: Access to the Ballot in 
New Mexico'' to examine the pro-democracy, pro-voter policies 
New Mexico has implemented to improve and expand access to the 
ballot throughout the state, additional steps supported by many 
in the state that would continue to expand access, and any 
ongoing issues related to elections in New Mexico. The 
Honorable Maggie Toulouse Oliver, Secretary of State, State of 
New Mexico; Heather Ferguson, Executive Director, Common Cause 
New Mexico; Ahtza Dawn Chavez, Executive Director, NAVA 
Education Project; and Andrea Serrano, Executive Director, 
Organizers in the Land of Enchantment (OLE) provided testimony 
on the many election administration policies New Mexico employs 
that improve and expand access to the ballot, including 
automatic voter registration, online voter registration, same-
day registration, early in-person voting, and no-excuse 
absentee voting, and improvements to access for Native American 
voters.
    In the wake of the 2020 election, despite statements made 
by the state's leaders that Florida's election was fair and 
secure, Florida made several changes to its voting laws that 
erect barriers to the ballot and could lead to voter 
disenfranchisement--including placing new limitations on the 
use of drop boxes, mail-in ballots, and the provision of food 
and beverages to voters waiting to cast a ballot, among others. 
Additionally, the state enacted a new elections police force 
under the guise of bolstering election integrity and enacted a 
discriminatory redistricting plan. The Subcommittee held a 
field hearing in Tallahassee, Florida, entitled ``Voting in 
America: Access to the Ballot in Florida'' to examine these 
issues. Witnesses at the hearing included Brad Ashwell, Florida 
State Director, All Voting Is Local; Brenda Holt, County 
Commissioner, Gadsden County, Florida; Cecile Scoon, President, 
League of Women Voters of Florida; Matletha Bennette, Senior 
Staff Attorney, Voting Rights Program, Southern Poverty Law 
Center; and Chris Anderson, Supervisor of Elections, Seminole 
County, Florida (minority witness).
    Additionally, the Subcommittee held a roundtable in Upper 
Darby, Pennsylvania, entitled ``Voting in America: Access to 
the Ballot in Pennsylvania'' to examine ways in which voters in 
Pennsylvania can access the ballot freely, fairly, and 
securely, the security of Pennsylvania elections, ways in which 
ballot access and elections can continue to be improved, and 
ongoing attempts to undermine ballot access in the 
Commonwealth. Members heard from the Honorable Leigh M. 
Chapman, Acting Secretary of the Commonwealth, Pennsylvania 
Department of State; Dori Sawyer, Director of Elections, 
Montgomery County, Pennsylvania; Joan Duvall-Flynn, Past 
President, NAACP Pennsylvania State Conference of Branches & 
NAACP Media Branch; Benjamin Geffen, Staff Attorney, Public 
Interest Law Center of Philadelphia; and Al Schmidt, President 
& CEO, Committee of Seventy about these issues.

Examining Election-Related Mis- and Disinformation

    The spread of mis- and disinformation in American elections 
gained national attention following the 2016 election. The 
spread of false information continued in 2018, and the 2020 
election saw the spread of domestic misinformation and 
disinformation take center stage. America also experienced a 
rise in mis- and disinformation targeted specifically at Black 
and Latino communities, and the spread of mis- and 
disinformation in the Asian American and Pacific Islander 
community. Misinformation is ``information that is false, but 
not created or shared with the intention of causing harm.'' 
Disinformation is ``false information that is deliberately 
created to mislead, harm, or manipulate a person, social group, 
organization, our country. Increasingly, experts are also 
discussing malinformation, which is ``based on fact, but used 
out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.''\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \72\Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, U.S. Department 
of Homeland Security, Mis, Dis, Malinformation, available at https://
www.cisa.gov/mdm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The proliferation of election-related misinformation and 
disinformation seen during the 2016 and 2018 elections 
continued throughout the 2020 election cycle, and experts 
warned that the onslaught would continue throughout the 2022 
election, becoming more widespread as the midterm elections 
drew nearer. Following the spread of the Big Lie that the 2020 
election was stolen, lies and misleading information about the 
integrity of U.S. elections, voting systems and processes, and 
election officials were used as false justifications for 
restrictive voting laws, attempts at election subversion 
legislation, and a dramatic rise in threats to election 
officials.
    A roundtable on the ``Impact of Mis- and Disinformation on 
Elections in the Spanish Speaking Community'' held in Miami, 
Florida, began the committee's examination of election-related 
mis- and disinformation in the 117th Congress. Debbie Mucarsel-
Powell, former Member of Congress, Florida's 26th Congressional 
District; Raul L. Martinez, former Mayor of the City of Hialeah 
& Host of Sin Mordaza con Raul Martinez; Andrea Mercado, 
Executive Director, Florida Rising; Eduardo Gamarra, Professor, 
Department of Politics and International Relations and Director 
of the Latino Public Opinion Forum, Florida International 
University; and Ameer Patel, Vice President of Programs, Voto 
Latino & Latino Anti Disinformation Lab provided information on 
the targeting of communities with Spanish-language election-
related mis- and disinformation across multiple platforms such 
as Spanish-language radio, television, and newspaper 
programming, particularly in South Florida, and across the 
United States on social media apps, messaging apps, and other 
online forums.
    Building upon the roundtable, the Subcommittee held a 
hearing entitled, ``A Growing Threat: The Impact of 
Disinformation Targeted at Communities of Color.''At this 
hearing Stephanie Valencia, Co-Founder & President, EquisLabs; 
Emily Chi, Director of Telecommunications, Technology, and 
Media, Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC; Joi Chaney, 
Executive Director of the Washington Bureau & Senior Vice 
President of Policy and Advocacy, National Urban League; Dr. 
Samuel Woolley, Program Director of the Propaganda Research 
Lab, Center for Media and Engagement, University of Texas at 
Austin; and Carlos Curbelo, former Member of Congress, 
Florida's 26th Congressional District (minority witness) 
discussed the impact election-related disinformation has on 
communities of color, including voters who consume information 
primarily in a language other than English, and what can be 
done to combat the impact of that disinformation.
    The Subcommittee next examined how mis- and disinformation 
poses a threat to American democracy. A hearing entitled ``A 
Growing Threat: How Disinformation Damages American Democracy'' 
examined the damage done by mis-, dis-, and malinformation 
(MDM) during the 2020 election through present day. Mike 
Rothschild, Journalist and Author; Yosef Getachew, Media & 
Democracy Program Director, Common Cause; Edgardo Cortes, 
Election Security Advisor, Brennan Center for Justice; Lisa 
Deeley, Chairwoman, Philadelphia City Commissioners; and Gary 
Lawkowski, Senior Fellow, Institute of Free Speech, Counsel, 
Dhillon Law Group (minority witness) testified as witnesses at 
the hearing. Witnesses called by the Majority focused on four 
categories of harm related to the spread of MDM--threats to 
election officials, the passage of restrictive voting laws, 
discouraging voters in communities of color from participating 
in the democratic process, and undermining public confidence in 
American democracy.
    Finally, the Subcommittee on Elections held a hearing on 
the sources of disinformation. ``A Growing Threat: Foreign and 
Domestic Sources of Disinformation,'' focused on domestic and 
foreign sources of mis-, dis-, and malinformation, particularly 
how foreign disinformation differs from domestic disinformation 
and how they interact. The Subcommittee examined the trends and 
targets of these different disinformation campaigns ahead of 
the 2022 election. Witnesses John D. Cohen, former Acting 
Undersecretary for Intelligence and Analysis, U.S. Department 
of Homeland Security & Adjunct Professor, Georgetown 
University; Mark Juergensmeyer, Distinguished Professor 
Emeritus of Sociology and Global Studies, University of 
California, Santa Barbara; Jiore Craig, Head of Digital 
Integrity, Institute for Strategic Dialogue; and Renee DiResta, 
Research Manager, Stanford Internet Observatory provided 
testimony on the U.S. government approach to foreign and 
domestic MDM, the risk of violence posed by domestic 
originating MDM, how the global rise of right-wing religious 
neo--nationalism is manifesting in the U.S. and the ties to 
election-related MDM, trends in MDM around the globe, the 
commercial market for MDM, and how election-related social 
media content morphs from rumor to MDM.

