39–008

105TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 105–30

PROVIDING AMOUNTS FOR THE EXPENSES OF CERTAIN

COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN

THE ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

MARCH 17, 1997.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. THOMAS, from the Committee on House Oversight,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

together with

MINORITY VIEWS

[To accompany H. Res. 91]

The Committee on House Oversight, to whom was referred the

resolution (H. Res. 91) providing amounts for the expenses of certain committees of the House of Representatives in the One Hundred Fifth Congress, having considered the same, report favorably

thereon with an amendment and recommend that the resolution as

amended be agreed to.

The amendment is as follows:

Strike out all after the resolving clause and insert the following:

SECTION 1. COMMITTEE EXPENSES FOR THE ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—With respect to the One Hundred Fifth Congress, there shall

be paid out of the applicable accounts of the House of Representatives, in accordance

with this primary expense resolution, not more than the amount specified in subsection (b) for the expenses (including the expenses of all staff salaries) of each committee named in that subsection.

(b) COMMITTEES AND AMOUNTS.—The committees and amounts referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, $7,656,162; Committee on Banking and

Financial Services, $8,901,617; Committee on the Budget, $9,940,000; Committee on

Commerce, $14,576,580; Committee on Education and the Workforce, $10,125,113;

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, $20,020,572; Committee on

House Oversight, $6,100,946; Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,

$4,815,526; Committee on International Relations, $10,368,358; Committee on the

Judiciary, $10,699,572; Committee on National Security, $9,756,708; Committee on

Resources, $9,876,550; Committee on Rules, $4,649,102; Committee on Science,

$8,677,830; Committee on Small Business, $3,906,941; Committee on Standards of

Official Conduct, $2,456,300; Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,

$12,483,000; Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, $4,344,160; and Committee on Ways

and Means, $11,066,841.
2

SEC. 2. FIRST SESSION LIMITATIONS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Of the amount provided for in section 1 for each committee

named in subsection (b), not more than the amount specified in such subsection

shall be available for expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on January 3, 1997, and ending immediately before noon on January 3, 1998.

(b) COMMITTEES AND AMOUNTS.—The committees and amounts referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, $3,791,039; Committee on Banking and

Financial Services, $4,363,817; Committee on the Budget, $4,970,000; Committee on

Commerce, $7,122,959; Committee on Education and the Workforce, $5,002,127;

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, $11,702,573; Committee on

House Oversight, $3,093,200; Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,

$2,358,040; Committee on International Relations, $5,145,358; Committee on the

Judiciary, $5,054,800; Committee on National Security, $4,729,454; Committee on

Resources, $4,800,014; Committee on Rules, $2,306,407; Committee on Science,

$4,263,672; Committee on Small Business, $1,936,471; Committee on Standards of

Official Conduct, $1,276,300; Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,

$6,141,500; Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, $2,084,368; and Committee on Ways

and Means, $5,387,934.

SEC. 3. SECOND SESSION LIMITATIONS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Of the amount provided for in section 1 for each committee

named in subsection (b), not more than the amount specified in such subsection

shall be available for expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on January 3, 1998, and ending immediately before noon on January 3, 1999.

(b) COMMITTEES AND AMOUNTS.—The committees and amounts referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, $3,865,123; Committee on Banking and

Financial Services, $4,537,800; Committee on the Budget, $4,970,000; Committee on

Commerce, $7,453,621; Committee on Education and the Workforce, $5,122,986;

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, $8,317,999; Committee on House

Oversight, $3,007,746; Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, $2,457,486;

Committee on International Relations, $5,223,000; Committee on the Judiciary,

$5,644,772; Committee on National Security, $5,027,254; Committee on Resources,

$5,076,536; Committee on Rules, $2,342,695; Committee on Science, $4,414,158;

Committee on Small Business, $1,970,470; Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, $1,180,000; Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, $6,341,500;

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, $2,259,792; and Committee on Ways and Means,

$5,678,907.

SEC. 4. VOUCHERS.

Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized by the committee involved, signed by the chairman of such committee, and approved in the

manner directed by the Committee on House Oversight.

SEC. 5. REGULATIONS.

Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in accordance

with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House Oversight.

SEC. 6. RESERVE FUND FOR UNANTICIPATED EXPENSES.

There is hereby established a reserve fund of $7,900,000 for unanticipated expenses of committees for the One Hundred Fifth Congress. Amounts in the fund

shall be paid to a committee pursuant to an allocation approved by the Committee

on House Oversight.

