U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–003 2004

OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE GOVERNMENT

PRINTING OFFICE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, APRIL 28, 2004

Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

BOB NEY, Ohio, Chairman 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

JOHN LINDER, Georgia 

JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California 

THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York 

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut 

Ranking Minority Member 

JUANITA MILLENDER-MCDONALD, 

California 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

PAUL VINOVICH, Staff Director 

GEORGE SHEVILIN, Minority Staff Director 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Statements of Bruce James, Public Printer of the United States, GPO; Marc 

Nichols, Inspector General, GPO; and Linda Koontz, General Accounting 

Office ..................................................................................................................... 7

Statement of Bruce James ............................................................................... 7

Statement of Marc A. Nichols ......................................................................... 19

State of Linda Koontz ...................................................................................... 27

Statements of Ben Cooper, Printing Industries of America; George Lord, 

Chairman of the Joint Council of Unions, Government Printing Office; 

William Boarman, Communications Workers of America; and Janis Johnston, University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana ............................................ 74

Statement of Ben Cooper ................................................................................. 74

Statement of George Lord ................................................................................ 77

Statement of William Boarman ....................................................................... 79

Statement of Janis Johnston ........................................................................... 81

(1)

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 2004 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, 

Washington, D.C. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room 

1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Robert W. Ney 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Ney, Linder, Larson, Millender-McDonald, and Brady. 

Staff present: Jeff Janas, Professional Staff Member; Maria Robinson, Policy Director; Fred Hay, General Counsel; George Shevlin, 

Minority Staff Director; Charles Howell, Minority Chief Counsel; 

and Michael Harrison, Minority Professional Staff Member. 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. And we will 

begin today by welcoming Congressman Brady. Other Members, I 

am sure, will be joining us. I wanted to start by introducing—we 

have a special guest in the audience—Karim Sayed. If you could 

stand up, Karim. Karim is with the Parliament in Egypt. He is 

over here today. So welcome to the United States and to the U.S. 

Capitol. 

The committee is meeting today to hold an oversight hearing on 

the Government Printing Office. I think it is important that we 

bring to light the many changes that have been taking place at the 

GPO. 

The purpose of this committee hearing is to discuss the ways in 

which GPO has been improving its operations; the recent General 

Accounting Office, or GAO as we all know it, report examining Federal printing, information dissemination; and the progress of the 

Office of Management and Budget. 

For nearly 150 years, the Government Printing Office has provided invaluable service to the American people by producing, procuring and disseminating printed and electronic publications produced in the legislative and executive branch so that every citizen 

has access to the wealth of information that is produced on our behalf. 

I want to welcome our Ranking Member, Congressman Larson of 

Connecticut. 

Historically, as advancements in technology have altered the 

means for meeting its mission, the GPO has embraced these new 

technologies to more efficiently deliver information to the American 

public. The GPO disseminates more than 35 million documents per 

month on line via GPO Access, one of the Federal Government’s 

largest and most heavily used Web sites. 

2

We once again are at a crucial juncture requiring a vast transformation of the ways in which GPO does business. When electronic distribution of documents over the Internet arrived in the 

early 1990s, few in the printing industry anticipated the sweeping 

publishing revolution that would occur inside of 10 years. Few at 

GPO imagined the day when print media would become secondary 

to or even potentially replaced by documents created digitally by 

authors and distributed electronically from their source. 

However, this is now a reality. Under the authority of the Joint 

Committee on Printing, (JCP) and the stewardship of the Public 

Printer, Mr. Bruce James, GPO has worked to meet this new reality, maximizing cost-effectiveness across all of its operations. 

With JCP approval, the GPO last year carried out an initial 

round of a very successful voluntary retirement incentive program 

which has generated an annual savings, I want to repeat savings, 

of 21.7 million to the taxpayers of the country. Due to the success 

of this buyout, the JCP subsequently authorized a second round of 

buyouts for this year aimed at achieving an annual cost savings of 

16.5 million. 

In addition, the JCP authorized the GPO to close several areas 

of its business that were consistently losing money. In 2003, the 

Government Printing Office closed their remaining 13 retail book 

stores, one of which was in the State of Ohio where I am from, with 

a cost savings of 1.5 million, and their ink shop where GPO was 

still making its own ink. Through their inspector general, they determined it was cheaper to buy ink elsewhere, resulting in 1.1 million in savings over the next 5 years. With JCP approval, Mr. 

James has been cutting costs at the GPO while maintaining a high 

level of service. 

To realize its vision of a primarily digital future, GPO will need 

to look at what type of facility will fully support this type of operation. With JCP approval, GPO has begun the information-gathering process with respect to the possibility of relocating their 

headquarters from their oversized facility on North Capitol Street 

to a more modern and efficiently manageable facility that will meet 

the emerging and future needs of the agency. 

I look forward to hearing testimony today from Linda Koontz, Information Management Issues Director of GAO, who has just concluded an extensive and thorough examination of GPO operations 

and is making recommendations on how GPO can transform to 

keep up with general trends in the printing industry. 

GAO concluded that GPO’s print procurement business has seen 

a loss in revenue in at least 3 of the last 5 years. Although the 

printing work that GPO traditionally did is in decline, the good 

news is that the agencies are generally satisfied with GPO’s products and services. Most responded that they knew more about what 

GPO has to offer and that they need to expand their electronic dissemination programs, which fall in line with Mr. James’ strategic 

planning for the organization. 

I look forward to hearing testimony from the panels. Before I 

turn over to our Ranking Member, I also want to say something 

that needs to be addressed publicly, and I have said this before, 

when we were over at a Congressional Research Service (CRS) 

event. I came here in 1994 and started serving in 1995. We went 

3

from shut it down, take it apart, dismember it, to different ideas 

people had, to throwing our hands up in the air and not knowing 

particularly what to do. And I think under your stewardship, Mr. 

James, as the Public Printer—and I know from the phone calls that 

you have made and your staff—you have taken the right approach 

to test ideas, to think outside of the box, to see what works or what 

doesn’t work. So I think that personally, after 9 years of dealing 

with this issue, I believe that we are on the right track due to your 

stewardship. So I just want to publicly commend you, and all of 

your staff because I know you always speak about the people that 

work there and you always compliment them.With that I will turn 

to our distinguished Ranking Member Mr. Larson. 

Mr. LARSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to the panelists. We thank you for availing yourselves today for this important hearing. This is the first oversight hearing on the Government 

Printing Office since July of 2002. 

Much has happened since July of 2002. A new Public Printer, 

Bruce James, has taken office. He has appointed a new inspector 

general, Marc Nichols, who we had the pleasure of meeting yesterday, and who joins us here today. Both gentlemen come to the GPO 

directly from the private sector, Bruce after a successful career in 

the printing industry in California, Marc Nichols from a law practice in Colorado. 

Since taking office, as the Chairman has pointed out, Bruce has 

reorganized the GPO’s top management and has accrued significant savings. He has embarked on a strategic planning process and 

made other changes in direction that are laudable. This hearing offers Bruce an opportunity to provide this committee with better understanding of his vision for the GPO of the future. 

This is a normal part of our process, and, again, I commend the 

Chairman for holding this hearing. And we welcome it, as I trust 

all of the panelists welcome it as much as we do. This hearing offers us the opportunity to hear from others interested in these matters, including the General Accounting Office, organized labor, the 

printing industry, and the library community, panels that we will 

hear from later. 

Yesterday we had an important memorial service that took place 

at the Library of Congress. They memorialized a former Librarian 

of Congress, Daniel J. Boorstin. And I was struck at that service, 

again, and I am most interested in hearing from the library community, because you are the protectors of knowledge and of the historic record. The Chairman and I happened to be at a CRS-sponsored class last evening that was conducted by Judith Schneider at 

the Smithsonian Institute. And I mentioned this last night about 

Boorstin’s remarks, talking about libraries and the principal responsibility that all of them share both from the GPO’s perspective, 

but most importantly from the library’s perspective. They are the 

cathedrals or the only place where one still has the opportunity to 

ask the unimagined question and receive unwelcome answers. 

That indeed is a tremendous responsibility and one that should 

be cherished. It is one that makes our government unique from 

every other government in this pursuit of knowledge and this important keeper of the records. 

4

And so, again, I laud the Chairman, and I look forward to hearing from the printing industry and organized labor, who I know 

have concerns, as we project out into the future and look at what 

Bruce James’ vision for that future is going to be. But I am heartened by the fact that we have the ability and capability to move 

forward into that future collectively, and with the support that is 

necessitated to continue to keep the public records and that knowledge there for access to the general public. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank the gentleman for his comments. 

[The statement of Mr. Larson follows:]

5


Insert graphic folio 14 94003A.001
6


Insert graphic folio 15 94003A.002
7

The CHAIRMAN. With that we will begin with the first panel, 

which consists of, Mr. Bruce James, the Public Printer of the 

United States, GPO; Marc Nichols, Inspector General, GPO; and 

Linda Koontz, General Accounting Office. Welcome to all three. We 

will start with the Public Printer, Mr. James. 

STATEMENTS OF BRUCE JAMES, PUBLIC PRINTER OF THE 

UNITED STATES, GPO; MARC NICHOLS, INSPECTOR GENERAL, GPO; AND LINDA KOONTZ, GENERAL ACCOUNTING 

OFFICE 

STATEMENT OF BRUCE JAMES 

Mr. JAMES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. I am pleased to be here this morning as you conduct this 

oversight hearing of the GPO and our plans to transform it to meet 

the demands of the 21st century. I will be happy to summarize my 

prepared statement, which has been submitted for the record. 

The GPO is one of the Nation’s oldest and most venerable agencies within which the official version of every great American state 

paper since President Lincoln’s time has been produced. I can’t 

begin to tell you what an incredible honor it is to head this distinguished institution. 

The GPO’s employees, in my view, are the most talented and 

dedicated group of professional men and women in the Federal 

Government. They perform demanding tasks under demanding 

schedules, and they are committed to providing Congress, Federal 

agencies, and the public with the best products and services possible. I have nothing but the highest regard for them, and for their 

representatives in organized labor. 