Additional Subcommittee Activity

    House Resolution 8, establishing the rules of the House for 
the 117th Congress, requires that ``each standing committee 
(other than the Committee on Ethics) or each subcommittee 
thereof (other than a subcommittee on oversight) shall hold a 
hearing at which it receives testimony from Members, Delegates, 
and the Resident Commissioner on proposed legislation within 
its jurisdiction'' during the first session of the 117th 
Congress.\73\ Fulfilling this requirement, the Subcommittee on 
Elections held a Member Day hearing and received testimony from 
Representatives Claudia Tenney, Peter Meijer, John Katko, John 
Sarbanes, Larry Bucshon, Buddy Carter, Mike Johnson, and Van 
Taylor, as well as statements for the record from Reps. Pete 
Stauber and Mike Levin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \73\H. Res. 8, supra note 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contested Elections

    The Constitution vests substantial and broad authority in 
Congress with respect to federal elections, including to hear 
and decide contests brought to challenge the results of 
congressional elections that have been certified by the States. 
Article I, Section 5, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution 
provides that, ``Each House shall be the Judge of the 
Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members . . 
.'' Article I, Section 4, clause 1 provides that, ``The Time, 
Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and 
Representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the 
Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law 
make or alter such Regulations . . .'' As a preeminent 
constitutional and elections law scholar recently described 
this authority at a Committee hearing:

          In a word--one the U.S. Supreme Court has used 
        repeatedly for 142 years--Congress's power over 
        congressional elections is ``paramount.'' Under the 
        unambiguous text of the Elections Clause and a long 
        line of Supreme Court precedent, Congress has broad 
        plenary authority to regulate the time, place, and 
        manner of conducting congressional elections. The most 
        recent explication was Justice Scalia's opinion for 
        seven justices in Arizona v. Inter-Tribal Council of 
        Arizona back in 2013 where he referred to the ``broad'' 
        and ``comprehensive'' scope of the Elections Clause 
        power.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \74\The Elections Clause: Constitutional Interpretation and 
Congressional Exercise: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on H. Admin., 117th 
Cong. (2021), written statement of Daniel P. Tokaji, Fred W. & Vi 
Miller Dean and Professor of Law, University of Wisconsin Law School.

    In addition to the broad authority vested in Congress under 
the Elections Clause, ``Under express provisions of the U.S. 
Constitution, the final authority over the `Elections, Returns 
and Qualifications of its own Members' is clearly lodged within 
each House of Congress.''\75\ Thus, ``Together, `these two 
sections invest Congress with near-complete authority to 
establish the procedures and render final decisions relating to 
the election of its members.'''\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \75\L. Paige Whitaker, Contested Election Cases in the House of 
Representatives: 1933 to 2009, Cong. Res. Svc., Nov. 2, 2010.
    \76\H. Comm. on H. Admin., A History of the Committee on House 
Administration: 1947-2012 115 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The House has been vested with not only the authority but 
the responsibility from our nation's very beginning, and it has 
consistently and regularly exercised it from the First Congress 
through the 117th. Over our history, election contests have 
remained a normal and regular part of the biennial process for 
electing, recognizing, and seating new Members of the House. 
Although Congress has opted to revise the statutory framework 
by which it considers election contests, consideration of such 
contests has been a regular and recurring part of the House's 
constitutional prerogatives and work. Across our nation's 
history, more than 600 elections have been contested in the 
House, an average of more than five per Congress. Indeed, even 
discounting the Reconstruction period and its surge in election 
contests, there have been 110 contested election cases 
considered in the House since 1933--an average of more than two 
contests per a Congress.
    As discussed below, this regular pattern continued in the 
117th Congress. In 2021, contestants properly filed two 
elections contests under the FCEA to challenge a state-
certified election, one in Illinois's 14th Congressional 
District and one in Iowa's 2nd Congressional District. The 
Illinois case was brought by a Republican contestant against a 
Democratic contestee who was certified by her state as the 
winner; the Iowa case was brought by a Democratic contestant 
against a Republican contestee who was certified by her state 
as the winner.
    Although the authority for the House to determine the 
``Elections, Returns, and Qualifications of its own Members'' 
was clearly established by the Constitution and exercised 
immediately in the First Congress, since then, Congress has 
continued to refine a statutory framework to provide guidelines 
for how elections contests are to be considered and resolved. 
Initially, the Committee on Elections was guided by informal 
practice and precedent. Then, ``In 1798 the Fifth Congress 
(1797-1798) enacted a statute governing the process and 
procedures relating to contested elections. This statute 
expired at the end of the First Session of the Sixth Congress 
(1799-1800).''\77\ A half century later, ``In 1851, Congress 
enacted a second contested election statute, which, with the 
exception of minor amendments made in 1860, 1873, 1875, 1879, 
and 1887, remained substantially unchanged until enactment of 
the Federal Contested Elections Act of 1969 (FCEA).''\78\ The 
FCEA, which was last updated more than 50 years ago, remains 
the primary statutory framework which guides the House in 
considering elections contests today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \77\Id.
    \78\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

House Observer Program

    To administer its responsibilities under the Constitution, 
FCEA, and oversight of federal elections generally, the 
Committee coordinates efforts on a bipartisan basis to ensure 
that all ballots in close congressional races are counted 
fairly and accurately. The Committee has a long-standing 
practice of working collaboratively on a bipartisan basis to 
send observers to congressional districts as part of this 
program every two years to proactively monitor elections for 
which there was a reasonable basis to expect a contest might be 
filed. There is a record of the Committee sending observers in 
these circumstances in Committee summary of activities reports 
dating back to at least the 99th Congress.
    When requested by a candidate, the Committee deploys at 
least two observers, one from the Majority and one from the 
Minority, to the congressional district at issue. Specific 
observer responsibilities include: documenting the state of 
ballots during an extended count and/or recount and observing 
the security of voting machines, equipment, voter rolls, 
records, and stored ballots. The observations are critical to 
the United States House of Representatives and to the 
Committee, particularly in the event the House or Committee is 
directed to investigate or resolve any contested election.
    During the first month of the 117th Congress, the Committee 
continued its observation in New York's Twenty-Second 
Congressional District, which was the last House race to be 
certified after litigation delayed the certification.
    For the 2022 general election, the Committee received 24 
requests for observers from Members and/or candidates for 
congressional office. Two candidates later determined observers 
were unnecessary after consultation with the Committee. The 
Committee sent observers to 22 congressional districts. The 
Committee sent observers to ten states, including Arizona, 
California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, 
Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. In addition, the Committee 
sent two observers to observe a recount in Colorado's Third 
Congressional District.

Election Contests

    Election contests remain a regular and expected part of the 
federal election cycle. This regular pattern continued in the 
117th Congress. In 2020, contestants properly filed two 
elections contests under the FCEA to challenge a state-
certified election, one in Illinois's 14th Congressional 
District and one in Iowa's 2nd Congressional District, each of 
which was adjudicated during this Congress. The Illinois case 
was brought by a Republican contestant against a Democratic 
contestee who was certified by her state as the winner; the 
Iowa case was brought by a Democratic contestant against a 
Republican contestee who was certified by her state as the 
winner.
    On December 2, 2020, Rita Hart, a candidate for the House 
in Iowa's Second Congressional District, announced that her 
campaign would file a contest under the FCEA with the House to 
challenge the results of a district-wide recount. The recount 
resulted in a historically narrow six-vote margin between the 
candidates. Contestant Rita Hart properly filed a notice of 
contest under the Federal Contested Elections Act on December 
22, 2020, and Contestee Mariannette Miller-Meeks filed a motion 
to dismiss on January 21, 2021. After a response to the motion 
from the Contestant and a reply from the Contestee, the 
Committee decided on March 10, 2021, to postpone the motion to 
dismiss. On March 31, 2021, Contestant Hart announced she would 
be withdrawing her contest.
    On December 4, 2020, the Illinois State Board of Elections 
certified Representative Lauren Underwood as the winner of the 
November 2020 general election for Illinois' Fourteenth 
Congressional District by 5,347 votes. On January 4, 2021, 
Contestant James ``Jim'' Oberweis filed a notice of contest 
under the Federal Contested Election Act. On February 3, 2021, 
Contestee Underwood filed a motion to dismiss, citing two 
grounds. First, Contestee claimed the Contestant did not timely 
serve the Notice of Contest. Second, the Contestant failed to 
set forth with particularity, as required by 2 U.S.C. 
Sec. 382(b), grounds sufficient to change the result of the 
election. On April 28, 2022, the Committee voted unanimously in 
favor of a resolution to dismiss the contest. The resolution 
was agreed to by the House as a simple resolution on May 12, 
2021.
    On February 19, 2021, the Committee adopted a resolution to 
govern both contests. This resolution provides a general 
framework for future filings by the contestant and contestee in 
contested elections cases in the 117th Congress and serves as a 
model of impartial administration of contests for future 
Congresses. First, the resolution restricted filings from 
either party to those expressly authorized or directed by the 
FCEA or by the Committee on House Administration. It set 
standards for responses to motions to dismiss and replies to 
those responses. For all other filings the resolution set 
specific word limits--13,000 for a motion or brief and 6,000 
for a reply brief. It also provided that the Committee on House 
Administration would decide on any motion filed under 2 U.S.C. 
Sec. 383 on the papers, without a hearing or oral arguments. 
Finally, the resolution informed the parties that, if the 
motion to dismiss was denied or postponed, the Committee might 
request that each party file a brief within 10 days that 
answers specific questions put forward by the Committee.