SEC. 7. ADJUSTMENT AUTHORITY.

The Committee on House Oversight shall have authority to make adjustments in

amounts under section 1, if necessary to comply with an order of the President issued under section 254 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act

of 1985 or to conform to any reduction in appropriations for the purposes of such

section 1.

COMMITTEE ACTION

On March 13, 1997, by voice vote, a quorum being present, the

Committee agreed to a motion to report the resolution favorably to

the House, as amended.
3

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules of the

House of Representatives, the Committee states that the findings

and recommendations of the Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

STATEMENT ON BUDGET AUTHORITY AND RELATED ITEMS

The resolution does not provide new budget authority, new

spending authority, new credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures, and a statement under

clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974

is not required.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the Rules of the

House of Representatives, the Committee states, with respect to

the resolution, that the Director of the Congressional Budget Office

did not submit a cost estimate and comparison under section 403

of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

OVERSIGHT FINDINGS OF COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND

OVERSIGHT

The Committee states, with respect to clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, that the Committee

on Government Reform and Oversight did not submit findings or

recommendations based on investigations under clause 4(c)(2) of

rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

ROLLCALL VOTES

In compliance with clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the

House of Representatives, with respect to each rollcall vote on a

motion to report the resolution and on any amendment offered to

the resolution, the total number of votes cast for and against, and

the names of those Members voting for and against, are as follows:

H. Res. 91, Rollcall No. 1

Motion by Mr. Ney. Subject: Motion to agree to the amendment

in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Thomas.

Member Aye Nay Present

Mr. Thomas ...................................................................................................................................... X ........... ...........

Mr. Ney ............................................................................................................................................. X ........... ...........

Mr. Boehner ..................................................................................................................................... X ........... ...........

Mr. Ehlers ........................................................................................................................................ X ........... ...........

Ms. Granger ..................................................................................................................................... ........... ........... ...........

Mr. Gejdenson .................................................................................................................................. ........... X ...........

Mr. Hoyer .......................................................................................................................................... ........... X ...........

Ms. Kilpatrick ................................................................................................................................... ........... X ...........

Total ........................................................................................................................................ 4 3 ...........
4

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Voice vote

The Committee by voice vote, with a quorum present, on March

13, 1997, agreed to report H. Res. 91, as amended, favorably to the

House.

General discussion

H. Res. 91, as amended, authorizes $178,321,878 for committee

salaries and expenses for all standing committees of the House of

Representatives (except the Committee on Appropriations), the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the reserve fund for

the 105th Congress. The amendment in the nature of a substitute

offered by the majority, and passed by the Committee, was the only

amendment offered to the resolution. The minority offered no

amendments to the funding resolution. In a separate Committee

resolution, approved on March 12, 1997, the Committee on House

Oversight established franked mail allocations for these committees.

Significant changes were enacted at the beginning of the 104th

Congress which affected the structure and jurisdiction of Committees. In the 104th Congress, three standing committees and 32 subcommittees were abolished. Committee staff was reduced by 33%

from the 103rd Congress levels and committee funding authorization was reduced by a total of 30%, $67,003,290. Additionally, committees became directly responsible and accountable for costs previously paid from funds not specifically authorized through a committee funding resolution. These costs included, scanning and

graphics, local telephone line charges, long-distance telephone call

charges, office supplies mail. Prior to the 104th Congress, these

costs were paid from other House funds, separate from the investigative and statutory funding procedures. The 30% reduction in

funding was achieved even after mandating full accountability by

committees for these costs.

The 104th Congress was one of the most prolific and substantive

Congresses in history. According to statistics complied by the Committee on Rules, the House spent 2,445 hours in session deliberating on and passing 333 bills into law, including landmark legislation such as welfare reform, a balanced budget and health care reform. This was accomplished with fewer committee staff and significantly fewer financial resources than was authorized in the

prior Congress.

Requests

The sum total of all budget requests for the 105th Congress was

$180,129,315. The amount authorized for the basic operations of

committees is $170,421,878, including $3.8 million for a special investigation by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. The authorization for the basic operations of committees is

reduced by $9,707,437, 5.4%, from the sum of all amounts requested by committees.

An additional $7,900,000 is included in the resolution, as authorization held in reserve. The ‘‘Reserve Fund’’ is for future allocation
5

by the Committee on House Oversight for unanticipated committee

activities during the 105th Congress.