The support and guidance that we have been getting from Congress has been simply amazing. Your leadership of the Joint Committee on Printing, Mr. Chairman, with the able assistance of the 

Joint Committee’s staff director Maria Robinson, has been invaluable to us. 

Equally invaluable has been the support and guidance we have 

been getting from the appropriations committees and other Members, officers and staff with the House and Senate, with whom we 

work closely every day. 

Just as gratifying has been the strong support we have been getting from our customers throughout the Federal agencies, from the 

public that uses Government information, and from our long-standing partners in the Government information community, including 

the printing equipment industries, the library community, and the 

information and technology industries. Their advice and input has 

been extremely helpful. Without their input, Mr. Chairman, we 

would be lost. 

We need their support now more than ever, because the fact is 

that GPO is at the very epicenter of technological change that is 

upending virtually every aspect of Federal information policy. 

There is no time for us to rest on our laurels from the successes 

achieved long ago. The 19th century is not coming back. Printing, 

once the world’s only mass communications medium, has been 

eclipsed by revolutionary changes in electronic information technologies, principally the Internet. While printing will not disappear 

8

in our lifetime, its role in our lives and in the lives of those who 

depend on our products and services has been forever changed. 

Technological change has made it necessary to rethink what the 

GPO is and what it does. It is forcing us to think about how we 

can lead the way to an information policy that is relevant to and 

necessary for the demands of the Federal Government and the public in the 21st century. Our stakeholders, our employees, Congress, 

our customers, and our partners all know that. They are ready for 

change, and they are ready for the GPO to lead the way. Over the 

past 16 months, with the help of the General Accounting Office and 

others, this is the essential task we have been confronting. 

I am strongly encouraged by the outcome of the GAO’s study of 

Federal printing and information dissemination, which is nearing 

completion. Their findings, which I have summarized in my prepared statement, and which they will discuss this morning, underscore the strategic direction we are headed. That direction is based 

on a straightforward and uncomplicated conclusion. 

The time has come for the GPO to fully assume its responsibilities as the Government’s primary resource for gathering, cataloging, producing, providing and preserving its published information in all forms. This is the GPO’s historic mission, tracing its beginning to 1813, when the amendment for Federal Depository Library Program was first enacted. But to fully assume it, the GPO 

must embrace its historic mission using the technology of the 21st 

century, not the past. This is the central concept of the strategic 

vision that we have begun presenting to our stakeholders throughout the Government and the private sector. 

The implications of this vision are clear. First, the GPO needs to 

take the lead in creating digital standards for official documents of 

the United States Government. The GPO must deploy the technology needed by its agency customers and the public to gather and 

produce digital documents in a uniformly structured database in 

order to authenticate documents disseminated over the Internet, 

and to preserve the information for permanent public access. 

The GPO needs to work with its library partners to develop a 

new model for no-fee access through the FDLP, which must include 

a fully digital database of all past, present, and future U.S. Government documents, augmented database search and retrieval 

tools, and increased training to enable librarians to better serve the 

21st century information needs of their patrons. 

The GPO needs to develop a customer service model that partners with its agency customers at the program level in order to 

provide a range of support and solutions for their publishing needs 

and responsibilities, from creation to dissemination, whether digital 

or printed publications. 

The GPO will need to make significant investments in workforce 

development in order to train its existing employees in the skills 

required for 21st century printing and information processing. 

Finally, in order to efficiently and effectively meet the continuing 

in-house printing needs of Congress and its agency customers, and 

to provide for a modern information processing environment, the 

GPO will need to relocate to a facility sized and suited for its 

present and future requirements. 

9

We are getting sound positive feedback from our stakeholders as 

we present this vision. Our stakeholders are excited by the prospects this vision represents, and they want to work with us to 

carry it out. We look forward to that collaborative process. After 

fully consulting with them, we will make the necessary adjustments to our plan and move forward. We expect to have a plan in 

place later this year. 

In the meantime, we haven’t waited to begin making changes at 

the GPO. We are fixing things that needed fixing and putting in 

place the organization and systems that will help carry out our 

plan. 

The past 16 months have been a period of outstanding accomplishment for the GPO resulting in significant improvements and 

savings. These accomplishments could not have been achieved 

without the support and guidance of the Joint Committee on Printing, and we deeply appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. 

Among those achievements is the very positive reception we have 

had from our appropriations committees on both the House and the 

Senate side. In fact, we are appearing before Chairman Kingston’s 

legislative subcommittee this afternoon at 1:00. We are extremely 

fortunate to have received their full support for our funding request for fiscal year 2004, including investment funds for the 

buyout we conducted that eased the way for more than 300 staff 

to retire last year. That action, along with another buyout we are 

currently conducting with our own finances, will reduce overall 

staffing by more than 500 positions, or 20 percent, and achieve cumulative savings of more than $38 million annually. Baring any 

inforseen circumstances, these savings will position us to complete 

this fiscal year at or near the break-even point, ending a period of 

sustained losses in the GPO’s finances. 

We are seeking the support of the appropriations committees 

again in fiscal year 2005. We are able this year to propose appropriation requirements for our congressional Printing and Binding 

and Salaries and Expenses appropriations that are actually less 

than the amounts we received for this fiscal year. 

In addition to those requests, we are seeking investment funds 

for essential technology improvements that will generate future 

savings, as well as an independent appropriation for our Inspector 

General. We understand the limits of available funding, however, 

and depending on the decision of the Committees, we are committed to do our part to help meet funding targets for the legislative branch this year. 

Mr. Chairman, I understand that you have a full slate of witnesses before you, and I don’t want to use up any more of the Committee’s time. Once again, I have the distinct honor to serve one 

of the Federal Government’s finest agencies, and I am blessed with 

a superb staff. 

We have a tough job ahead of us to map out GPO’s future. We 

have already achieved a great deal with the support of the Joint 

Committee and the appropriations committees. With your continued help, and with the guidance and support of our stakeholder 

community, we will achieve fundamental change in the GPO that 

will provide lasting benefits to the American people. This concludes 

10

my remarks. And I will, of course, be happy to answer any questions the committee may have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. James. 

[The statement of Mr. James follows:]

11


Insert graphic folio 24 94003A.003
12


Insert graphic folio 25 94003A.004
13


Insert graphic folio 26 94003A.005
14


Insert graphic folio 27 94003A.006
15


Insert graphic folio 28 94003A.007
16


Insert graphic folio 29 94003A.008
17


Insert graphic folio 30 94003A.009
18


Insert graphic folio 31 94003A.010
19

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Nichols, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MARC A. NICHOLS 

Mr. NICHOLS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I 

appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. As you 

know, GPO is on the threshold of transforming into a 21st century 

digital facility under the leadership of Public Printer James. The 

Office of the Inspector General is dedicated to facilitating this 

transformation. The OIG offer an independent and objective means 

of keeping the Public Printer and Congress fully informed about 

problems and deficiencies relating to the administration and operations of the GPO. To meet these responsibilities, the OIG conducts 

audits, evaluations, investigations and inspections. 

My office is dedicated to partnering with the Public Printer to 

help the GPO improve its efficiency and effectiveness as the GPO 

transforms. As the GPO becomes a more technology- and contentdriven agency, I expect the OIG universe to grow and the responsibilities associated therewith to increase significantly. As GPO’s 

reliance on contractor support grows, the need for more advanced 

skill sets within OIG will be necessary to ensure that public assets 

are protected and used effectively. OIG human and other resources 

are critical to adequately monitor this increasingly complex and 

technical universe. 

My written comments highlight some pressing issues that the 

Public Printer and I agree face GPO. These include the headquarters building, workforce needs and training, information technology vulnerabilities, contracting processes, and internal controls. 

As GPO undergoes unprecedented changes, the OIG must adapt 

its resources to facilitate the transformation while continuing to 

meet the current and evolving obligations. Through new management initiatives and an improved cooperative relationship with 

GPO management, my office has provided substantive recommendations and has identified more than $19 million in audit, 

investigation, and inspection findings in the last reporting period. 

I attribute these results to a better focus on higher-priority matters 

affecting GPO programs, operations, and the financial bottom line. 

Let me summarize some key programs and initiatives that my office has undertaken recently. Through ongoing partnership with 

the Public Printer, the relationship between my office and GPO 

management has improved considerably. I have initiated a liaison 

program wherein senior members of my staff have been assigned 

responsibility for major GPO divisions to enhance the relationship 

between my office and GPO management in order to identify cost 

savings and efficiency opportunities. 

The Office of Audits conducted audit-related activities resulting 

in 14 recommendations for improvements that represent between 

$1 million and $2 million in potential cost savings per year, and 

identifying $100,000 in funds put to better use. 

The Office of Investigations has closed or referred 56 matters to 

GPO management, and active cases are questioning more than $8 

million. 

The Office of Administration and Inspections issued a report on 

GPO’s network security, monitored security concerns in passport 

production, and aided GPO in confirming the approximately 

20

$542,000 in outstanding receivables for Federal Register work, and 

highlighted $9.6 million in additional receivables past due more 

than 90 days, recommending a new process that should help GPO 

recover payments from its customer agencies faster. 

I have spent much of the past year identifying unique opportunities and characteristics of the potential inspection, audit, and investigation jurisdiction over which I have responsibility. There are 

several examples that highlight the uniqueness of GPO’s OIG. 

The OIG has a nonpersonnel audit universe of nearly 75 percent 

of GPO’s overall agency dollar responsibility. The OIG has jurisdiction over more than 16,000 contractors, almost 2,300 of which are 

active at any given time, and who together generate more than 

100,000 contracts per year. 

Additionally, there are considerable taxpayer dollars at stake. These include printing contracts totaling more than $650 million 

annually, approximately $75 million in open GPO procurements, 

over $89.5 million in workers’ compensation liability for the next 

decade. 