Election Deniers

    During the 2022 election, a substantial number of 
candidates who were deemed election deniers (i.e., those who 
rejected or questioned the results of the 2020 presidential 
election) were on the ballot. These candidates were extremely 
dangerous to the health of American democracy, and they ran for 
offices at all levels, from local school boards to the United 
States Congress.
    According to a report from the Washington Post, nearly 300 
Republicans who sought congressional and state offices in 
forty-eight states were election deniers.\79\ Several election 
deniers in battleground states ran for offices which oversee 
elections, creating a very worrisome prospect that the 
elections in states that could potentially decide the 2024 
presidential election would be administered and certified by 
individuals that cast doubt on the security and integrity of 
U.S. elections. Fortunately, most of those candidates lost 
their elections, but election deniers who are running for 
office continue to be a threat to American democracy. This is 
an issue the Committee should explore further in the 118th 
Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \79\Adrian Blanco & Amy Gardner, Where Republican election deniers 
are on the ballot near you, Wash. Post (Nov. 8, 2022), available at 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/interactive/2022/election-
deniers-running-for-office-elections-2022/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

    During the 117th Congress, a wide range of media stories 
reported significant and troubling accounts about failures to 
comply with financial disclosure obligations and financial 
conflicts of interest in relation to stock trading and 
ownership across the entire federal government. These stories 
addressed, among other related issues, Members of Congress 
failing to file timely reports of securities transactions; 
allegations of possible insider trading by Members of Congress 
and other senior government officials, including at the White 
House, in the early weeks of the coronavirus pandemic; 
widespread problems with financial disclosure and conflicts of 
interest in the federal judiciary, including the failure by 
more than 130 federal judges to recuse themselves from cases in 
which they or their family members held stock in a party in the 
litigation possible financial conflicts of interest of Federal 
Reserve officials; and shortcomings of existing substantive 
financial disclosure requirements, particularly with respect to 
the wealthiest filers.
    The issues and shortcoming exposed in these news stories 
undermine the American people's faith and trust in the 
integrity of public officials and our federal government. In 
light of these concerns, the Speaker of the House tasked the 
Committee on House Administration with conducting a 
comprehensive review of deficiencies in our financial 
disclosure system and various legislative proposals introduced 
by Members to address financial disclosure issues and conflicts 
of interest in government, including imposing new restrictions 
on stock trading and ownership.
    In addition, 2022 marked the tenth anniversary of the 
enactment of the STOCK Act.\80\ That measure, which President 
Barack Obama signed into law in April 2012, amended the Ethics 
in Government Act of 1978, and imposed new financial disclosure 
requirements, among other provisions. The STOCK Act enhanced 
public disclosure requirements by introducing a requirement to 
report securities transactions throughout the year, closer in 
time to the transactions, rather than just the following year, 
on an annual financial disclosure statement. Among other 
things, the STOCK Act also affirmed that insider trading 
prohibitions apply to federal officials and clarified that all 
federal officials have a duty of confidentiality and trust to 
the United States and its citizens with respect to material, 
non-public information that they derive from their positions. 
The experience of a decade of the law in practice also provided 
an opportunity to review how officials have complied with the 
law and whether there are ways it could be updated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \80\STOCK Act, Pub. L. No. 112-244, 126 Stat. 291 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Accordingly, on April 7, 2022, the Committee held a full 
Committee hearing entitled, ``Examining Stock Trading Reforms 
for Congress'' to examine the underlying issues that have 
prompted the various legislative proposals, their details, and 
variations. The following witnesses testified: Jacob Straus, 
Specialist on the Congress, Congressional Research Service, 
Library of Congress; Donald Sherman, Senior Vice President and 
Chief Counsel, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in 
Washington; Liz Hempowicz, Director of Public Policy, Project 
on Government Oversight; Donna Nagy, C. Ben Dutton Professor of 
Business Law, Indiana University Maurer School of Law; and 
Jennifer Schulp, Director of Financial Regulation Studies, 
Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, CATO Institute. 
Following the hearing, the Committee asked substantial written 
questions for the hearing record of all of the witnesses, each 
of whom provided meaningful and important responses for the 
hearing record in addition to their important hearing 
testimony.
    Following development of that substantial hearing record--
the only hearing by any congressional committee in the 117th 
Congress to focus on this issue--and informed by a review of 
the more than 20 various legislative proposals by Members to 
address financial conflicts of interest in the federal 
government, including those that aim to restrict stock trading 
and ownership, on September 28, 2022, Chairperson Zoe Lofgren 
introduced H.R. 8990, the ``Combatting Financial Conflicts of 
Interest in Government Act.''\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \81\Combatting Financial Conflicts of Interest in Government Act, 
H.R. 8990, 117th Cong. (2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This government ethics reform bill includes a strong and 
comprehensive approach to combatting financial conflicts of 
interest across the entire federal government. It imposes new 
restrictions on financial activity by senior government 
officials and their spouses and dependent children, enhances 
transparency by strengthening financial disclosure requirements 
and ending disclosure loopholes, strengthens penalties for 
noncompliance with financial disclosure requirements and 
restrictions on financial activity, and ensures accountability 
by requiring public disclosure of enforcement efforts. These 
complementary measures, taken together, can help restore the 
American people's faith and trust in the integrity of public 
officials and our federal government.

           SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE MODERNIZATION OF CONGRESS

    The Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress 
(SCMC) was established by the House at the beginning of the 
116th Congress and was initially intended to exist for only the 
first session of the 116th Congress. The House then extended 
the SCMC, first for the remainder of the 116th Congress and 
then for the 117th Congress. Its mission was to investigate, 
study, hold public hearings, and develop recommendations to 
make Congress more effective, efficient and transparent.
    The SCMC passed a total of 204 recommendations, many of 
which addressed issues in the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
House Administration. The Committee implemented many of the 
recommendations, through legislation, Committee regulation, and 
policy direction to the officers of the House. Of the 204 
recommendations, 43 were fully implemented and 89 were 
partially implemented by the end of the 117th Congress. These 
recommendations included proposals to improve staff 
recruitment, diversity, retention, compensation, and benefits; 
professionalize internships and fellowships; improve 
accessibility; encourage civility and bipartisanship; 
strengthen Congressional oversight capacity; modernize district 
office operations; improve Congressional continuity; modernize 
the legislative process; and improve constituent engagement and 
constituent services. Upon the disbanding of the SCMC at the 
end of the 117th Congress, the SCMC recommended the House 
provide a home for ongoing modernization work within the 
Committee, and that the House should authorize a Modernization 
Select Committee at least every fourth Congress.

          MEMBER SERVICES AND EDUCATIONAL/OUTREACH ACTIVITIES

    Through the Member Services Division (Division), the 
Committee provided guidance and performed outreach to Member 
and Committee offices to ensure compliance with Committee 
regulations. In support of these efforts, the Division received 
and responded to over 2,000 inquiries from congressional 
offices, including receiving and formally responding to 80 
waiver letter requests from Member and Committee offices. As 
regulations changed through the 117th Congress, the Division 
provided various briefings to ensure that all Member and 
Committee offices had the adequate resources to maintain their 
continuity of operations.
    In addition, the Member Services team served as expert 
panelists for various professional development conferences 
hosted by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Assistant Speaker Katherine 
Clark, the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), and the 
Congressional Research Service (CRS).
    In further support of the efforts to ensure compliance with 
committee regulations, the Member Services Division reviewed 
and revised the Members' Congressional Handbook, the 
Committees' Congressional Handbook, the Guide to Outfitting and 
Maintaining an Office, and the Eligible Congressional Member 
Organizations Handbook. Because these sets of regulations often 
contained disclosure requirements, the Division routinely 
provided meaningful outreach to Member offices, committees, 
Eligible Congressional Member Organizations, and other House 
offices to ensure offices understood and complied with existing 
disclosure requirements.
    At the beginning of the 117th Congress, the Committee 
authorized a series of necessary measures to ensure the 
essential functions of the House of Representatives. These 
measures included authorizing the initial funding of the 
Members' Representational Allowance (MRA) and committee funds, 
establishing certain reimbursement rates, and setting various 
House fees. In cooperation with the Office of the Speaker, the 
Committee provided weekly administrative updates to Majority 
Chiefs of Staff.