Committee 105th request 1 H. Res. 91 1997 1998

Agriculture ............................................................................... $7,792,162 $7,656,162 $3,791,039 $3,865,123

Banking and Financial Services ............................................. 9,414,785 8,901,617 4,363,817 4,537,800

Budget ..................................................................................... 9,940,000 9,940,000 4,970,000 4,970,000

Commerce ................................................................................ 15,191,538 14,576,580 7,122,959 7,453,621

Education and the Workforce .................................................. 10,569,157 10,125.113 5,002,127 5,122,986

Government Reform and Oversight ......................................... 20,020,572 20,020,572 11,702,573 8,317,999

House Oversight ...................................................................... 6,160,946 6,100,946 3,093,200 3,007,746

Intelligence .............................................................................. 5,040,526 4,815,526 2,358,040 2,457,486

International Relations ............................................................ 11,143,892 10,368,358 5,145,358 5,223,000

Judiciary .................................................................................. 12,037,046 10,699,572 5,054,800 5,644,772

National Security ..................................................................... 10,668,640 9,756,708 4,729,454 5,027,254

Resources ................................................................................ 10,418,537 9,876,550 4,800,014 5,076,536

Rules ....................................................................................... 4,649,102 4,649,102 2,306,407 2,342,695

Science .................................................................................... 9,128,727 8,677,830 4,263,672 4,414,158

Small Business ....................................................................... 4,339,817 3,906,941 1,936,471 1,970,470

Standards of Official Conduct 2 ............................................. 2,439,300 2,456,300 1,276,300 1,180,000

Transportation and Infrastructure .......................................... 14,096,282 12,483,000 6,141,500 6,341,500

Veterans’ Affairs ..................................................................... 5,744,757 4,344,160 2,084,368 2,259,792

Ways and Means ..................................................................... 11,333,529 11,066,841 5,387,934 5,678,907

Sub-total .................................................................... 180,129,315 170,421,878 85,530,033 84,891,845

Reserve Fund ........................................................................... 7,900,000 7,900,000 ...................... ......................

Total ........................................................................... 188,029,315 178,321,878 85,530,033 84,891,845

1 Amount requested in budget request submitted to Committee on House Oversight.

2 H. Res. 91 includes $60,000 for Ethics Reform Task Force expenses.

Committee funding process

The 105th Congress is the second funding cycle under the biennial funding process instituted in the 104th Congress. At the beginning of the 104th Congress House Rules were revised, changing the

Committee funding process to a biennial cycle and abolishing the

bifurcation of funding under statutory and investigative accounts.

Committee Chairmen in the 104th Congress achieved the ambitious goals established by the new Republican majority, including

those of fiscal conservatism and legislative proclivity. The biennial

committee funding process has proven successful in at least two respects. First, every House committee chairman was a new chairman, and was asked to present a two-year budget and to predict

the needs and the legislative goals of the committees over which

they had only recently taken control. 104th Congress Chairmen did

plan realistic budgets which funded the needs of their committees,

simultaneously reducing budgets by an average of 30% from their

predecessors. Second, a two-year budget cycle saves time and resources for all committees because the process is undertaken only

once per Congress, rather than twice as was done previously. The

biennial funding process facilitates long term planning and cuts in

half the time and resources dedicated to making, defending and approving budget requests.

At the outset of the 104th Congress, the Committee on House

Oversight adopted a regulation which required committees to reimburse legislative and executive branch agencies or departments for

any detailees working for the committee. The regulation has been

revised for the 105th Congress. Committees must continue to reimburse for detailees from the Government Printing Office. Commit-
6

tees will not, however, be required by the Committee on House

Oversight to reimburse other agencies for details, so long as the

number of details at any one committee does not exceed 10% of

their staff ceiling. Agencies must be reimbursed for details above

this 10% limit. While details often provide special expertise not

available on committee staff, or expertise not required on a permanent basis, this policy is intended to continue to ensure prudent

use of other agencies resources and to continue a full-accountability

model for committee funding.

Funding for the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight has requested and been allocated a total 48% increase over the 104th

Congress authorization. The Committee on Government Reform

and Oversight was established in the 104th Congress, by combining the jurisdictions of three former committees: The Committee on

Government Operations, The Committee on the District of Columbia and The Post Office and Civil Service Committee (exclusive of

its jurisdiction over the Commission on Congressional Mailing

Standards). When the former three committees were combined into

one entity, the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight,

staff levels and funding were reduced substantially:

[Dollars in millions]

103d Percent 104th Percent 105th Percent

Government Operations Committee ........................................................... $11.8 .......... (1) .......... (1) ..........