For fiscal year 2005, the OIG will have responsibility for moni- toring a nearly $800 million GPO financial universe. Let me also 

note that the Public Printer has requested annual funding for the 

OIG by direct appropriation for fiscal year 2005. I believe direct appropriation will provide the OIG with the necessary independence 

and flexibility to monitor and evaluate GPO’s rapidly changing operations. 

I believe the success of GPO depends not only on a clear vision 

and executable plan by the Public Printer, but also on a strong 

partnership between GPO and my office. This partnership depends 

on two-way communication based on mutual respect for the role 

that both the GPO and the OIG play. This communication will ensure that current and future needs of Congress will be met, as well 

as ensure the success and vitality of GPO. I am confident we are 

well on our way to achieving our goals. 

I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank the gentleman for his testimony. 

[The statement of Mr. Nichols follows:]

21


Insert graphic folio 38 94003A.011
22


Insert graphic folio 39 94003A.012
23


Insert graphic folio 40 94003A.013
24


Insert graphic folio 41 94003A.014
25


Insert graphic folio 42 94003A.015
26


Insert graphic folio 43 94003A.016
27

The CHAIRMAN. And now Linda Koontz of the General Accounting Office, GAO. 

STATEMENT OF LINDA KOONTZ 

Ms. KOONTZ. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am 

pleased to be here today to participate in this hearing. 

As you know, technological advances during the past decade have 

significantly changed the nature of printing and dissemination. 

This changing environment, in turn, is creating challenges for 

GPO. 

Specifically, the agency has seen declining print volumes, printing revenues and document sales. At the same time, more and 

more government documents are being created and downloaded 

electronically, many from its Web site, GPO Access. The agency’s 

procured printing business, once self-sustaining, has experienced 

losses in 3 of the last 5 years, showing a net loss of about $16 million. The sales program lost about $77 million over the same time 

period. In addition, these changes are creating challenges for GPO’s 

long-standing structure for centralized printing and dissemination 

and its interactions with customer agencies. 

The Public Printer recognizes these challenges and in response 

has embarked upon an ambitious transformation effort. To assist 

in this effort, we have been working with GPO leadership on a 

wide variety of issues. First, we convened a panel of printing and 

dissemination experts who provided suggestions for GPO to consider as it transforms itself. The panel suggested that GPO develop 

a business plan focused on information dissemination as its primary goal, rather than printing; collect data to demonstrate that 

the services it provides, printing and publishing as well as information dissemination to the public, add value; improve and extend 

partnerships with other agencies, particularly those with an information dissemination role; and ensure that its internal operations, 

including technology, how it does business with its customers, management information systems and training, are adequate for efficient and effective management of core business functions and for 

service to its customers. 

GPO officials have responded positively to these results, commenting that the panel’s suggestions dovetail well with their own 

assessments. In addition, these officials stated that they are using 

the results of the panel as a key part of their strategic planning 

effort. In addition, in October of 2003, we reported that under the 

Public Printer’s direction, GPO had taken several steps that recognize the important role that strategic human capital management 

plays in this transformation, including establishing and filling the 

position of Chief Human Capital Officer. 

At that time we made numerous recommendations to GPO on the 

further actions it could take to strengthen its human capital management. In response, GPO has begun to address these recommendations. For example, it has reorganized its human resources offices into teams responsible for each of its divisions, serving as a one-stop shop for all of its divisions’ human resource 

needs. It also plans to conduct a skills assessment of its workforce 

and is initiating a pay for performance pilot. 

28

Finally, GPO is taking steps to put greater emphasis on customer needs. Agency responses to surveys we conducted indicated 

that overall, agencies were generally satisfied with GPO’s products 

and services and with the performance of the individual organizations that provide them; however, they furnished responses that 

did identify a number of suggestions for action to GPO. Again, GPO 

has responded positively through several initiatives, including taking a new direction regarding sales by establishing national account managers who work directly with customers to identify their 

needs and offer solutions. 

In summary, GPO leadership recognizes the challenges that the 

agency faces and has made the commitment to transform to function effectively within this changed environment. As part of this effort, the Public Printer has taken important steps by establishing 

a strategic planning process which in part will consider changes to 

the agency’s future mission and focus. 

Further, in realizing the importance of effective human capital 

management, he is establishing the foundation needed to successfully transform GPO. In addition, by placing new emphasis on its 

customers, the agency is focusing on a key characteristic of highperforming organizations. Fulfilling this commitment, however, will 

require sustained attention from GPO leadership as well as clearsighted analysis of the challenges and the actions required in response. In the coming months, we look forward to continuing to 

work with these leaders cooperatively as they make further 

progress on their transformation. 

That concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any 

questions you may have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you. 

[The information follows:]

29


Insert graphic folio 48 94003A.017
30


Insert graphic folio 49 94003A.018
31


Insert graphic folio 50 94003A.019
32


Insert graphic folio 51 94003A.020
33


Insert graphic folio 52 94003A.021
34


Insert graphic folio 53 94003A.022
35


Insert graphic folio 54 94003A.023
36


Insert graphic folio 55 94003A.024
37


Insert graphic folio 56 94003A.025
38


Insert graphic folio 57 94003A.026
39


Insert graphic folio 58 94003A.027
40


Insert graphic folio 59 94003A.028
41


Insert graphic folio 60 94003A.029
42


Insert graphic folio 61 94003A.030
43


Insert graphic folio 62 94003A.031
44


Insert graphic folio 63 94003A.032
45


Insert graphic folio 64 94003A.033
46


Insert graphic folio 65 94003A.034
47


Insert graphic folio 66 94003A.035
48


Insert graphic folio 67 94003A.036
49


Insert graphic folio 68 94003A.037
50


Insert graphic folio 69 94003A.038
51


Insert graphic folio 70 94003A.039
52


Insert graphic folio 71 94003A.040
53


Insert graphic folio 72 94003A.041
54


Insert graphic folio 73 94003A.042
55


Insert graphic folio 74 94003A.043
56


Insert graphic folio 75 94003A.044
57

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank all three witnesses on the panel. 

The first question I have would be of Mr. James. Is there anything else that Congress needs to do to help GPO with the transition in the sense of trying to be, as everybody says, more businesslike? Are there things that the Congress needs to act upon? 

Mr. JAMES. Yes, sir. We will be coming to Congress with some 

proposals for changing Title 44 of the U.S. Code in regard to the 

policies that govern GPO. And we are in the process right now of 

consulting with our stakeholders, as you know, as we develop the 

strategic plan, and at the appropriate time, Mr. Chairman, we will 

be coming to you and asking you for help. At this point, I can tell 

you that we have received help from every Member of Congress 

whom we have asked. I just cannot be more pleased with the support of Congress. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Have you had any type of ways that you have reached out to, 

what I would call customers of GPO, to ask them how things need 

to change or information and feedback? You have undertaken, I assume, efforts like that? 

Mr. JAMES. That is a very good question. And you bet we have, 

beginning with me. I spend a considerable portion of my time out 

visiting with our customers and talking to them about what they 

are doing, how their missions are changing, what kinds of additional support that we can provide to them. 

I have talked to more than 100 of our customers. In addition to 

that, our management team is out regularly meeting with customers and have talked with hundreds more of our customers. And 

as Ms. Koontz indicated, we also have established a team of nine 

what we call National Account Managers who I am not even sure 

that they have desks. Their office is their car. And their job is to 

be out in front of our customers every day talking to them about 

what we can do to support their programs, and their mission. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. I have a question for Mr. Nichols. As 

the role of GPO changes, do you see the role of the inspector general also adapting, changing, or having to look in different directions due to technology? 

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes, I do. And I think the office has to change. We 

have to be just as adaptable as we are asking GPO, and I think 

the Public Printer has identified that GPO needs to transform 

itself. As we become more of a technology- and content-driven agency, as I said in my remarks, I believe that we have to make sure 

that we have the skill sets to understand the change that is ongoing for GPO. 

I believe that we need to make sure that we are working with 

the agency to have a better understanding of exactly where they 

are going, and I think the Public Printer has indicated to me in 

personal conversations, as well as publicly, that he does support 

the transformation not just within GPO, but the transformation 

that I am trying to bring to the inspector general’s office as well. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Final question I have is for Ms. Koontz. The Web site, GPO Access, what kind of feedback have you had on surveys involving 

that. Or, have you had any feedback on the Web site? 

58

Ms. KOONTZ. We did surveys of the executive branch agencies, 

but I don’t believe we asked specifically about GPO Access. I think 

in our upcoming surveys that we have agreed to do with GPO on 

the legislative branch customers, that is an issue that we will be 

asking about. 

The CHAIRMAN. We look forward to getting some feedback on 

that. 

Mr. Larson. 

Mr. LARSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me start first by asking Mr. James, in your testimony you 

cite the need to establish digital standards. Could you elaborate on 

what the criteria would be, what process you have set in place? 

Mr. JAMES. I would be pleased to, Mr. Larson. To build a database that will allow us to authenticate documents, identify 

versions, and preserve digital databases in perpetuity, which I believe I am required to do, we need to have a uniform structure to 

the databases. And there are basically three components that need 

to be taken into consideration. The first is the character set, the 

alphanumerics. I think the Government is pretty well agreed on 

what that character set is. 

The second issue is the coding of the information to impart values to it, such as a headline or a paragraph. We have a number 

of schemes in play throughout Government. There is no agreedupon scheme. 

And the third aspect is what has come to be called metadata. 

That is the information that identifies a document, who the author 

was, what the purpose of creating the document was, what version 

it is, and so forth. 

And while there are various views of what it is going to take to 

be able to save this information in perpetuity—some people think 

that computers will be big enough and powerful enough in the future that it won’t make any difference how we structure databases—I think we would be foolish to rely on that. I think we as 

a Government would be well served by having a uniform set of 

standards for all three of those areas I outlined. 

As GPO in the past published a Style Manual which covered how 

Government documents are created for printing, I think GPO needs 

to introduce a 21st century Style Manual, which would indicate the 

preferred way of coding data and of adding metadata to databases. 