Residential Security Program and Security Related Expenses

    In August 2022, in cooperation with the House Sergeant at 
Arms (SAA), the Committee established the Residential Security 
Program, under which the House paid for certain residential 
security upgrades, maintenance and monthly monitoring fees. 
Members were allotted up to $10,000 for security equipment and 
associated installation costs for their personal residence(s). 
Additionally, the House covered up to $150 per month in 
monitoring fees for each Member. Through both electronic Dear 
Colleagues and virtual forums, the Committee and SAA briefed 
the House community and addressed frequently asked questions on 
the details of the new program. In addition to the Residential 
Security Program, House rules and Committee regulations allowed 
the use of the MRA for certain security related expenses. As 
part of the Committee's dedication to the safety of the 
Congressional community, the Committee conducted briefings and 
provided materials to congressional offices regarding 
permissible use of the MRA for security related expenses.

Educational Expenses

    In October 2022, under the authority of and pursuant to 2 
U.S.C. Sec. 4313, 2 U.S.C. Sec. 5341(d), clause 1(k)(1) of rule 
X, clause 1(k)(6) of rule X, and clause 1(k)(9) of rule X, the 
Committee amended the Members' Congressional Handbook and 
Committees' Congressional Handbook to allow reimbursement of 
expenses related to professional development programs or 
courses that directly related to the employees' official duties 
and provided a direct benefit to the office, even if the 
program provided a certification upon completion. This is an 
important tool for Member offices and committees alike to 
retain staff and provide staff with essential professional 
development trainings to directly support their professional 
growth and support Members' official and representational 
duties and the work of committees.

New Member Orientation

    The Committee is responsible for planning and executing the 
New Member Orientation (NMO) program, a bipartisan 
comprehensive orientation program for newly elected Members of 
Congress, along with the related travel and logistics for 
Members-elect and their designated aides and transition aides. 
As part of the transition to the 118th Congress, the Committee 
hosted 78 Members-elect for NMO. The in-person program was held 
in Washington, D.C., from November 13, 2022, to November 19, 
2022, and from November 28, 2022, to December 2, 2022. In 
addition, Members-elect and aides participated in virtual 
programming from November 21, 2022, to November 23, 2022.
    For the 118th Congress NMO, the Committee leveraged the 
newly established CAO Coach Program to facilitate the program. 
Working closely with the Committee, CAO Coaches planned and 
executed 43 live, bipartisan briefings and panels of Members, 
senior staff and other institutional partners. Programming 
included but was not limited to: Finding and Working with the 
Right Chief of Staff; Member Security in the District; Member 
Security in Washington, D.C.; Cybersecurity; Responsibilities; 
MRA Budgeting Basics; ``If I Knew Then What I Know Now;'' 
Mandatory Ethics Training; Hiring a Diverse and Inclusive 
Workforce; Office Design; and much more. Members-elect also 
participated in the highly anticipated room selection lottery 
and suite selection.
    Moreover, the CAO Coaches, in consultation with the 
Committee developed a 265-page briefing book with a panoply of 
resources for incoming Members on topics ranging from starting 
an office from scratch and finding a district office, to 
constituent service and online presence.
    After the first week, Members-elect were provided with an 
anonymous survey to provide feedback on the NMO Program. The 
feedback was overwhelmingly positive. Comments from incoming 
Members included: ``It's fantastic--so much info. Really well 
done,'' ``Y'all have been wonderful,'' and ``The first week or 
orientation has been phenomenal.'' The survey also asked 
incoming Members what they liked best and least from the first 
week. These answers helped the Committee slightly adjust 
programming for the second week to provide the incoming Members 
the exact information they desired.
    Many staff from the Committee, CAO, and other offices made 
NMO such a success and the Committee is grateful for all of 
their hard work. In particular, the Committee wishes to thank 
Edward ``Eddie'' Flaherty, its longtime Chief Clerk, for his 
leadership of the planning of NMO, which began early in 2022, 
and was a significant factor in its success.

                     HOUSE PAID INTERNSHIP PROGRAM

    The Committee continued its collaboration with the CAO to 
expand the House Paid Internship Program established in the 
116th Congress. In 2022, the Committee adopted Committee 
Resolution 117-19, which permitted Committees to participate in 
the House Paid Internship Program and increased Member 
personnel office budgets to $35,000. In the first six months of 
2022 alone, approximately 3,000 paid interns were appointed in 
the House Paid Internship Program, with over 95 percent of 
Member offices, 100 percent of Leadership offices and 74 
percent of Committees participating. In cooperation with the 
Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), Office of Payroll and 
Benefits, the Committee provided guidance and materials to both 
Member and Committee offices through internal channels of 
communications and virtual forums.

                         Hearings and Meetings


Hearings

Organizational Meeting for the 117th Congress

Full Committee

February 10, 2021

A Committee Resolution to establish procedures in contested election 
        cases properly filed under the Federal Contested Election Act, 
        and related matters.

Full Committee

February 19, 2021

Strengthening American Democracy

Full Committee

February 25, 2021

Witnesses:

    Ricky Hatch, CPA, County Clerk/Auditor; Stacey Abrams, 
Founder and Chair, Fair Fight Action; Guy-Uriel Charles, Edward 
and Ellen Schwarzman Professor of Law, Duke University School 
of Law; Hon. Shenna Bellows, Secretary of State, State of 
Maine.

Contestee Mariannette Miller-Meeks's Motion to Dismiss Notice of 
        Contest Regarding the Election for Representative in the 117th 
        Congress from the Second Congressional District of Iowa, and 
        for other purposes.

Full Committee

March 10, 2021

Witnesses:

    N/A

Committee Funding for the 117th Congress

Full Committee

March 12, 2021

Witnesses:

    Hon. Madeleine Dean, Vice Chair, Committee on the 
Judiciary; Hon. Jim Jordan, Ranking Member, Committee on the 
Judiciary

Voting in America: Ensuring Free and Fair Access to the Ballot

Subcommittee on Elections

April 1, 2021

Witnesses:

    Allison Riggs, Interim Executive Director/Chief Counsel, 
Voting Rights, Southern Coalition for Social Justices; Sonja 
Diaz, Founding Director, Latino Policy & Politics Initiative, 
UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs; Marcia Johnson-Blanco, 
Co-Director, Voting Rights Project, Lawyers' Committee for 
Civil Rights UnderLaw; Debo Adegbile, Partner, Wilmer Cutler 
Pickering Hale & Dorr, LLP; Hon. Kim Wyman, Secretary of State, 
State of Washington.

Oversight of the United States Capitol Police and Preparations for and 
        Response to the Attack of January 6th

Full Committee

April 15, 2021

Witness:

    Michael A. Bolton, Inspector General, United States Capitol 
Police.

H. Res. 316, Providing for the expenses of certain committees of the 
        House of Representatives in the One Hundred Seventeenth 
        Congress, and Committee Resolution 117-13, a Resolution to 
        Approve Franked Mail Allowances for Committees for the 117th 
        Congress

Full Committee

April 15, 2021

Witnesses:

    N/A

Disposition of Contested Elections, and for Other Purposes

Full Committee

April 28, 2021

Witnesses:

    N/A

Voting in America: The Potential for Voter List Purges to Interfere 
        with Free and Fair Access to the Ballot

Subcommittee on Elections

May 6, 2021

Witnesses:

    Hon. Joshua L. Kaul, Attorney General, State of Wisconsin; 
Sophia Lin Lakin, Deputy Director, Voting Rights Project, ACLU; 
Dr. Marc Meredith, Associate Professor, University of 
Pennsylvania; Kaylan Phillips, Litigation Counsel, Public 
Interest Legal Foundation.

Oversight of the January 6th Attack: Review of the Architect of the 
        Capitol's Emergency Preparedness

Full Committee

May 12, 2021

Witness:

    Christopher P. Failla, Inspector General, Architect of the 
Capitol.

Voting in America: The Potential for Voter ID Laws, Proof-of-
        Citizenship Laws, and Lack of Multi-Lingual Support to 
        Interfere with Free and Fair Access to the Ballot

Subcommittee on Elections

May 24, 2021

Witnesses:

    Dr. Lonna Rae Atkeson, Professor, University of New Mexico; 
Matthew Lee Campbell, Staff Attorney, Native American Rights 
Fund; Dr. Nazita Lajevardi, Professor, Michigan State 
University; Andrea Senteno, Regional Counsel, Mexican American 
Legal Defense Fund; Lori Roman, President, American 
Constitutional Rights Union; Dr. Matt Barreto, Professor, 
University of California, Los Angeles.

