U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

32–364 WASHINGTON : 2018

MARKUP OF COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS 115–6, 

115–7, AND 115–8 

MARKUP 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

Held in Washington, DC, February 27, 2018 

Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration 

( 

Available on the Internet 

www.govinfo.gov 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi, Chairman 

RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois, Vice Chairman 

BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia 

MARK WALKER, North Carolina 

ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania, 

Ranking Member 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
(1) 

MARKUP OF COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS 115–6, 

115–7, AND 115–8 

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:25 p.m., in Room 

1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Gregg Harper [Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Harper, Davis, Comstock, Loudermilk, 

and Brady. 

Staff Present: Sean Moran, Staff Director; Kim Betz, Deputy 

Staff Director; Cole Felder, Deputy General Counsel; Dan Jarrell, 

Legislative Clerk; Amanda Anger, Professional Staff; Erin 

McCracken, Communications Director; Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff 

Director; and Eddie Flaherty, Minority Chief Clerk. 

The CHAIRMAN. I now call to order the Committee on House Administration for today’s Committee meeting. A quorum is present, 

so we may proceed. The meeting record will remain open for 5 legislative days so that Members may submit any materials that they 

wish to be included therein. 

There are three items that we have on the docket today: First, 

Committee Resolution 115–6, the Committee’s views and estimates 

on the fiscal year 2019; second, we have Committee Resolution 

115–7, a measure to amend the regulations collectively known as 

the Members’ Congressional Handbook; and, third, Committee Resolution 115–8, a measure to amend the regulations collectively 

known as the Committee Congressional Handbook. 

The first item before us is Committee Resolution 115–6, the 

Committee’s views and estimates for fiscal year 2019. The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 requires Congressional Committees to 

submit to the Committee on the Budget their views and estimates 

on programs within their jurisdictions. 

The views and estimates we are making up today highlight the 

Committee’s continued work to conduct oversight and identify future potential savings at the Federal Election Commission. As the 

Committee has stated previously, one way to reduce the FEC’s 

budget is to eliminate the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. 

The Committee continues that recommendation. In addition, the 

views and estimates highlight the ongoing concerns the Committee 

has with the Election Assistance Commission. 

The views and estimates reflect the Committee’s support for the 

ongoing efforts to strengthen the cybersecurity platforms within 

each of the legislative branch entities and agencies. Equally imporVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:52 Oct 18, 2018 Jkt 032364 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A364.XXX A364

dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
2 

tant, the Committee supports the ongoing efforts in the House to 

ensure it has the resources and assistance in the event of a cyber 

attack. 

Furthermore, the views and estimates recognize the importance 

of providing resources to address the issue of sexual harassment. 

As I have said previously, one case of sexual harassment is one too 

many. We need to ensure that the House’s training program, which 

will begin this April, is effective in educating and preventing discrimination and harassment. 

Finally, the views and estimates recognize the ongoing need to 

secure and protect Members, their staffs, their constituents, and, of 

course, the public. The events in the summer of 2017 and the corresponding increase in threats against Members demonstrate security remains paramount. The Committee supports funding for the 

United States Capitol Police and the House Sergeant at Arms for 

these efforts. 

The second measure before us, Committee Resolution 115–7, 

clarifies certain provisions and makes additional technical corrections to the Members’ Congressional Handbook, and I will mention 

a few. First, the Committee Resolution incorporates the prohibitions contained in H. Res. 724, which we passed earlier this month. 

H. Res. 724, among other things, prohibits the Members’ representational allowance from being used for settlements or for an award 

in connection with conduct prohibited by the Congressional Accountability Act. 

The Committee resolution also clarifies the use of the MRA for 

security, including allowing prior year funds to be obligated for security furnishings and enhancements, clarifies the role of the 

House Sergeant at Arms in approving noncapital security enhancements; clarifies responsibility for costs associated with security enhancements considered capital improvements; clarifies payments 

for security personnel are an ordinary and reimbursable expense; 

and, lastly, clarifies security items exceeding $500 must be added 

to office inventory. 

Finally, the third measure on our docket, Committee Resolution 

115–8, mirrors the changes in the Members’ Congressional Handbook as it relates to settlements and awards under the Congressional Accountability Act. The measure prohibits Committee funding from being used for settlements or awards in connection with 

conduct prohibited by the Congressional Accountability Act. 