Not only will we suggest what those standards should be in consultation with other people in Government who are interested in 

this, but we also will develop a group of our own people who can 

train agencies in how to apply these standards, and then we will 

have filters at our end that check all of this information coming in 

to make sure that it conforms to these uniform standards. 

Mr. LARSON. I am also interested in, and applaud you again, as 

was noted by Linda as well, for the efforts that you have made in 

the human capital area. More than half of your current workforce 

is retirement-eligible, and only 5 percent are under age 30. Though 

the world clearly is moving away from ink on paper and towards 

electronic dissemination, we aren’t there yet. 

Are you satisfied with the direction that we are moving in in this 

transformation? And what do you see your workforce needs as we 

move forward? 

59

Mr. JAMES. I think you have identified perhaps the biggest challenge that we have as an agency. That is, how do we take people 

that have devoted their lives to producing printing and supporting 

the producing of printing at the GPO, and how do we retrain them 

with the skills that are necessary to operate in a digital world? 

There are basically three steps that we are doing. The first was 

to take a look and assess what our training policies are. When I 

arrived on the scene, what we had was an interesting policy that 

said that GPO would pay to train people in the job they hold today, 

but we wouldn’t train for future jobs. Well, we have changed that 

training policy. And the GPO training policy now is to train for 

mission. 

The second thing we had to do was put in place an organization 

that had the ability to lead in a workforce development program, 

and I have done that. We have hired a Chief Human Capital Officer, who is one of the most experienced people in the country. He 

has been through transformations in other industries and knows 

what is required. 

The third thing we need to do—once we create a strategic plan 

and we are able to define exactly the direction we are going—is define what skills will be required of our workforce, and then implement a program to retrain certainly the part of our workforce that 

will need those skills in the future. 

Mr. LARSON. This question is for both you, Mr. James, and Ms. 

Koontz. With respect to the amount of money that the GAO cited 

that is being lost or not being taken in, and in surveying a number 

of agencies, many of whom would say that without the Printer 

doing their specific tasks, their costs would rise, and inasmuch as 

there is still a considerable number of agencies that outsource their 

work currently, does it make economic sense for us to look at having OMB having more agencies who are currently outside of the 

norm doing their work through the Printer’s office? 

Mr. JAMES. Would you like me to answer that first? Title 44 of 

the U.S. Code basically says that all printing shall come to the 

Public Printer, unless it is specifically exempted from that requirement by Congress. 

Over the years Congress has given permission—the JCP has 

given permission—for some agencies to establish their own inhouse printing capabilities. Other agencies chose to go forward and 

build what they call duplicating capabilities that they didn’t believe 

necessarily fell within the requirements of Title 44. 

What we have seen is there is a proliferation of printing and duplicating plants in agencies that need to be addressed and looked 

at. We have had a discussion with OMB about this. OMB has indicated a great interest in working with us to help identify all of the 

plants that exist in Government, and to develop a program to assess whether or not there is any reason to continue these plants. 

As far as the printing that is bought and GPO goes, we have 

looked at this, and we have determined that there is a significant 

amount of printing that is being procured directly by agencies in 

violation of Title 44 of the U.S. Code. We, of course, have no real 

mechanism to enforce the buying of printing through GPO, but 

what we find is that it isn’t necessarily an enforcement problem, 

it is an education problem. And what I found as I have gotten into 

60

this, and I have had discussions with Cabinet-level Secretaries, and 

I have had discussions with directors of agencies, is that frequently 

the agency or the personnel involved do not understand the responsibility under Title 44 to send the work to us, and furthermore 

don’t understand what the capabilities are that GPO has to perform in their behalf. 

So I think that we have to take responsibility for at least part 

of the problem, and we need to vastly improve our education program of agencies. The way we are going about doing this is we 

have reorganized GPO’s customer service organization. Instead of 

having just a group of 500 people that sort of at random deal with 

customers, we are reorganizing our customer service group by department. 

For instance, the Department of Agriculture will have a group of 

four or five or six GPO specialists that are devoted 24 hours a day, 

7 days a week to providing service to them. As I tell the folks in 

these groups, I want them reading more Department of Agriculture 

publications than anybody at the Department of Agriculture. And 

any time the Department of Agriculture announces a new program, 

I want them in there working with the program manager to define 

what the information requirements are going to be at the very beginning. 

So I think that you will see over the next 2 or 3 years, and certainly over the next 5 years, that this lack of agencies understanding their responsibility will go away. It is our responsibility 

to—— 

Mr. LARSON. The Chairman had asked earlier, is there something that Congress could do? I ask again from GAO’s perspective 

and from the inspector general’s perspective, inasmuch as this is 

an educational issue, or is it an enforcement issue? And I would be 

interested in your response. 

Ms. KOONTZ. As to the issue of enforcement, our work indicated 

also that there were agencies who, when we surveyed them, stated 

that they did do in-house printing. Now, some of this is the printing that has been approved by the Congress. And last summer we 

did a briefing on this and found that there were as many as 240 

approved printing plants. 

And I agree. This is something to take a look at, as you have an 

overall decline in printing, that there could be all kinds of adverse 

consequences associated with an overcapacity of government printing chasing less and less demand for that resource. 

But I think in terms of the other printing that is going on, some 

of it is an inevitable consequence of the changes in technology. 

Agencies do not have to have large-scale printing equipment in 

order to produce small runs of printed documents, and they are 

doing that very thing. 

What we suggested to the Public Printer, and I think what he 

articulated to you, is that this was a place where, as our panel 

said, GPO can demonstrate its value by having closer relationships 

with customers, and if indeed they can provide this more efficiently 

and effectively, I think the business should come their way. 

It is also an educational issue, I believe. And I think that, in 

truth, enforcement of Title 44, trying to find all of this, would be 

very, very difficult under any circumstance, and that a more 

61

proactive approach on the part of GPO would be much more effective in the long term. 

Mr. LARSON. Does the inspector general agree? 

Mr. NICHOLS. I would agree with the Public Printer that it is 

largely an educational issue in terms of trying to work with agencies to make sure that they understand what GPO can do and how 

we can go about doing it. 

I would also, however, say that I think it is—we shouldn’t undervalue that it is also, in part, an enforcement issue. As the Public 

Printer also said, since we don’t really have a mechanism to enforce Title 44, it becomes more apparent that if somebody doesn’t 

want to work with GPO for—— 

Mr. LARSON. If you had the necessary capability to enforce it 

through the approach that you have taken, the proactive capability 

of a very capable printer, the recommendations of the panel from 

the GAO, and as in your capacity—as my grandfather Norman 

would say, trust everyone, but cut the cards capacity, come in and 

have not only the logic and the information that comes from a 

panel, and the proactive marketing on behalf of the Public Printer, 

but it would seem from your perspective that this also would be 

able to close that gap in revenue, and especially since it seems that 

there are so many agencies that aren’t rightfully going through the 

Public Printer, and that would only serve to enhance your capability and be more economically efficient. 

Mr. NICHOLS. I would certainly agree with that. One of the ways 

in which we have gone about trying to help the Public Printer and 

GPO in terms of its enforcement is dealing with Inspectors General’s offices at the various customer agencies, when there is an example of a Title 44 issue that comes up where there is an agency 

that is not coming to GPO, is to actually work with the IG’s office 

and say there are things that your agency is doing that may be not 

cost-effective, and work in tandem or in a joint operation to try and 

figure out how we can help make sure that the agency does that. 

Mr. LARSON. I have one quick question for the Inspector General. 

Should we do something to disabuse people of what your role is, 

and that, in fact, it is there to help and to look at these things and 

not—one thing the Chairman and I agree on is that the mentality 

of ‘‘got you’’ in government is just bad policy, and that what we 

need to do is focus on the constructive means of making sure that 

we are working in a collaborative venue, with the end result being 

a better product, more efficiently delivered at the best cost to the 

taxpayer. Do you agree? 

Mr. NICHOLS. I couldn’t agree with you more. I think the Public 

Printer and I have, from the outset, tried to ensure that we led 

from the top down in making sure that both of our respective agencies or entities had that same understanding. That cooperation has 

been ongoing. I expect it to continue. 

Mr. JAMES. May I make one additional comment? The issue over 

the bypass of the Government Printing Office on the procurement 

of printing really falls to the heart, I think, of what the responsibilities of the Public Printer are. That is to collect in one place and 

to catalog and identify publications of the United States Government, and make them widely and broadly available to the public. 

62

We do that through the Federal Depository Library Program. 

And what we find is that when people procure documents directly 

themselves, if they know they are in violation of the law, there is 

not a single chance they are going to tell us about those publications so we can get them in the system. 

Mr. LARSON. Good point. 

Mr. JAMES. If they are doing this inadvertently, again, they don’t 

know their responsibilities under the law. So I think the issue here 

is we are losing part of the history of the American Government, 

and that is the real key issue here. 

As I have discussed this with the management of OMB, they absolutely understand this. Mitch Daniels was there when I arrived 

and if you recall, we had a controversy when I walked in the door, 

and we were able to resolve the controversy because Mr. Daniels 

understood the nature of this. And I can absolutely tell you that 

Mr. Bolten and Mr. Johnson understand this and are working 

closely with us to help us close the gap and get these publications 

to the GPO. And I think that probably, at the end of the day, is 

going to be the best enforcement mechanism we have is to have a 

close working relationship with OMB. 

Mr. LARSON. Our staff would also like to join with you. I know, 

as the Chairman indicated, his willingness to work to see what we 

can do. We share a love of history and the importance of its preservation. I think you are right-on in your comments and look forward 

to working with the triumvirate assembled here today, because I 

think that you have three unique and appropriate approaches to 

this problem-solving that needs to go on. And we would like very 

much to be a part of that to assist you in this. I think it in the 

long run will help everyone. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Linder had to leave. He has another meeting 

that he has to attend. But I think he will have a question to submit, I believe, in writing for you. 

[The information follows:] 

COMMITTEE INSERT—COMMITTEE PLEASE SUPPLY

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let’s see 

here. 