Voting in America: The Potential for Polling Place Quality and 
        Restrictions on Opportunities to Vote to Interfere with Free 
        and Fair Access to the Ballot

Subcommittee on Elections

June 11, 2021

Witnesses:

    Dr. Stephen Pettigrew, Director of Data and Science, 
University of Pennsylvania; Jesselyn McCurdy, Interim Executive 
VP for Government Affairs, Leadership Conference on Civil and 
Human Rights; Kevin Morris, Quantitative Researcher, Democracy, 
Brennan Center for Justice; Mimi Marziani, President, Texas 
Civil Rights Project; Donald Palmer, Chair, U.S. Election 
Assistance Commission; Dr. Michael C Herron, Professor, 
Dartmouth University; Gilda Daniels, Director of Litigation, 
Advancement Project; Danielle Lang, Director, Voting Rights; 
Campaign Legal Center; Isabel Longoria, Elections 
Administrator; Harris County, Texas; Ashlee Titus, Board Member 
and Corporate Secretary, Lawyers Democracy Fund.

Oversight of the January 6th Attack: United States Capitol Police 
        Containment Emergency Response Team and First Responders Unit

Full Committee

June 15, 2021

Witnesses:

    Michael A. Bolton, Inspector General, United States Capitol 
Police; Gretta L. Goodwin, Director, Justice and Law 
Enforcement Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Voting in America: A National Perspective on the Right to Vote, Methods 
        of Election, Jurisdictional Boundaries, and Redistricting

Subcommittee on Elections

June 24, 2021

Witnesses:

    Jerry Vattamala, Director, Democracy Program, Asian 
American Legal Defense and Education Fund; Patty Ferguson-
Bohnee, Director, Indian Legal Clinic, Sandra Day O' Connor 
College of Law; Eric H. Holder, Chairman, National Democratic 
Redistricting Committee; Thor Hearne, Founding Partner, True 
North Law Group; Thomas Saenz, President & General Counsel, 
Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Janai 
Nelson, Associate Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense Fund; 
Michael Waldman, President, Brennan Center for Justice, NYU 
School of Law; Wade Henderson, Interim President & CEO, 
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; Sara 
Frankenstein, Partner, Gunderson, Palmer, Nelson & Ashmore.

The Elections Clause: Constitutional Interpretation and Congressional 
        Exercise

Full Committee

July 12, 2021

Witnesses:

    Jack Rakove, Coe Professor of History and American Studies, 
Stanford University; Franita Tolson, Professor of Law and Vice 
Dean for Faculty and Academic Affairs, University of Southern 
California Gould School of Law; Daniel P. Tokaji, Fred W. & Vi 
Miller Dean and Professor of Law, University of Wisconsin 
School of Law; Hon. Michael G. Adams, Secretary of State, 
Commonwealth of Kentucky.

Election Subversion: A Growing Threat to Electoral Integrity

Full Committee

July 28, 2021

Witnesses:

    Hon. John P. Sarbanes, Member of Congress; Hon. Nikema 
Williams, Member of Congress; Hon. Burgess Owens, Member of 
Congress; Gowri Ramachandran, Senior Counsel, Brennan Center 
for Justice; Adrian Fontes, former County Recorder, Maricopa 
County, Arizona; Janice Winfrey, City Clerk, City of Detroit; 
Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, Chairman, Election Transparency 
Initiative.

Oversight of the Renovations to the Cannon House Office Building: 
        Lessons Learned

Full Committee

August 5, 2021

Witnesses:

    J. Brett Blanton, Architect of the Capitol; Christopher P. 
Failla, Inspector General, Architect of the Capitol; Terrell G. 
Dorn, Managing Director, Infrastructure Operations, Government 
Accountability Office.

Oversight of the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights: Lessons 
        Learned from the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 
        Reform Act

Full Committee

November 9, 2021

Witnesses:

    Barbara Camens, Member, Board of Directors, Office of 
Congressional Workplace Rights; Teresa James, Deputy Executive 
Director for the House, Office of Congressional Workplace 
Rights; Barbara Childs Wallace, Chair, Board of Directors, 
Office of Congressional Workplace Rights.

Oversight of the Smithsonian Institution: Protecting Smithsonian 
        Facilities and Collections Against Climate Change

Full Committee

December 16, 2021

Witnesses:

    Nancy J. Bechtol, Facilities Director, The Smithsonian 
Institution; Cathy Helm, Inspector General, The Smithsonian 
Institution; Phetmano Phannavong, Senior Projects Manager, 
Atkins North America.

Member Day

Subcommittee on Elections

December 17, 2021

Witnesses:

    Hon. Larry Bucshon, Member of Congress; Hon. Earl L. 
``Buddy'' Carter, Member of Congress; Hon. Mike Johnson, Member 
of Congress; Hon. John Katko, Member of Congress; Hon. Mike 
Levin, Member of Congress; Hon. Peter Meijer, Member of 
Congress; Hon. John P. Sarbanes, Member of Congress; Hon. Pete 
Stauber, Member of Congress; Hon. Van Taylor, Member of 
Congress; Hon. Claudia Tenney, Member of Congress.

Big Data: Privacy Risks and Needed Reforms in the Public and Private 
        Sectors

Full Committee

February 16, 2022

Witnesses:

    Hugh Halpern, Director, Government Publishing Office; 
Daniel Castro, Vice President, Information Technology & 
Innovation Foundation; Marshall Erwin, Chief Security Officer, 
Mozilla Corporation; Caitriona Fitzgerald, Deputy Director, 
Electronic Privacy Information Center; Shoshana Zuboff, Charles 
Edward Wilson Professor Emerita, Harvard Business School.

Oversight of the January 6th Attack: Ongoing Review of the United 
        States Capitol Police Inspector General Flash Reports

Full Committee

February 17, 2022

Witnesses:

    Michael A. Bolton, Inspector General, United States Capitol 
Police; Daniel Schuman, Policy Director, Demand Progress 
Education Fund.

Oversight of Section 220 of the Congressional Accountability Act: 
        Implementing the Rights of Congressional Staff to Collectively 
        Bargain

Full Committee

March 2, 2022

Witnesses:

    Mark Strand, President, The Congressional Institute; John 
D. Uelmen, General Counsel, Office of Congressional Workplace 
Rights.

Voting in America: Ensuring Free and Fair Access to the Ballot in Texas

Subcommittee on Elections

March 17, 2022

Witnesses:

    Gary Bledsoe, President, Texas NAACP State Conference; Andy 
Brown, Travis County Judge, Travis County, Texas; Hani Mirza, 
Legal Director, Voting Rights Program, Texas Civil Rights 
Project; Nina Perales, Vice President of Litigation, Mexican 
American Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Cindy Siegel, 
Chair, Harris County Republican Party, Houston, Texas.

H. Res. ___, Adjusting the Amount provided for the expenses of certain 
        Committees of the House of Representatives in the One Hundred 
        Seventeenth Congress

Full Committee

April 7, 2022

Witnesses:

    N/A

Examining Stock Trading Reforms for Congress

Full Committee

April 7, 2022

Witnesses:

    Liz Hempowicz, Director of Public Policy, Project on 
Government Oversight; Donna C. Nagy, C. Ben Dutton Professor of 
Business Law, Indiana University Maurer School of Law; Jennifer 
J. Schulp, Director of Financial Regulation Studies, CATO 
Institute; Donald Sherman, Senior Vice President and Chief 
Counsel, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington; 
Jacob Straus, Specialist on the Congress, Congressional 
Research Service.

Voting in America: Access to the Ballot in New Mexico

Subcommittee on Elections--Field Hearing in Santa Fe, New Mexico

April 11, 2022

Witnesses:

    Ahtza Dawn Chavez, Executive Director, NAVA Education 
Project; Heather Ferguson, Executive Director, Common Cause New 
Mexico; Hon. Maggie Toulouse Oliver, Secretary of State, State 
of New Mexico; Andrea Serrano, Executive Director, OLE.

A Growing Threat: The Impact of Disinformation Targeted at Communities 
        of Color

Subcommittee on Elections

April 28, 2022

Witnesses:

    Joi Chaney, Executive Director of the Washington Bureau and 
Senior Vice President for Policy & Advocacy, National Urban 
League; Emily Chi, Directorof Telecommunications, Technology, 
and Media, Asian Americans Advancing Justice; Hon. Carlos 
Curbelo, former Member of Congress; Stephanie Valencia, Co-
Founder and President, Equis; Dr. Samuel Woolley, Program 
Director, Propaganda Research Lab, Center for Media and 
Engagement, University of Texas, Austin.