I would now like to recognize my colleague and the Committee’s 

Ranking Member, Mr. Brady, for the purpose of providing an opening statement. 

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this business 

meeting today. 

I support the three Committee resolutions before us. However, 

we do intend to file minority views on the proposed views and estimates on the President’s budget, as we do have some well-known 

disagreements about the Election Assistance Commission and the 

Federal Election Commission. 

And, of course, we support the ban on using the MRA or Committee funds to settle sexual harassments and discrimination cases. 

That is a very long overdue commonsense change, and I appreciate 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
3 

your bipartisan work on that. I encourage my colleagues to support 

the proposal before us, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman yields back. 

Does any other Member wish to be recognized for the purposes 

of an opening statement? 

Seeing none, I now call up and lay before the Committee Committee Resolution 115–6, the views and estimates for fiscal year 

2019. 

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with, and the 

resolution is considered read and open for amendment. 

[The resolution follows:] 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
4 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 8 here 32364A.001

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

I 15TH CONGRESS 

c 

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION 115- II 

February 27, 2018 

Resolution to Approve Committee Views and Estimates 

Resolved, pursuant to§ 30l(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and House Rule X, 

clause 4(t), the Committee adopts the following views and estimates for Fiscal Year 2019: 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

VIEWS AND ESTIMATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 

Federal Election Commission 

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent, bipartisan commission which 

facilitates transparency in the federal election process through public disclosure of campaign 

finance data, and encourages compliance with the Federal Election Campaign Act by providing 

information and policy guidance. The FEC administers and interprets the Federal Election 

Campaign Act, the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, and the Presidential Primary Matching 

Payment Account Act. The FEC also enforces these Acts through audits, investigations, and civil 

litigation. 

The current Fiscal Year 2018 appropriated amount for the FEC continues to be 

$79,119,000, the same as fiscal year 2017. This and any increased funding requires appropriate 

allocation. The Committee will continue to conduct vigorous oversight to identify and realize 

future potential savings. 

Presidential Election Campaign Fund 

One means to reduce the budget needs of the FEC is to eliminate the Presidential Election 

Campaign Fund (PECF). The PECF provides taxpayer financing for presidential campaigns. The 

PECF receives its funds through a voluntary election on tax returns to have $3 of the taxpayer's 

taxes directed to the fund. For primary elections the PECF provides payments to candidates to 

match private contributions. Candidates who elect to participate are subject to state-by-state 

spending limits. For general elections the PECF provides a single grant payment to participating 

candidates, in return for which the candidate agrees not to spend funds from any other source. 
5 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 9 here 32364A.002

The FEC incurs costs to administer the PECF and to audit recipients of PECF funds. These costs 

could be eliminated if the PECF were eliminated. 

The fund is underutilized by candidates. After pledging to participate in the PECF, in 

2008 then-Senator Obama declined public financing during the general election. In the 2012 

campaign, only three candidates received PECF funds- Buddy Roemer (Americans Elect and 

the Reform Party), Gary Johnson (Libertarian) and Jill Stein (Green). The total they received was 

$1,356, I 08. Both major party candidates rejected PECF financing in both the primary and 

general elections. No major party candidate utilized PECF financing in the 2016 campaign. 

If candidates did chose to accept PECF funds and the accompanying restrictions, the fund 

would be undercapitalized because the American public chooses to no longer contribute. Public 

support for the PECF has declined precipitously since its introduction. The percentage of 

taxpayers participating dropped from 28.7% in 1980 to approximately 5.4% in 2015, even 

though participating does not affect tax liability. 

In the 112'h Congress, the House twice voted to eliminate the Presidential Election 

Campaign Fund by passing both H.R. 359 and H.R. 3463. In the ll3'h Congress, the Committee 

reported H.R. 95, which would eliminate the PECF and would reduce direct spending by 

approximately $130 million by 2023. In the !14th Congress, the Committee has reported H.R. 

412, which would transfer $88,202,400 to the 10-Year Pediatric Research Initiative to fight 

childhood diseases and the remaining amount, roughly $170 million, to the United States 

Treasury to pay down the national debt. In the 115'h Congress, H.R. 133 has been introduced, 

which would transfer $63.002...100 to the 1 0-Year Pediatric Research Initiative to fight childhood 

diseases and the remaining amount, roughly $250 million, to the United States Treasury to pay 

down the national debt. 