Mr. James, it is mentioned that GAO has indicated that GPO 

has initiated positive changes in the human resource management 

of GPO. And if that is the case, how does this positivity, the positive changes, result in 2,700 full-time employees not being affected; 

or if they are going to be affected with this positive change, how 

are they going to be affected in the short and long run, especially 

given the fact that you are reducing printing, and you have—there 

is a loss—you have a loss of—you have lost money in publication 

sales? Given all of these variables in your agency, how—what steps 

are you going to take in collecting the loss of revenue, and how 

does this affect the changes in your human resources? 

Mr. JAMES. You have just asked the question right at the heart 

of everything. You are correct that we are losing revenues in many 

of our traditional areas, but you have to understand that we don’t 

create the revenue. We simply respond to the needs of our agency 

customers. And what we find is that they are moving away from 

63

printing as the answer to their communication needs, and moving 

more to digital documents. 

Now, we are providing some services to these agencies in regard 

to digital documents and to constructing databases and Web sites, 

but I think we have a long way to go. There is much more that we 

can do, as the GPO has pointed out, and I think those are the jobs 

of the future. So as the information needs of our customers change, 

I think it is incumbent upon the management of GPO to prepare 

our labor force to be able to do things in the style that is preferred 

by our customers. That is what we are intending to do. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Well, that is indeed correct. 

Now, this Chief Human Capital Officer, of course, does that have 

anything to do with the training of these employees for the new 

types of jobs that you are referring to? 

Mr. JAMES. The GPO has been around a long time. We have been 

around nearly 150 years. And as I go back and look at particularly 

the 20th century, what I see is that there have been several technological changes that occurred in the printing industry in the 20th 

century, and GPO has been at the forefront of each of those technological changes. Through history, we have changed completely the 

responsibilities of many of our employees, and time after time our 

employees have been able to rise to the challenge and to embrace 

new technology and move forward. 

My guess is that our employees once again will rise to the technological challenge, and will embrace the new technology, and will 

prepare themselves in conjunction with the help that we give to be 

able to continue to serve you and continue to serve our agency customers. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. So in this whole newfound ambiance 

that we are in, and your trying to change, given the high technology, given the reduction in publications and all of the other variables, are we suggesting that these 2,700 full-time employees will 

either go by attrition, or they will step up to the plate and be ready 

for the newfound technological changes that you are going to 

make? 

Mr. JAMES. I think the issue that I hear most of from our employees is that they are ready for change. They want to embrace 

this change. They want to be retrained. They are ready to move 

ahead, and want to know how come we are moving so slowly. I 

think I hear that more than anything else. 

However, I cannot begin to retrain employees until after we have 

defined what it is we are going to be doing. 

At the same time, there are some basic things we are beginning 

to prepare for. We are doing a study of the skills, called a ‘‘skills 

assessment,’’ of our existing employees so we know where each employee is. Once we determine that and once we determine where 

we are going, then we will see how successful we are. 

I think we will lose some employees, but there will be a place for 

those who want to move ahead with us. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Will you lose them to attrition or 

just that they are unable to adapt to the new technological 

changes? 

Mr. JAMES. I think there are going to continue to be lots of jobs 

in the GPO that looked like they did yesterday. Not every job will 

64

change. I think we will have 3-, 4-, 500 of our jobs that dramatically change. My guess is that our workforce will rise to that challenge. I have every reason to believe that they will. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And they will continue to be as diverse as this country is? 

Mr. JAMES. I absolutely believe that. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. One other question or comment. 

I see that FDLP, the Federal Depository Library Program, which 

many libraries in my district are in, has seen a decline from 1,400 

to 1,300. Can you tell me why this change has occurred and, hopefully, if you are going to reduce others, they will not be in my district? 

Mr. JAMES. It is interesting. The FDLP program is changing and 

it is being driven by technology. You know, 20 years ago, or 25 

years ago, the FDLP was the source of information for people that 

couldn’t afford to buy it themselves. If you couldn’t afford to buy 

a printed publication from the GPO, you could go to your depository and find the publication there and use it—not only find the 

publication, but find people that were skilled in the use of Government information, librarians who had studied and been trained in 

this. 

What we see today is that the change is so dramatic that as 

much as two-thirds of all new Government publications coming into 

the FDLP are now on the Internet. So you don’t need any longer 

to visit a depository library to have access to the information. I 

think what that is doing is causing some of the depository libraries 

to reconsider whether they are invested in the program to question 

whether they want to continue or not, whether or not it is really 

necessary to their community or their constituency to continue. 

And we are addressing this on a regular basis. 

Two weeks ago I was in St. Louis meeting with 500 depository 

librarians to discuss some of these issues and begin to look at what 

the future will be. I believe we need to digitize the entire bank of 

Government documents going back to the Federalist Papers so everyone has access to those documents at their home or office or 

wherever they are. 

And, of course, not everyone will have a computer, and so—— 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. That is just what I was going to 

refer to. 

Mr. JAMES. Not everyone will have a computer. So this is where 

libraries will come into play. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And there is such a connection to 

the Federal Government so far away. And so, to me, it gives pause 

to ensure that as you are downgrading or eliminating some of 

those, that you don’t—that you remember that there are some who 

still do not and have not become part of the digital age. There is 

a lot of digital divide, and so we need to recognize that. 

I did want to speak, but if Ms. Koontz—I have to go to another 

meeting that I am late for, but you are saying that you have recommended that GPO hires the national something managers—I 

will see it when I put my glasses on—but I need to know, just how 

do they play into the whole scheme of things in the restructuring 

of GPO, hiring of national account managers? 

65

Ms. KOONTZ. The national account managers I mentioned in my 

statement, this is really just one small part of what GPO is doing 

to put a new emphasis on their agency customers; and they have 

a number of initiatives that are ongoing that we have been working 

with them on. This is one way they have chosen to expand their 

capability in this area. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Seems like a positive step. Thank 

you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Ms. Millender-McDonald follows:]

66


Insert graphic folio 97 94003A.045
67


Insert graphic folio 98 94003A.046
68


Insert graphic folio 99 94003A.047
69


Insert graphic folio 100 94003A.048
70


Insert graphic folio 101 94003A.049
71

The CHAIRMAN. Thank the gentlelady. 

Mr. Brady. 

Mr. BRADY. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I understand that you have 2,700 employees. 

Mr. JAMES. We may be down a little under that now. I think we 

are under 2,500 employees, Mr. Brady. 

Mr. BRADY. Roughly, how many are bargaining, nonbargaining? 

Mr. JAMES. Roughly 50–50. 

Mr. BRADY. And I am for buyouts and drop programs. I wish to 

have one around here. How does that work when you have 

buyouts? Is it longevity? Is it an age factor? 

Mr. JAMES. When I came in the door, we took a look at the workforce composition, just so I could understand who worked for us, 

what were their skills, where did they come from, how long did 

they work for the GPO; and I was amazed to discover that most 

of the people at GPO, it was their first and only job. In many cases, 

their fathers and mothers had worked before us and, in some cases, 

their grandparents before that. So there is a great tradition of the 

craft of GPO and loyalty to the agency. 

But 52 percent of the folks that worked for us were age eligible 

for retirement, that means they reached the correct years of service 

and age. And it was necessary for us to substantially reduce our 

expenses—we have been losing about $35 million a year—and Congress seemed unwilling to continue to fund that, and my job was 

to figure out how to deal with it. 

So we figured the easiest thing would be to tell our employees 

what we are going to do, how we were going to modernize the GPO, 

and then give people an opportunity—and we offered the opportunity to 300 people—to retire now. They were age eligible to retire, and we offered a $25,000 incentive to do it. 

We had 600 people that applied. We accepted a little over 300 

of those; and then decided, well, if there are that many people that 

are interested, perhaps we ought to go back and do a second round 

of this. And we went back and did a second round and a few—over 

200, I think by the time we finished the program, it will be close 

to 250—elected to do that. 

There are a couple of reasons that I see that people have elected 

to do it. One is, they feel they are entitled to retire. They spent a 

life working for the GPO and they would just like to enter retirement. The second is that some people just don’t want to go through 

the struggles of having to learn a new job or learn a new way of 

doing things. I think this gives them an opportunity to opt out. So 

what we have left, as I see it, is a whole bunch of people that are 

very anxious to get on with the future. 

Mr. BRADY. Well, those people that apply for this, is that still 

around 50–50, bargaining to nonbargaining? Was it offered to both? 

Mr. JAMES. We had it open to both. And I would be happy to supply that information for the record. I don’t know it. 

Mr. BRADY. My concern is—and you can probably see where I am 

going, and I am just worrying about an organization that is fundamentally sound with bargaining unit people and then all of a 

sudden, they are the ones that usually get hurt. They are the 

smaller end, and you wind up putting—hiring management people 

with senior positions or whatever you want to call them, and reVerDate jul 14 2003 21:50 Jul 17, 2004 Jkt 094003 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003
72

placing them with, you know, taking out the small bargaining unit 

people. 

And I am not against that either. I really believe, especially in 

your case, when you come on board for a new agency, you should 

be able to run that agency the way you see fit or else we are going 

to blame you or praise you. But I don’t want to see the smaller guy 

get hurt; I would like to see a protection factor. 

And, again, like I said, hiring other people or whatever senior positions is fine as long as we don’t hurt the core people that have 

been there and offer them in-house or out-of-house, whatever training they need to do their job. It is real easy to say you can’t do this, 

we have to have a reduction in force and hire who you want to hire 

in a nonbargaining capacity and let them do their job also. We 

need to protect those people. 

I don’t want to see top heaviness. I want to see you work with 

our unions and make sure that doesn’t happen and continue to 

have a happy family there. 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank the panel. I also want to mention something. 

I happen to know that the Inspector General and Printer were 

stuck out in traffic, got out, and kind of semi-jogged over here. So 

that is pretty good. 