Voting in America: Access to the Ballot in Florida

Subcommittee on Elections--Field Hearing in Tallahassee, Florida

May 25, 2022

Witnesses:

    Chris Anderson, Supervisor of Elections, Seminole County, 
Sanford, Florida; Brad Ashwell, Florida State Director, All 
Voting Is Local; Matletha Bennette, Senior Staff Attorney, 
Voting Rights Group, Southern Poverty Law Center; Brenda Holt, 
Commissioner, Gadsden County Board of County Commissioners, 
Gadsden County, Florida; Cecile Scoon, President, League of 
Women Voters of Florida.

A Growing Threat: How Disinformation Damages American Democracy

Subcommittee on Elections

June 22, 2022

Witnesses:

    Edgardo Cortes, Election Security Advisor, The Brennan 
Center for Justice; Lisa Deeley, Chairwoman, Philadelphia City 
Commissioners, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Yosef Getachew, 
Media & Democracy Program Director, Common Cause; Gary 
Lawkowski, Senior Fellow, Institute for Free Speech; Mike 
Rothschild, Journalist.

A Growing Threat: Foreign and Domestic Sources of Disinformation

Subcommittee on Elections

July 27, 2022

Witnesses:

    John D. Cohen, Adjunct Professor, Security Studies Program, 
Georgetown University; Jiore Craig, Head of Digital Integrity, 
Institute for Strategic Dialogue; Renee DiResta, Research 
Manager, Stanford University Internet Observatory; Mark 
Juergensmeyer, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Sociology 
and Global Studies, Department of Global Studies, University of 
California, Santa Barbara.

The Independent State Legislature Theory and its Potential to Disrupt 
        our Democracy

Full Committee

July 28, 2022

Witnesses:

    Richard H. Pildes, Sudler Family Professor of 
Constitutional Law, New York University School of Law; Carolyn 
Shapiro, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Academic 
Administration and Strategic Initiatives, Chicago-Kent College 
of Law; Eliza Sweren-Becker, Counsel, Democracy Program, 
Brennan Center for Justice.

                         Committee Resolutions

    The Committee passed 24 resolutions over the course of the 
117th Congress. These resolutions are reprinted in Appendix I--
Committee Resolutions.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                             MINORITY VIEWS

    Throughout the 117th Congress, the Minority is thankful for 
the partnership shown across the aisle regarding a number of 
oversight and operational initiatives. The Minority is 
similarly thankful for the comprehensive approach taken in this 
Summaries of Activities report compiled by the Majority.
    The inclusion of the Minority Oversight Priorities, 
beginning on page 33 of this report, showcase the Minority's 
top initiatives and priorities over the last two years. 
Although progress has been made on the initiative of staff, the 
Minority is disappointed by the lack of Member involvement in 
holding the House Officers and directorates accountable.
    In the 117th Congress, during which the House has withstood 
a pandemic, the adoption of teleworking technologies, proxy 
voting, the attack on January 6, and more, the Majority has 
failed to host consistent oversight hearings to learn firsthand 
about the health of our institutional partners. During this 
Congress, the Majority did not call any House Officer before 
the Committee to discuss strategic plans, budget authorization, 
or organizational health and needs. The Clerk of the House and 
the Chief Administrative Officer were neither called before the 
Members of the Committee on House Administration in the last 
two years--this is especially noteworthy given the large amount 
of organizational growth within the CAO and the great 
alterations in the Clerk's standard operating procedures during 
and post-pandemic, all of which is summarized in this report.
    The lack of involvement of the Members of the Committee in 
overseeing the operations of the House runs counter to the 
Committee's purpose. The Minority looks forward to re-
establishing regular committee business in the 118th Congress 
by re-instituting a regular and comprehensive oversight hearing 
schedule.

                           FEDERAL ELECTIONS

    To the Minority's disappointment, the Majority continued in 
the 117th Congress its recent tradition of hyper-partisan 
efforts in the federal elections space.
    Despite the Minority's stated goal of returning to 
bipartisan oversight of the nation's federal elections, the 
Majority refused to engage in any meaningful way, pushing 
through their priority legislation, The For the People Act 
(H.R. 1), the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (H.R. 
4), the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act (H.R. 5746), and the 
Presidential Election Reform Act (H.R. 8873), without any real 
efforts to negotiate and over the Minority's concerns with the 
constitutionality and practicality of each of those bills, none 
of which became law. Further, with respect to H.R. 8873, the 
Majority engaged in a concerted effort to exclude the 
Minority's involvement in ongoing, bipartisan, and bicameral 
conversations concerning reform of the Electoral Count Act of 
1887.
    To achieve this, the Majority used a variety of methods 
ranging from radio silence and refusal to engage to creating 
the fiction that Members not even on the Committee could stand 
in for the Committee Minority in bicameral conversations on 
this topic to veiled threats made to any outside experts 
interested in working with both sides of the Committee on such 
an important issue. As it stands, H.R. 8873 passed the House on 
a partisan basis and was immediately discounted by the Senate, 
which had engaged in months of bipartisan conversations on 
workable reform. During debate over this failed legislation, 
Ranking Member Davis recounted the Majority's efforts to 
exclude the Committee's Minority remarked that the Senate's 
bipartisan Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition 
Improvement Act of 2022 (S. 4573) would have been a good place 
to begin conversations on the House side.
    The Committee's Minority notes that, despite unprecedented 
efforts by the Majority to disrupt the legislative process, the 
text of the bipartisan S. 4573 will become law as part of the 
FY2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 2617).
    In the 117th Congress, the Committee Minority formalized 
its federal election oversight efforts under the banner of the 
``Faith in Elections Project'', a unified approach to 
strengthen our nation's decentralized elections system, 
highlight its successes, and offer a constructive approach for 
the resolution of weaknesses by state and local officials. This 
project builds on Ranking Member Davis' work since 2019 and 
provides a comprehensive effort to offer educational 
opportunities with respect to how American elections are 
administered, to engage with key stakeholders, and to put forth 
thoughtful, conservative reforms for the improved 
administration of federal elections, protection of free speech, 
and protection of the right to vote for military members and 
their families.
    The Project trained hundreds of staff members on issues 
relating to election administration, election policy, free 
speech, and campaign finance through a series of webinars over 
the summer of 2021, each taught by experts in the field. 
Further to that point, Ranking Member Davis hosted a series of 
Member Dinners for Members of the Republican Conference. Each 
dinner featured one or more trusted election experts who 
engaged in colloquy with Members on elections issues.
    Since the beginning of concerted engagement efforts, the 
Committee Minority has traveled to approximately 20 states and 
territories to meet with state/territorial and local elections 
officials, state/territorial legislators, and members of the 
regulated communities to learn about and highlight the 
successes of election administration in those jurisdictions and 
learn about policy areas where the federal government has 
overstepped its authority or where the federal government's 
involvement is otherwise detrimental and areas of federal 
authority where Congress can make helpful improvements.
    Ranking Member Davis also hosted a podcast series, the 
Faith in Elections Podcast, where he discussed key elections 
issues with experts in the field. Podcast topics and guests 
included
    (1) How the Federal Election Commission Works and Its Role 
and Impact on Free Speech with Allen Dickerson, Chair of the 
FEC, Lee Goodman, former FEC Chair, and Prof. Bradley A Smith, 
former FEC Chair and current Chair of the Institute for Free 
Speech.
    (2) The Fundamentals of Campaign Finance with Joy Lee, 
General Counsel for the Republican State Leadership Committee, 
Caroline Hunter, former FEC Chair, and Chris Winkelman, 
election law partner at Holtzman Vogel and former NRCC General 
Counsel.
    (3) Understanding the Different Types of Equipment Used to 
Facilitate Elections and the Security Measures to Protect Them 
with Chris Anderson, Supervisor of Elections for Seminole 
County, Florida, Aaron Ockerman, Executive Director for the 
Ohio Association of Election Officials, and Christy McCormick, 
an EAC Commissioner.
    (4) Behind the Scenes of How an Election is Run from Start 
to Finish with now-Representative-elect Nick LaLota, former 
Republican Commissioner for the Suffolk County, N.Y., Elections 
Commission, and Terry Burton, Director of the Wood County, 
Ohio, Board of Elections.
    As both history and recent events have shown, in the 
limited situations when it is prudent for federal election 
legislation is even to become law, it must be bipartisan. In 
contrast to the hyper-partisan legislation brought forth by the 
Majority this Congress, none of which was ever considered in 
Committee, Minority Committee Members have spent the 117th 
Congress engaging with elections officials of both parties and 
stakeholders across the spectrum through the Faith in Elections 
Program to develop--publicly and over the course of years--a 
proposal for federal election, The American Confidence in 
Elections (ACE) Act. The ACE Act, which will be the key 
Republican election integrity bill in the 118th Congress, also 
makes the biggest legislative effort in a generation to protect 
political speech and addresses continued disappointing 
challenges faced by military and overseas voters and their 
families.
    The ACE Act focuses on three main pillars,
    (5) Providing States with the tools necessary to implement 
election integrity measures and removing federal impediments to 
implementation;
    (6) Exercising Congress' constitutional responsibility to 
ensure effective governance in the nation's capital city by 
implementing election integrity measures in Washington, D.C.--
all based on proven policy from the States; and
    (7) Protecting free speech.
    The bill emphasizes that the Constitution reserves to the 
States the primary role in establishing federal election law 
and administering federal elections, all eligible Americans who 
want to vote must be given the opportunity to do so--and all 
lawful votes must be counted, and political speech--regardless 
of voice--is protected by the First Amendment.
State Tools to Improve Election Integrity and Voter Confidence
    The ACE Act will
    (1) Provide States with tools to protect election integrity 
and will remove outdated federal policies that get in the way;
    (2) Prohibit non-citizen voting in federal elections;
    (3) Allow States to use REAL ID as proof of citizenship; 
and
    (4) Establish a ``federal forum'' at the EAC for state 
elections officials to share best practices and learn from 
other states.
    Further, the ACE Act will be paired with model state 
legislation and model state referenda (based on policies the 
ACE Act implements in D.C.). for consideration by state 
legislators.