District of Columbia Committee ................................................................ 5.1 .......... .......... .......... .......... ..........

Post Office & Civil Service Committee ...................................................... 9.7 .......... .......... .......... .......... ..........

Govt. Reform Committee (equivalent funding) ......................................... 26.6 .......... 13.5 .......... 16.2 61

Special Investigation ........................................................................ .......... .......... .......... .......... 3.8 ..........

Total Authorization ....................................................................... 26.6 100 13.5 51 20.0 75

1 Not applicable.

In the 104th Congress, the Government Reform and Oversight

Committee maintained a heavy workload, conducted numerous investigations and performed essential and unexpected oversight

functions despite the decrease in staff and resources. The Government Reform Committee anticipates a marked increase in their

workload for the 105th Congress, and has received an authorization increase of 20% over two years for its basic functions. Even

after this increase in authorization for its basic operations, the

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight is funded at 39%

less than its 103rd Congress predecessors.

Included in the 105th Congress authorization for the Govern- ment Reform and Oversight Committee is $3.8 million available in

1997 for a special investigation into alleged illegal executive branch

activities related to the 1996 federal campaigns.

Changes to the Rules of the House to accommodate funding for matters that are unanticipated during the biennial funding process

House rule XI, clause 5(a) allows for a reserve fund to be included in the primary expense resolution reported by the Committee on House Oversight. The total amount allocated to the reserve
7

fund in the 105th Congress is $7,900,000. Amounts from this fund

will be authorized to a specific standing committee or to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence only after approval by the

Committee on House Oversight. If no requests are received or no

authorization is approved, the funds will not be spent. Funds allocated from the Reserve Fund are to be for unanticipated matters

that arise within a committee’s jurisdiction. Historically, during a

Congress new matters and issues come to the attention of the

House which require study and review. Under a two-year funding

cycle, there is a significantly greater likelihood that Committees

cannot accurately anticipate all matters which may arise in their

jurisdiction. The reserve fund is therefore established as a prudent

method for funding such unexpected matters.

Minority resources

The majority is proud of the progress that has been made by its

committees towards the goal of allocating one-third of each committee’s resources to the minority. We remain committed to this goal.

In 1990, the Democratic Majority, pursuant to Democratic Caucus

Rule 34(F), adopted a policy that the committee caucuses shall not

be required to provide for more than 20 percent of the total funding

for minority investigative staff for the full committee and each subcommittee of the committee. In 1994, at the end of the 103rd Congress, only four committees (exclusive of those that share bipartisan and nonpartisan staff) allowed one-third of their resources,

staff and funds, to the minority party.

When the new majority assumed control in the 104th Congress,

the number of committee staff allocated to the minority party significantly improved:

102d 103d 104th 1995

&

1996

105th

1997

&

1998 1991 1992 1993 1994

Percent of Committees providing 33% of staff slots 1 to the minority ... 6 13 0 6 44 47

Number of Committees providing:

33% or more ..................................................................................... 1 2 0 1 7 7

25% to 32% ..................................................................................... 3 2 5 5 6 7

20% to 24% ..................................................................................... 5 1 3 2 3 1

Less than 20% ................................................................................. 7 11 8 8 0 0

1 For the 102d and 103d Congress the calculation is from the investigative staff.

For the 105th Congress, there has been no erosion of the resources provided to the minority party, and additional progress has

been made. Of those seventeen committees that have partisan staff,

nine committees have achieved the goal of one-third allocation of

the total budget or staff salaries to the minority. Of the eight remaining committees, three have increased their allocation to the

minority party for the 105th Congress. The situation has improved

significantly and progress will be monitored and encouraged.
(8)

MINORITY VIEWS

Many of the chairman who presented their committees’ budgets

have done a commendable job of achieving a balance between carrying out the committee’s responsibilities and seeking increased resources to ensure a fair allocation of both staff positions and financial resources to the Minority. For example, Chairman Thomas of

the Committee on House Oversight demonstrated his commitment

to the House-adopted objective of providing at least one-third of the

staff positions and resources to the Minority. In his budget presentation, Chairman Thomas allocated to the Minority one-third of the

positions under the Committee’s Speaker-established staff ceiling,

one-third of the amount approved by the House for committee operations (one half in the case of contested elections), and control of

those resources by the Minority. Several other committee chairmen

provided a welcome allocation to the Minority of positions and resources, and we would be remiss if we failed to recognize the

progress such committees have made. Notwithstanding the

progress on such committees, actions by certain other committees

deserve no such credit. In particular, the Government Reform and

oversight Committee demands discussion.

GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

There is absolutely no excuse for the manner in which the Minority of the Government Reform and oversight Committee has been

treated. That Committee’s initial and supplemental funding requests—a 48% increase over the last Congress—were granted in

toto. Yet, despite the sensitive nature of this Committee’s responsibilities, its Chair has arbitrarily proposed a totally inadequate

and unfair allocation of resources to the Minority.

The Government Reform and Oversight Committee submitted its

budget without prior consultation with the Minority. This Committee has indicated that in the best case it will give the Minority only

between 15% and 25% of the total resources. This Committee has

been granted up to 41 new positions, including detailees, and has

thus far earmarked only 7 to the Minority. This Committee has

proposed a blatantly partisan investigation, and its Chair has unilaterally issued over 30 subpoenas without Committee approval.

Without consultation with the Minority, this Committee’s Chair established a document protocol which is contrary to the Rules of the

House of Representatives. It purports to authorize the Chairman,

without consulting his Committee, to publicly disclose any subpoenaed document. This Committee’s nearly $12 million budget for the

First Session of the 105th Congress focuses exclusively upon an investigation of Democrats, the Democratic Party, and White House

campaign contribution issues, while ignoring valid parallel Republican campaign contribution issues, such as the use of Congressional buildings for Republican fundraising activities. This Com-
9

mittee cavalier disregard of elemental notions of fairness should

not be rewarded with a nearly $12 million budget for 1997 alone.

Incredibly, to compound their unjust distribution of money, staff,

and resources, the Republicans are creating a $7.9 million slush

fund, to be spent by the Republican Majority of the Committee on

House Oversight as it sees fit. Without a vote of the House, these

monies could be added to the already excessive budget the Government Reform and Oversight Committee has to conduct its highly

partisan investigation. The reason for creating the slush fund, according to the Republicans during markup, was to eliminate the

need for supplemental funding resolutions.

The net effect of creating the slush fund, however, is to deny the

American taxpayer the opportunity to hear the requests of committees seeking to tap into that $7.9 million slush fund. Under current

House Rules, any committee seeking additional funding is required

to have its request debated on the House floor, and voted on by

every House member, a process providing direct accountability to

the Members and the public. But the new slush fund language provides the Committee on House Oversight, by simple majority vote,

with authority to spend $7.9 million. This is on a committee with

a ratio understood to be six Republicans to three democrats. And

of course, removing spending decisions from the bright lights of

House floor debate also removes an important element of accountability to the taxpayer.

BIPARTISANSHIP IN QUESTION

To the extent that Republicans profess a desire for bipartisan administration of the House, their intentions must be manifested

through their actions. If the scope of the Government Reform and

Oversight Committee’s investigation remains as specified by the

Chairman in his budget presentation, oversight report, and supplemental request, then it is clear that Republican partisanship is

governing the funding and investigative processes at issue here,

and that Republicans have rejected objectivity and fairness. With

the scope of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee’s investigation so clearly a partisan one, Republicans are adding insult

to injury by cutting the Minority out of any effective or meaningful

participation in the investigation by providing inadequate investigative funding by any measure. The Democrats want the truth,

but the partisan nature of this investigation calls directly into

question the likelihood that a fair and balanced conclusion will be

reached, or that the American public will ever be informed of the

range of campaign contribution issues which need to be addressed

now by legislation, including those attendant to Republican fundraising.

Republicans have dedicated more money to this investigation

than any other such investigation in recent history, allowed the

Chairman to act beyond his authority, disarmed the Minority

through a devastating restriction on resources, and targeted the

Democratic Party and White House. We believe these partisan decisions stem from the continuing Republican desire to avoid any

meaningful campaign finance reform legislation in this Congress.

Neither we nor the American people will stand by idly while the
10

Republicans use this uncontrolled investigation to justify their

delay.

We cannot support the funding resolution in its present form.

CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK.

STENY H. HOYER.

SAN GEJDENSON.

Æ