Also I wanted to mention, I recognize two staff, Mike Harrison—

Mike has worked on these issues with Congressman Larson, and 

Maria Robinson. And this is Maria’s last hearing with us; she is 

from Belmont County where I am from; she is truly a coal miner’s 

daughter. She is a coal miner’s daughter; her father is a coal 

miner. And Maria is going on to great things. We are going to miss 

her. 

She started, her first 2 months out of high school, with us in the 

Ohio senate and worked her way up and became an LD out here 

and then a policy person. So this is Maria Robinson’s last official 

day with us. Just wanted to note that—half a day. 

Mr. LARSON. I just wanted to ask one more follow-up question on 

this, and again—and to all three of the panelists, but specifically 

directed to Mr. James. 

In your opening statement, you talked about what you are intending to do to help close that revenue gap as we move forward. 

The DOD is, number one, your largest customer, but also sometimes problematic in not, shall we say, necessarily going through 

the GPO. 

What are your ideas on improving that? And if all three of you 

can answer that, what are some of the things you think we can do, 

and whether legislation is needed in any of those areas. 

Mr. JAMES. It is a very good question. I certainly spent my first 

year in determining how we could best cut expenses. As you know, 

we have to put points on the scoreboard to win the game. 

We are now in a position to be able to focus on increasing revenues. And almost all of my time is now spent on how are we going 

to replace the revenues we have lost, how we can expand future 

revenues; and I think that you ought to give us a chance. I mean, 

I think this does not require a sledgehammer. I think this requires 

just operating our unit, our business, if you will, in a professional 

way. I think we can get the job done, and I say that based on my 

73

experiences in talking with employees throughout Government. I 

think that, by and large, people want to cooperate if they understand. 

Mr. LARSON. How long a time frame would you say that was? 

Mr. JAMES. We will see results in the next fiscal year, 2005. We 

will see results from this. Within 3 years, we should be doing what 

we need to be doing. 

Mr. LARSON. Ms. Koontz. 

Ms. KOONTZ. First of all, GPO, as it intends to do, needs to look 

at its mission and what it is doing and to make sure that what it 

is doing fits currently what customer needs are and what the needs 

of the public are. So that is sort of first and foremost. 

There are opportunities, I think, for GPO that were indicated by 

our executive branch customer surveys that they are going to follow up on. For example, we found there were some agencies who 

were not aware of some of the emerging electronic services that 

GPO provides, and they were less likely to use those services. We 

pointed out that we thought that was an opportunity for perhaps 

GPO to grow its business in that way; and I think there are probably other opportunities like that as they reexamine what they are 

doing. 

They have to look at their expenses and to look at their people. 

And I think they are moving forward on all fronts in order to determine how to stem the losses that have occurred over the last years. 

Mr. LARSON. And you wouldn’t think legislation is needed either? 

Ms. KOONTZ. At this time, I wouldn’t be able to make any recommendations in that area. 

Mr. NICHOLS. I would agree with what the Public Printer and 

Ms. Koontz have said and just reiterate that, from our vantage 

point, when there are problems dealing with customer agencies, it 

is to deal with the Inspector General at the Defense Department. 

I know that OMB has indicated a willingness to hear from us, 

as well, on any Title 44 problems. So we can use them as a resource as well. 

Mr. LARSON. Thank you all very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank you and I appreciate your testimony. We will call the second panel and will begin in about 3 minutes. 

[Recess.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank you. We will start with Panel 

2. Let me introduce the panel. 

First, we have Mr. Ben Cooper, who is the Executive Vice President of the Printing Industries of America; also, Mr. George Lord, 

Chairman of the Joint Council of Unions at the GPO; Mr. Bill 

Boarman, President of the Printing, Publishing and Media Workers 

section of the CWA; and finally, Janice Johnston, President of the 

American Association of Law Libraries. 

74

STATEMENTS OF BEN COOPER, PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF 

AMERICA; GEORGE LORD, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT COUNCIL OF UNIONS, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; WILLIAM 

BOARMAN, COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA; AND 

JANIS JOHNSTON, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHAMPAIGNURBANA 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you and welcome to the panel, and we 

will begin with Mr. Cooper. 

STATEMENT OF BEN COOPER 

Mr. COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today, and I want to thank you for the 

work you have done in this committee, and the members of this 

committee. You have provided a great deal of leadership. 

And also want to pay special thanks to Bruce James, who came 

out of our industry. We certainly expected Bruce to be a leader in 

the Government Printing Office, and he has not disappointed us to 

that extent. 

And also want to acknowledge and appreciate being with Mr. 

Lord and Mr. Boarman today. We have been involved in Government Printing Office issues for more years than any of us would 

care to recollect. Bill and I go back to 1978; we were just reminiscing about that. It is fun to be with my friends and to appear before the committee. 

Contrary to published reports, print is not dead. The printing in- dustry this year will exceed $155 billion in sales, and we are expecting a growth rate this year of upwards of 4 percent. 

These are challenging times. There has been a tremendous 

growth in electronic communication; nevertheless, people still prefer to get their communication by print. And we find that—as other 

forms of technology arise, we find that print still serves an enormous market in this country. 

In addition to the substantial role of print in the private sector, 

print is also a very big part of the public sector. I would like to 

point out that in the Federal budget, the print sector in 1996 was 

$1.75 billion. We are expecting $2.1 billion in print in the Federal 

budget in fiscal year 2004. So while GPO volume in print may be 

declining, the growth in print in the Federal Government has not 

declined and, in fact, is continuing to grow. 

Our objective, and I think the objective of most of the witnesses 

here, is to figure out ways to more effectively move that print volume into the GPO so the GPO can continue to provide that work 

more efficiently and more effectively. 

Why is print still relatively strong in the face of new technologies? It is simply because for many private sector and government communications, print is the most effective and reliable way 

to reach the end user. It is very interesting that the challenges we 

face in the private sector are not very different from the challenges 

faced by the Government Printing Office. 

Our industry has always managed information. Our output has 

historically been on paper and a good portion is still on paper. But 

modern printers are now creating, managing and distributing information in all formats for their clients. Also, printers are managing 

files, storing and distributing print information for their customers 

75

as well. For the GPO to remain viable, it will have to change to 

these kinds of technologies as well; and from what we have heard 

from the Public Printer today and watching his actions over the 

last 16 months, we are confident he is moving rapidly in that direction. 

There are some changes needed, however, and we have been 

talking to GPO about these changes, as well as with people from 

the Office of Management and Budget and a number of folks on 

Capitol Hill. 

Over time, we have had three fundamental issues that have been 

consistent in all of our testimonies and all of our efforts to reform 

government printing. Those three issues are that Federal agencies 

other than the Government Printing Office should not be in the 

printing business other than providing routine office copying. 

Secondly, the GPO must modernize the way it buys printing for 

its agency customers to conform to the rules used throughout the 

rest of the Federal Government and by GPO to make some of its 

own purchases. 

And third, the Federal Government should implement a planning 

process which determines printing and information needs for the 

coming fiscal year. 

We had hoped that many of these issues would have been resolved in 2003 by what became known as the OMB–GPO Compact. 

Regrettably, despite apparent universal agreement on the need for 

these changes, little progress is being made in these areas. While 

all three are important, I want to focus today on the planning process and the need to modernize GPO procurement regulations. 

The planning process that we have proposed for some time has 

been to simply require agencies or subagencies to develop, in conjunction with their budget submission, a plan for the coming year 

and their printing and information needs. An officer in that agency 

could be designated for this purpose. Agencies are required to have 

a chief information officer; whether that person is appropriate or 

not, I would leave that to the judgment of Congress and the Federal agencies. 

But it would seem to us that if an agency had to lay out its plan 

for printing and information and communication to the Congress as 

part of its budget planning process, then the GPO would better be 

able to understand what it needed, how to use its people more effectively. We would also be able, in that process, to have the agencies identify what its printing capacities are and what its needs are 

so that, in looking at the larger picture, we might be able to more 

effectively plan the process. 

We know that this is somewhat of an undertaking for Federal 

agencies, but one presumes there is some planning process that is 

already in place and that printing and information is not whimsically decided at the last minute. 

The next area of concern that I want to address is the reform of 

procurement. GPO’s Federal agency customers have the same need 

for flexibility in selecting solutions in print and related services as 

our private sector customers. Given the technology changes, all customers need to hear new ideas to take advantage of new technologies, methodologies and solutions. Unfortunately, under current GPO regulations, if a printing company proposes an exciting 

76

new alternative, even when it reduces overall costs, its bid can be 

declared nonresponsive and rejected. 

In this new environment, GPO’s classic ‘‘low price wins’’ methodology and rigid procurement methods are simply too restrictive. 

Purchases of all other products and services throughout the Federal Government can be made using a variety of purchasing methods under the Federal acquisition regulations. This flexibility allows the contracting officer and his customers to structure a procurement based on the complexity of the project and the needs of 

the government while still obtaining competition. It not only allows, but also encourages, creative, cost-saving solutions. 

Ironically, when GPO buys products and services for itself, it 

uses a materials management acquisition regulation which mirrors 

the Federal acquisition regulation and provides it with a variety of 

purchasing options, including the option to consider not only price, 

but quality, experience, delivery service, et cetera, when awarding 

contracts. But none of these modern purchasing methods is applied 

to print and related purchases GPO makes for its agency customers. 

I should note that some believe that the electronic procurement 

system being developed under the OMB–GPO Compact will solve 

this problem. That is not the case for three reasons: 

First, whether procurement is done on paper or on the Web, the 

system will continue to decline if the underlying procurement regulations are not brought in line with the rest of the government and 

best practices. 

Second, based on agency decisions since the Compact, most print 

purchases will not go through the new GPO Direct program because agency print procurement departments do not have the contracting authority to use that future GPO buying vehicle. 

Finally, GPO Direct has a $100,000 limit, so the larger, critical 

jobs will still go through the traditional GPO procurement system. 

The solution is for GPO to adopt the current MMAR regulations as 

the procurement regulations applicable to purchases for its agency 

customers, not next year, but next month. 