D.C. as an Example

    The ACE Act will
          (1) Exercise Congress' constitutional responsibility 
        to ensure effective governance in the nation's capital 
        city by implementing proven election integrity and 
        voter confidence measures--the same that will be 
        included in model language given to states;
          (2) Requires photo voter ID to vote in person or to 
        request an absentee ballot;
          (3) Requires annual list maintenance;
          (4) Prohibits same-day registration;
          (5) Prohibits ballot harvest;
          (6) Prohibits automatically mailed ballots; and
          (7) Requires post-election audits.

Protecting Free Speech

    The ACE Act
          (1) Protects all voices--including conservative 
        voices--and Americans' First Amendment rights to speak 
        political views and support candidates, causes, and 
        organizations of their choice without fear of 
        retribution;
          (2) Strengthens state party committees and non-profit 
        organizations;
          (3) Curbs the use of private funds for public 
        election administration, including so-called 
        Zuckerbucks; and
          (4) Forbids the establishment of any ``Misinformation 
        Czar''.
    Additionally, Subcommittee on Elections Ranking Member 
Bryan Steil introduced the Confirmation of Congressional 
Observer Access Act (H.R. 8517), a Committee Minority bill 
designed to resolve bipartisan issues with congressional 
observer access and developed in conversation with the 
Majority. In fact, the two sides of the Committee had an 
agreement in principle to move the bill on suspension. However, 
when push came to shove, the Minority resorted to its old PERA-
style tricks and refused to speak to the Minority about the 
bill, apparently inventing nominal and previously unstated 
concerns about the text when pressed on the issue during debate 
on the House Floor. Again, had the Majority simply engaged in 
the standard legislative process, the Minority is sure both 
sides could have kept their agreement in principle and solved 
this serious issue.
    Further, the Committee Minority published two reports this 
Congress:
    (1) The Elections Clause: States' Primary Constitutional 
Authority Over Elections, August 12, 2021. Republicans believe 
that every eligible voter who wants to vote must be able to do 
so, and all lawful votes must be counted according to state 
law. Through an examination of history, precedent, the Framers' 
words, debates concerning ratification, opinions of the Supreme 
Court, and the Constitution itself, this report explains the 
constitutional division of power envisioned by the Framers 
between the States and the federal government with respect to 
federal election law, policy, and administration. Article 1, 
Section 4 of the Constitution explains that States have the 
primary authority over election administration--the ``times, 
places, and manner of holding elections''. Conversely, the 
Constitution grants Congress a purely secondary role to alter 
or create election law only in extreme cases, such as invasion, 
legislative neglect, or obstinate refusal to pass election law 
or to election Members of Congress. As do other aspects of our 
federal system, this division of sovereignty continues to serve 
to protect one of Americans' most precious freedoms, the right 
to vote.
    (2) An Unprecedented and Unconstitutional Power Grab: How 
Democrats are Abusing the Constitution to Nationalize 
Elections, August 24, 2021 (joint staff report with the 
Committee on the Judiciary Minority). This extensive joint 
report examines the legal and constitutional issues with H.R. 
4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, a partisan 
bill not marked up in our Committee, which did not pass the 
Senate. The Report disproves Democrats' false claims of 
widespread voter suppression and details how the legislation in 
question would take away the people's power to decide election 
law, instead giving that authority to unelected bureaucrats at 
the federal Department of Justice.
    Finally, pursuant to constitutional authority (Art. 1, Sec. 
5) delegated by the House to the Committee, the Minority 
Members again operated a robust Election Observer Program, 
which trained dozens of Republican congressional staff in 
professional election observation and deployed such observers 
to monitor close House races across the country or those 
experiencing particularly difficult election administration 
issues. With the stated goal of ensuring productive cooperation 
with the state and local officials who administer federal 
elections while also meeting the strict requirement that the 
House serve as the final ``Judge of the elections, returns and 
qualifications of its own Members'', the Minority Members 
engaged in coast-to-coast outreach to ensure each State and 
each territory with a federal election knew the program's 
parameters and how it would operate. As always, the House uses 
the independent record developed by its Official Election 
Observers to prepare for possible seating challenges or 
election contests in the following Congress.
    The Committee sent the following correspondence with 
respect to its oversight of federal elections:
    1. Date: March 19, 2021. Subject: GOP Members Raise 
Conflict Of Interest, Ethical Issues With Democrat Attorney 
Marc Elias Working To Unseat Rep. Miller-Meeks. Addressee: 
Chairperson Zoe Lofgren (D-CA, 19th District). Response: None.
    2. Date: February 10, 2022. Subject: 2020 Puerto Rico 
Primary not having enough ballots on Election Day. Addressee: 
David Skeel Jr., Chairman of Financial Oversight and Management 
Board for Puerto Rico. Response: Yes, April 29, 2022.
    3. Date: March 11, 2022. Subject: Report that Harris 
County, Texas located 10,000 ballots not counted during the 
primary. Addressee: Isabel Longoria, Elections Administrator, 
Harris County. Response: None.
    4. Date: March 29, 2022. Subject: Nine House Republican 
Committee Leaders Raise Concerns over Biden's Executive Order 
on Promoting Access to Voting. Addressee(s): Susan Rice, 
Director of Domestic Policy Council, Shalanda Young, Director 
of the Office of Management and Budget. Response: Yes, on July 
15, 2022 from OMB Director Young.
    5. Date: April 1, 2022. Subject: Illinois Refusal to 
Release Voter Registration List. Addressee: Ian K. Linnabary, 
Chair of the Illinois State Board of Elections. Response: None.
    6. Date: April 19, 2022. Subject: Request immediate 
evacuation assistance from Pakistan for Mohammad Ali Setegh, 
the former Chief Executive Officer of the Afghanistan Electoral 
Complaints Commission. Addressee: Uzra Zeya, Under Secretary of 
State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights 
Department of State. Response: None.
    7. Date: April 21, 2022. Subject: Concerns Stacey Abrams' 
New Georgia Project conducted voter education in Georgia high 
schools. Addressee: Brad Raffensperger, Secretary of State, 
Georgia. Response: None.
    8. Date: May 16, 2022. Subject: Report that 104 live 
ballots were found unattended in a mail tray on a sidewalk in 
East Hollywood. Addressee: Dean C. Logan, Registrar-Recorder/
County Clerk, Los Angeles County, California. Response: None.
    9. Date: June 3, 2022. Subject: Report that early ballots 
were illegally tabulated in primary elections. Addressee: Mike 
Kaplan, Chair, Macon-Bibb County Board of Elections, Georgia. 
Response: None.
    10. Date: June 3, 2022. Subject: Report that early ballots 
were illegally tabulated and request information on the 
security of the early-tabulated results. Addressee: Janine 
Eveler, Director of Elections & Registration, Cobb County, 
Georgia. Response: None.
    11. Date: June 3, 2022. Subject: Last minute software 
update caused polling locations to be open at less than full 
capacity. Addressee: Cathy Woolward, Chair, Fulton County 
Elections Board, Georgia. Response: None.
    12. Date: June 3, 2022. Subject: Report that Rockingham 
County's electronic pollbooks (EPBs) were inoperable for an 
extended period of time during the recent primary election. 
Addressee: Ophelia Wright, Chair, North Carolina. Response: 
None.
    13. Date: June 3, 2022. Subject: Report that some of Gates 
County's voting equipment was inoperable for nearly 4 hours on 
the day of the recent primary election. Addressee: Jimmy Eure, 
Chair, Pennsylvania. Response: None.
    14. Date: June 3, 2022. Subject: Report that Berks County's 
electronic pollbooks (EPBs) were inoperable for an extended 
period of time on election day, which resulted in extended 
polling hours. Addressee(s): (1) Christian Y. Leinbach Chair, 
Board of Commissioners Berks County, Penn. (2) Kevin S. 
Barnhardt Vice-Chair, Board of Commissioners Berks County, 
Penn. (3) Michael S. Rivera Commissioner, Board of 
Commissioners Berks County, Penn. Response: None.
    15. Date: June 8th, 2022. Subject: Report that up to 60,000 
ballots in the recent primary election had blurry barcodes. 
Addressee: Sherry Hall, Clackamas County Clerk, Oregon City, 
Oregon. Response: No.
    16. Date: June 15, 2022. Subject: Reports of voter fraud 
and ballot stuffing in Philadelphia. Addressee(s): (1) Lisa M. 
Deeley, Philadelphia City Commissioner, (2) Seth Bluestein, 
Philadelphia City Commissioner, (3) Omar Sabir, Philadelphia 
City Commissioner. Response: No.
    17. Date: June 15, 2022. Subject: Errors in New Jersey 
Voter Rolls. Addressee: Tahesha Way, Secretary of State of New 
Jersey, New Jersey Department of State. Response: No.
    18. Date: June 15, 2022. Subject: Concerns over legal and 
constitutional authority over Biden Executive Order Promoting 
Access to Voting. Addressee: Several Executive Branch 
Department Heads. Response: The EEOC responded on July 11, 
2022. The National Labor Relations Board responded to this 
letter on July 18th, 2022. The Department of Education 
responded to this letter on August 15, 2022. The Department of 
Agriculture responded to this letter on September 15, 2022.
    19. Date: July 11, 2022. Subject: Hand recount leads to 
different results from initial machine tabulation. Addressee: 
Dele Lowman Smith, Chair, Board of Registration & Elections 
Dekalb County, Georgia. Response: No.
    20. Date: July 15, 2022. Subject: No logic or accuracy 
tests performed on voting machines in Nevada before primary 
day. Addressee: Joe Gloria, County Clerk, Clark County. 
Response: None.
    21. Date: July 15, 2022. Subject: Printer malfunctions at 
voting locations in Nevada on primary day. Addressee: Joe 
Gloria, County Clerk, Clark County. Response: None.
    22. Date: July 15, 2022. Subject: 16,000 ballots with a 
coding error caused significant delay in elections results and 
required volunteers to re-mark and count the ballots. 
Addressee: Christa L. Miller, Chief Registrar/Chief Clerk of 
Elections Board of Elections, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. 
Response: None.
    23. Date: July 15, 2022. Subject: Incorrect ballots 
delivered to several precincts. Addressee: Sandra Merlino, 
County Clerk, Nye County, Tonopah, Nevada. Response: None.
    24. Date: August 24, 2022. Subject: Recent report that an 
estimated 63,000 erroneous ballots were sent out to voters for 
the primary election. Addressee: Virginia Ross, Director, Pinal 
County Elections Department, Coolidge, Arizona. Response: None.
    25. Date: September 1, 2022. Subject: Congratulatory letter 
to Paul Pete for his appointment to serve as Co-chair of the 
National Association of Secretaries of State's Elections 
Committee. Addressee: Paul Pate, Secretary of State, Des 
Moines, IA. Response: None.
    26. Date: September 1, 2022. Subject: Response to Clark 
County over significant technical issues with ballot printers 
during the 2022 primary election. Addressee: Joseph Gloria, 
County Clerk, Clark County, North Las Vegas, NV. Response: 
None.
    27. Date: September 30, 2022. Subject: Concerns over pre-
filled absentee ballot applications distributed by a private 
group for the general election. Addressee(s): (1) Peter S. 
Kosinski, Co-Chair, New York State Board of Elections. (2) 
Douglas A. Kellner, Co-Chair, New York State Board of 
Elections. Response: None.
    28. Date: October 10, 2022. Subject: Concerns about a 
privately-funded, government-sponsored get out the vote effort 
endorsing the Mayor of Milwaukee in his reelection campaign. 
Addressee: Cavalier Johnson, Mayor, City of Milwaukee, 
Wisconsin. Response: None.
    29. Date: October 20, 2022. Subject: Letter to D.C. Mayor 
urging her to abandon the bills: the Local Resident Voting 
Rights Amendment Act and the Elections Modernization Amendment 
Act. Addressee: Muriel Bowser, Mayor of the District of 
Columbia. Response: None.
    30. Date: October 26, 2022. Subject: Status of any funding 
requests being developed by the State Elections Commission in 
preparation for the upcoming federal general election in 2024. 
Addressee: Francisco J. Rosado Colomer, Chairman, Puerto Rico 
State Elections Commission. Response: None.
    31. Date: November 1, 2022. Subject: Letter to President 
Biden that he immediately cease spreading election 
misinformation. Addressee: President Joe Biden. Response: None.
    32. Date: November 4, 2022. Subject: Reports of voting 
irregularities in the June 2022 primary in Champaign County, 
IL. Addressee: Aaron Ammons Champaign County Clerk, Urbana, IL. 
Response: None.
    33. Date: November 4, 2022. Subject: Voters casting ballots 
in the wrong congressional district. Addressee: Jeff Roberts, 
Administrator, Davidson County Election Commission, Nashville, 
Tennessee. Response: Yes, on November 10th.
    34. Date: November 16, 2022. Subject: Inadequate ballot 
paper on election day. Addressee: Denise Williams, Chair, 
Luzerne County Board of Elections and Registration. Response: 
None.

    MEMBER SERVICES AND EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES MINORITY

    The Member Services Minority department communicated 
directly with Members of Congress, Chiefs of Staff, Staff 
Directors, and Schedulers monthly, sometimes multiple times 
each month, through a robust email newsletter program. This 
newsletter provides House operations updates, rules and 
regulations updates, use of MRA best practices, and a preview 
of programming from House Administration Republicans.
    The Member Services Minority department also processed 
routine requests from personal and committee offices on a range 
of requests that fall under House Administration oversight. Due 
to lack of preparedness, a lack of oversight hearings, and a 
lack of a transparent and efficient oversight operation by the 
Majority, completing Member and staff requests was often a 
delayed and/or inefficient process.
    The Member Services Minority department worked with the 
Majority and Senate counterparts to plan the annual Summer 
Intern Lecture Series. In addition to the bipartisan, bicameral 
lectures, House Administration Republicans also offered six 
career track panels and six networking, House operations, and 
resume workshop opportunities. The department co-sponsored the 
first ever Oversight Educational Briefing Series (five total 
briefings) with Republican Leader McCarthy's office on how to 
conduct and communicate effect oversight. The department 
cosponsored with Leader McCarthy's Office, the Republican 
Conference, and the Minority Leader's Office the first ever 
Level Up: House GOP Staff Development Course for future 
aspiring Chiefs of Staff, Legislative Directors, Communications 
Directors, and Schedulers. Level Up is an intensive training 
session tailored to each of the above mentioned positions and 
served as a conduit to train the next generation of senior 
Republican Congressional staffers. There were over 100 
graduates of the four Level Up tracks with over 25% within the 
first 60-90 days being promoted to a new position upon 
completion. By offering exemplary programming, House 
Administration Republicans continued to carry out its mission 
of making the House work for Members and staff thus empowering 
them to better serve their constituents.

              COMMUNICATIONS STANDARDS COMMISSION MINORITY

    Briefings:
           Individual briefings: 131
           GOP only & best practice briefings: 24
           Bipartisan House-wide briefings: 13
    Franking challenges:
    The GOP Conference hosted (2) Franking Challenges in 2021 
before primary blackout periods started. The goal was to 
increase email subscribers and social media followers (since 
they can message to subscribers/followers as much as they want 
during the blackout) and by doing so, develop stronger 
communication plans. All House GOP offices were invited to 
compete against each other over the course of 4 weeks to claim 
the title of ``Top Franker'' and boost the overall messaging of 
the Republican Conference.
           Freshman Franking Challenge numbers:
                   Kat Cammack won with 20,845 new 
                subscribers gained.
                   Participating freshman offices 
                collectively gained 58,271 new subscribers 
                during the challenge.
           Conference Franking Challenge numbers:
                   GOP Members gained 175,392 new 
                subscribers during the challenge
    Requests:
           Total in 117th: 17,561
                   GOP: 10,428
                   DEM: 7,133
                                              Rodney Davis,
                                                    Ranking Member.

                                  [all]