I would like to talk about simplified purchase agreements. In the 

summer of 2000, GPO launched a new simplified purchase agreement contract vehicle. Under these agreements, GPO sets up a 

blanket purchasing agreement with multiple vendors whose quality, service and pricing meet government requirements and allow 

Federal agency buyers to purchase printing directly from the approved vendors. This saves the agency time and administrative 

costs and allows them to have direct contact with a vendor. At the 

same time, GPO provides its contracting authority in full support 

of the agency buyer when needed. 

This is in contrast to the OMB–GPO Compact electronic model 

where agency contracting authority is used and GPO charges extra 

for support services. Under this program, agencies can make the 

purchase decision based on price and other factors. Other factors 

include responsiveness, business practices, convenience, courtesy, 

attention to detail and elements of past performance, including 

work quality, reliability and schedule compliance. This flexibility is 

in contrast to GPO’s traditional ‘‘low cost wins’’ methodology. 

77

This program offers agencies a flexible, full-service, alternative 

option to the Compact electronic purchasing model that is fully 

compliant with the goals of the Compact. It is very popular with 

agencies and vendors. It has spread from GPO central office in 

Washington to regional offices throughout the country. The only 

complaint about the program has been, the $2,500 purchase limit 

was too low. 

In June, 2003, after talking to agency customers and printers, PI requested that GPO increase the purchase limit to at least $10,000. 

In support of that request, we surveyed 150 agency print buyers 

and managers in August, 2003. Nine out of 10 respondents wanted 

the limit increased. Over half wanted the limit at $10,000 or more. 

We have included a copy of that survey for your information. 

Based on the survey and their own analysis, GPO management agreed to raise the limit to at least $10,000, but the limit today remains at $2,500. We now believe that the limit should be increased 

to $25,000. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. And I would like to 

say just in conclusion, the printing industry is changing dramatically. One of the primary ways it is changing is in the growth of 

what we call ancillary services. 

One of the fastest growing areas of ancillary services is in distribution and fulfillment. Many of our print—many of the members 

of our organization would enjoy talking to agency customers about 

providing that level of service. We want to do this under the context of GPO procurement authority. We firmly believe that if we 

will address this agency plan issue, be more flexible in contracting, 

that the net result will be to bring a significant amount of business 

back into the GPO and provide work not only for the folks represented by the gentleman sitting next to me, but serve the taxpayers well. 

Thank you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Cooper follows:]

78


Insert graphic folio 01 94003.001
79


Insert graphic folio 02 94003.002
80


Insert graphic folio 03 94003.003
81


Insert graphic folio 04 94003.004
82

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lord. 

STATEMENT OF GEORGE LORD 

Mr. LORD. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and to all members of 

the committee. I want to say how honored I am to appear before 

this committee to share with you the hopes and dreams and fears 

of the men and women whom I represent, that are employed at the 

U.S. Government Printing Office. 

We have served the Congress, the executive and judicial 

branches for well over 100 years. During that time, the employees 

have served and served well. We have fulfilled our mission year 

after year, no matter what, with honor and distinction. We take 

enormous pride in those accomplishments. 

These employees that I have represented have a high sense of 

duty and they have willingly met every challenge, whether the 

challenge was technological or financial. We have mastered the 

technology. We have made changes that saved the GPO and the 

American taxpayer huge amounts of money when warranted and 

legitimately needed. This history is why I am before you today. 

These employees over the years have given their sweat and labor 

for the survival of this fine institution. 

We believe some of GPO’s financial resources have been wasted, 

thereby reversing those sacrifices I have mentioned. Some of the 

wasteful spending items we consider are huge expansion of GPO’s 

overhead costs because of the creation of additional executive positions; increased expenditures for offices for those executives; and 

the wholesale reduction of employees that have chargeable hours, 

thereby reducing the revenue; finally, increased travel expenses for 

those executives and support staff. 

We believe the Public Printer needs to be more committed to the 

GPO mission and not squander scarce Federal dollars that should 

be used to plan for, enter into the new electronic age, including the 

impact of the new technology on ink-on-paper printing, which is 

still, even today, our greatest source of revenue. 

Earlier. In testimony, there were questions fielded about the 

human capital office and the programs. While we are still waiting 

for the skills assessment and the skills needs to be done, GPO has 

placed people into key positions, and has changed our job series, 

which is a job classification standard which allows people to compete for the job that I have been doing for 25, 30 years. We believe 

that is wrong and we believe that it needs to be resolved because, 

by the time these programs and evaluations are in place, jobs, critical jobs, jobs for growth—and everybody wants to grow for any employer that they devote their career to—will be filled and they will 

be left with a lower paid job and a lower skill. 

We also mentioned about the new technology. As I said in my 

written statement, GPO employees have had a fine record and tradition of being retrained for whatever the technology is. I say to 

you today that if you survey the current employees in IT occupations within the Government Printing Office, you will find probably 

at least half, if not more, of those employees working in IT fields 

today came out of the craft areas of yesterday. So GPO put forth 

a challenge the employees have met every time. 

83

We also have a concern because of the shifting of ink-on-paper 

to electronics that GPO gets its resources still, to this day, by the 

printed product. As we are doing the typesetting and the coding for 

the Congressional Record and we complete and create that digital 

file, it is nothing to take that file and put it out on the Web. So 

the revenue that is generated are—the hours that our people work 

on that are charged back to the revolving fund. 

In conclusion, I don’t want to leave you with the overwhelming 

impression that Mr. James and organized labor is not getting along 

or are battling over the various items, because on a lot of issues 

we are, in fact, in agreement. This is, however, a concern that the 

employees have been communicating to me over the last 14 

months, and I appreciate the time and the opportunity to express 

them to you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Lord follows:]

84


Insert graphic folio 05 94003.005
85


Insert graphic folio 06 94003.006
86


Insert graphic folio 07 94003.007
87


Insert graphic folio 08 94003.008
88

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Boarman. 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM BOARMAN 

Mr. BOARMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and good morning. And 

good morning to members of the committee. Thank you for holding 

this hearing and thanks for the invitation to my organization to appear and to give our views. 

My name is Bill Boarman and I am Vice President of the Communication Workers of America, over 730,000 members, including 

a broad spectrum of workers in the communications industry and 

the printing and publishing industry as well. 

Our union’s history within the Government Printing Office 

reaches as far back as the Civil War. That history provides us with 

an intimate insight into GPO’s operations and its evolution. My 

own experience with GPO goes back 30 years, first as an employee, 

later as a local union representative, and today, as a national Vice 

President of the CWA. I think over this period, I have testified at 

least a dozen times before either the Joint Committee on Printing, 

the Senate Rules Committee, House Administration and various 

committees on the appropriations side. And I also, as Ben Cooper 

has mentioned, served on an ad hoc committee back in the late 

1970s along with a member of your staff, Charlie Howell—I think 

we are the three survivors—where we were appointed by Congress 

to look at major changes and overhaul to GPO. 

It is notable that, through the years, GPO’s talented personnel 

continue to meet their grueling daily deadlines in producing the 

Congressional Record, the Federal Register and thousands of other 

complex and significant documents and records of our government’s 

work. The most important role that GPO plays is in the maintenance of our Nation’s commitment to participatory democracy and 

accountability by the government. That is GPO’s fundamental mission, to ensure universal citizen access to the products of their Federal Government. 

By collecting and distributing government research and reports 

through its network of 1,300 libraries, GPO serves a unique role for 

the Nation. Perhaps because GPO has been so effective at this 

function, the average citizen may not be aware of just how important it is. 

Some 20 years ago, GPO began a profound transition from a traditional ink-on-paper operation into a state-of-the-art information 

entity. That transition presaged changes that many other major 

publishers have followed, first in digital composition and pagination and currently in the masterful use of the Internet to enhance 

information flows throughout the Nation and the world. 

When I worked in the GPO, I might note there were 8,000 employees. And today, there are probably less than 2,500. And that 

has been done because of technology that allows us to do a lot more 

than we could before with a lot less people, and it has been done 

basically through attrition. And unfortunately, there has been some 

work loss because some Federal agencies are seeking other places 

to have their work done. 

GPO’s leadership and achievement have been widely recognized 

with a prestigious number of awards and honors. Today, however, 

we are concerned about a different problem for this venerable agenVerDate jul 14 2003 21:50 Jul 17, 2004 Jkt 094003 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003
89

cy, an issue of management philosophy that we believe could lead 

to a serious divergence unless it is addressed analytically. 

Our unique perspective with experience in the information industry both in the private and public sector—as you know, CWA represents people who work for General Electric, Verizon, ABC and 

Disney, just to name a few of our large employers that employ 

CWA members—that unique perspective tells me that any information enterprise depends upon the productive capacity of the organization, not the number of highly paid executives it has on its plan 

to analyze. We are frankly concerned that the GPO is heading in 

another direction along the lines of an organizational structure 

that is top heavy with management officials whose costs cannot be 

absorbed and whose presence may not add to the productive capacity of the agency. 

As those costs grow, we are fearful that GPO will not be able to 

maintain its efficiency. This could and may result in cuts to the 

workforce and/or pay and benefits. 

As the members of the committee know, GPO by law must recover all of its costs. Historically, GPO has operated on a traditional pyramid structure, a strong, broad foundation of productive 

personnel at the primary level holding up the strong, lean management layer dealing with the administration. We have noticed that 

there appears to be a new layering of management positions with 

highly paid executive salaries, virtually inverting the pyramid. 

That change, we believe, imperils GPO’s capacity because it results 

in a reapportionment of the agency’s resources away from productive capacity. 

Given GPO’s costs and accounting structure, any diversion of resources away from productive and billable positions could force the 

agency to choose between investment and additional productive capacity or growing executive salaries. 

We encourage this committee and other committees in the House 

and Senate with jurisdiction over GPO operations to remain vigilant. Sustaining this national treasure and preserving its vital 

function won’t earn you headlines and sound bites on the 6 o’clock 

news. 

I can assure you as a parent, citizen and elected leader of an organization which seeks to advance the economic well-being of working families, a fully functional Government Printing Office enriches 

our Nation’s wisdom and awareness in ways that are immeasurable on a balance sheet. Your oversight is critical in making certain that GPO is never forced to retrench or cut corners, compromise quality and efficiency or lose productive personnel in order 

to maintain a management layer. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity for CWA to 

give its views on these issues. And I would be happy to answer any 

questions that you or members of the committee may have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Boarman follows:]

90


Insert graphic folio 09 94003.009
91


Insert graphic folio 10 94003.010
92


Insert graphic folio 11 94003.011
93


Insert graphic folio 12 94003.012
94

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Johnston. 

STATEMENT OF JANIS JOHNSTON 

Ms. JOHNSTON. Good morning. I am Janis Johnston, Director of 

the Law Library and Associate Professor of Law at the Albert E. 

Jenner, Jr., Memorial Law Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. I am President of the American Association of 

Law Libraries. 

I am very pleased to appear before you this morning on behalf 

of the American Association of Law Libraries, the American Library Association, the Association of Research Libraries, the Medical Library Association and the Special Libraries Association. Together, we represent more than 90,000 librarians, as well as the 

more than 1,200 libraries that participate in the Federal Depository Library Program. 

We commend you, Chairman Ney and Ranking Member Larson, 

for holding this important oversight hearing on the Government 

Printing Office. Our communities have a very strong interest in 

Federal information policy, a fervent commitment to public access 

to government information and a Federal robust library program 

for the 21st century. I ask that you please include my long statement in the record of today’s hearing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection. 

Ms. JOHNSTON. I would like to summarize a few key points from 

that statement. 

First, we commend Public Printer Bruce James for bringing energy and enthusiam to the GPO as he works with Congress and all 

stakeholders to make its operations more efficient and to strenthen 

the FDLP. During his first year as Public Printer, Mr. James has 

accomplished several important initiatives to improve the public’s 

access to government information. 

Last June, he and then-OMB Director Mitch Daniels announced 

an historic compact for government printing that allows agencies 

flexibility to select their own printers through the GPO procurement system. Printers will not be paid until they provide GPO with 

one electronic version of each document ordered and two print copies, thus ensuring improved public access to agency publications. 

We applaud Mr. James for his many successful outreach efforts, 

including the equally important MOU signed last August with the 

National Archives and Records Administration. 

Second, we believe strongly that the FDLP and depository libraries will continue to be crucial access and service points for the public in the 21st century, and we are committed to our role in this 

important partnership with Congress. 

The FDLP is a very successful partnership not just between GPO 

and participating libraries, but also with Congress, Federal agencies, the courts and the American public. Librarians know firsthand on a daily basis the importance and impact that access to 

government information has on the health and lives of all Americans, our Nation’s economy and on public participation in government. 

The more than 1,200 Federal depository libraries come in all 

shapes and sizes—public, academic, law, special, Federal agency, 

research and medical libraries. Depository libraries spend millions 

95

of dollars annually for staff, space and, increasingly, for the technological infrastructure, the hardware, software, training, expertise 

and other services necessary to effectively connect users to electronic resources. In addition, we purchase costly commercial indexes, software and access to networks to make government publications more accessible to your constituents. 

Some depository libraries are dropping out of the FDLP for a 

number of different reasons. GPO has decreased significantly the 

number of print titles distributed to programs over the past several 

years, mostly as a result of the increased amount of born-digital information. 

We are pleased that GPO has begun to recognize that different 

types of libraries have different needs and different users. We believe GPO should strive to provide documents to depository libraries in the most suitable format to meet their users’ needs. 

For example, the users of legal government information often require access to authenticated legal materials. Important legal titles 

available electronically through the Internet, whether through GPO 

access or on agency, congressional or Web sites are not authenticated. Note the following disclaimer for the electronic version of the 

U.S. Supreme Court slip opinions on the Court’s own Web site, 

quote: 

‘‘these electronic opinions may contain computer-generated errors 

or other deviations from the official printed slip opinion pamphlets,’’ end of quote. 

Last year I was very pleased that GPO responded to a request 

from the AALL executive board to reinstate print distribution of 

the slip opinions to law and regional depository libraries. AALL has 

also proposed an expanded list of essential titles for law libraries 

that would ensure that core legal titles would be distributed to law 

libraries in authenticated print versions. 

Today, only the largest of the Nation’s map libraries have the 

ability to provide full-sized colored copies of maps delivered on line. 

There are technological issues with maps as well. Frequently online maps are not accessible in a way that allows downloading and 

copying of the full image. Therefore, many libraries need paper copies of maps to meet their users’ needs. 

Congress should be concerned that the move to an all-electronic 

Federal Depository Library Program may fail to meet the needs of 

those who live in rural or minority communities where there is little technological infrastructure and libraries may lack adequate 

high-speed Internet access. 

Third, the Federal Government must ensure the authenticity and 

permanent public access to and preservation of electronic government information. As we move into an even more electronic environment, we urge Congress to work to ensure that electronic government information products that have important historical value 

do not disappear, that they are preserved for permanent public access. 

In my long statement, I describe at some length the problems we 

have found trying to access information from government CD roms 

that have been distributed to depository libraries since 1988. The 

problem is that many early CDs and some continuing CD series 

use proprietary software and proprietary formats or both and are 

96

no longer usable at all. In addition, vast quantities of born-digital 

documents appear and disappear from government Web sites without notice or without any trace. It is alarming that a recent Mellon 

study found that the average duration——

The CHAIRMAN. I hate to interrupt, but your time has expired. 

That is a call for votes, so you have to basically conclude if you 

could. 

Ms. JOHNSTON. I am almost there. 

The Mellon study found that the average report on a government 

Web site is only available for 4 months. 

We know process is in place government-wide to ensure the entire life cycle of electronic government information and permanent 

public access and preservation. 

Chairman Ney and Ranking Member Larson, the library community is committed to working with you and GPO as they develop 

a strategic plan for the 21st century. We are committed to our partnership with you. 

Thank you very much for inviting me to participate in this important hearing. I am pleased to answer any questions you might 

have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Questions? 

Mr. LARSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Given the shortness of 

time—I have several questions, so I would like, with the permission of the Chair, to produce written questions for the panelists because time may not allow you to answer them thoroughly. 

But I would just like a general response, if you can, especially 

from the panelists representing labor and also from Mr. Cooper. 

First, Mr. Cooper, you argue that the government should generally engage in more formal planning process with respect to 

printing needs. You say there is resistance to such an idea. From 

whom and why? 

Mr. COOPER. I wouldn’t call this overt resistance, but it is one 

of those issues we have proposed over many years. The difficulty 

is like, with closing Federal agency printing plants, there is no one 

place to go to get this done, whether it is through an Appropriations Committee process, or we discussed it with OMB. It is hard 

to get the one place, to get the one answer, to move ahead with it. 

Mr. LARSON. Mr. Lord and Mr. Boarman, both of you commented 

at length about your concerns with regard to labor and your relationship with GPO, noting as well that it is not all a bad picture, 

but you are raising very salient points with respect to this. 

What is the biggest single thing that the Public Printer could do 

to make labor feel he considers them a partner in this transformation process now under way at the GPO? 

Mr. LORD. Well, above all, foremost, better communication, which 

is always the case in most situations. 

But also if—many Public Printers that I have served under have 

always advocated partnership with labor. But what my experience 

has showed me, what they mean by ‘‘partnership’’ is, I am going 

to make the decision and then I will get you together and inform 

you what that is. That is not our idea of partnership. 

I believe that a lot of the problem of the current administration, 

however, is timing more than it is—they need a deeper understanding that where GPO is today didn’t just happen, that there 

97 

was a lot of transition, a lot of sacrifices made; and employees just 

don’t want to see the clock turned back by having to face another 

financial crisis, because what we see is huge amounts of spending 

for things that we don’t believe are warranted or needed. And that 

is their biggest fear. 

I mean, we see some things that money is being spent on that 

we don’t believe should be a top priority, especially at the same 

time you are talking about retraining huge amounts of people. We 

don’t see the money is going to be there when it comes to our time 

to retrain at this rate of spending. 

We all see what has happened to the volume of work. But even 

if the Congress gave us a billion dollars to put in a revolving fund 

for any fiscal year, we can’t get to it if we don’t have chargeable 

hours. And overhead does not generate chargeable hours; it is just 

the opposite. 

And then the wholesale reductions that we see through the two 

buyouts that we have had, the overwhelming majority of those employees who seized the opportunity to go out are bargaining-unit 

jobs, are revenue-generating jobs, and therefore, are further 

compounding the costs of running the printing office. And we just 

don’t see, if that continues, that the money is going to be there to 

do all this lavish retraining that Mr. James talked about. That is 

our biggest fear. 

Mr. LARSON. I will defer to my other colleagues and just say that 

I am very concerned about the issues raised by the AALL. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Brady. 

Mr. BRADY. I know we have a vote on, and I will be brief. 

I want to restate something that was in the testimony of Mr. 

Boarman, that our oversight is critical to make certain that the 

GPO is never forced to retrench, cut corners, compromise quality 

and efficiency or lose productive personnel in order to maintain a 

management level layer that adds nothing to its output. And I 

promise you, I will be as diligent as I can be to try to make that 

not happen. 

The CHAIRMAN. We have a vote. There are questions that I wanted to ask, but I will submit them in writing and then we can converse back and forth. 

With that, I want to thank all of our witnesses and both panels 

for very good testimony. I know you have worked hard to prepare 

for the hearing today. 

I also want to thank our ranking member, Congressman Larson, 

Mr. Brady and their staff members who prepared for this. 

I ask unanimous consent that witnesses and members have 7 

legislative days to submit material into the record and for those 

statements and materials to be entered in the appropriate place 

within the record. Without objection, the material will be so entered. 

I ask unanimous consent that the staff be authorized to make 

technical and conforming changes on all matters considered by the 

committee at today’s hearing. And without objection, so ordered. 

And that completes our business for today. The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12 Noon, the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