Given the scarce resources available and our duty to the American tax payer to set 

priorities for federal spending, eliminating a needless and underutilized fund while paying down 

our national debt and directing more money to pediatric illness research is an appropriate and 

crucial step toward fiscal responsibility. 

The Committee does not support continued operation of the PECF and strongly supports 

the elimination of the PECF. 

Election Assistance Commission 

The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is an independent, bipartisan commission 

which develops guidance to meet Help America Vote Act (HA VA) requirements, adopts 

voluntary voting system guidelines, and serves as a national clearinghouse of information on 

election administration. The EAC also establishes voluntary voting system guidelines, certifies 

voting systems, accredits test laboratories, and audits the use of funds provided the states through 

election reform grants. 

The FY 2017 appropriated amount for the EAC totals $9,600,000. Further reductions 

from the President's budget are warranted. No new funding for election reform grants has been 

provided to the EAC for the last eight years. Less than $5 million in grant funding currently 

exists. 
6 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 10 here 32364A.003

In the 112'h Congress, a majority of the House twice voted to eliminate the EAC, with 

235 Members voting in favor of both H.R. 672 and H.R. 3463. A majority of the Committee's 

members voted in favor of eliminating the EAC on three occasions. In the 113'h Congress, the 

Committee reported H.R. 1994, which would eliminate the EAC. The CBO estimate for H.R 

1994 stated that eliminating the EAC would save taxpayers $42 million over five years. In the 

114'h Congress, the Committee reported H.R. 195, which would eliminate the EAC. The CBO 

estimate for H.R 195 stated that eliminating the EAC would save taxpayers $40 million over 

five years. In that report, the Committee stated that the EAC's "operations and budget show that 

its mission cannot justify maintaining a federal agency." In the !15th Congress, H.R 634, which 

would eliminate the EAC, was introduced and reported out of the Committee on House 

Administration on February 7, 2017. 

The Committee does not support continued funding for EAC activities and strongly 

supports its elimination. 

Cybersecurity 

The Committee supports appropriate funding for policies that improve the cybersecurity 

platform within each of the Legislative branch entities and agencies. The Committee supports the 

Legislative Branch Cybersecurity Working Group for its effort on sharing and implementing 

cybersecurity best practices. The Committee supports the Working Group's next phaseincluding identifying and meeting minimum standards to ensure the Legislative Branch is 

adequately protected and providing resources to allow all Legislative Branch agencies and 

entities to mature their cybersecurity programs. 

The Committee also supports appropriate funding for the House of Representatives' 

cybersecurity platform including but not limited to the assistance and support of the Executive 

Branch. Included in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act was language authorizing the 

Speaker of the House of Representatives in consultation with the Minority Leader to request the 

assistance of the Executive Branch in the event additional resources were needed to respond to a 

cyber breach. The Committee supports efforts to develop and approve Memoranda of 

Understanding between the House and the appropriate Executive Branch agencies and the 

resources necessary to provide adequate assistance. 

Sexual Harassment 

Every case of sexual harassment is one too many. At the end of the first session of the 

!15th Congress, the Committee passed H.Res. 630, a resolution directing the House of 

Representatives to develop and implement a mandatory training and education program focused 

on anti-harassment and anti-discrimination. The Committee requested the assistance of the Chief 

Administrative Officer (CAO) to implement the mandatory training and education program and 

supports their current efforts to procure an outside vendor. The Committee anticipates the CAO 

will incur an annual cost of$3.75 million beginning in Fiscal Year 2018 to carry out this 

mandatory training program. 

Separately, the House passed H. Res. 724, which among other things directed the CAO to 

establish an Office of Employee Advocacy under its supervision. The Committee believes there 

is a lack of parity between the representation provided to employing offices (i.e. Members and 
7 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 11 here 32364A.004

senior staff) and lower level employees. The establishment of an Office of Employee Advocacy 

will assist employees in understanding their rights and responsibilities under the Congressional 

Accountability Act and the House Committee on Ethics. The Committee anticipates the Chief 

Administrative Officer will need $600,000 to establish the Office. 

District Office Security Program 

The Committee supports funding for the United States Capitol Police and the House 

Sergeant-at-Arms' to provide comprehensive security services to Members of Congress, 

including in their district offices. As the events of June 2017 and the corresponding increase in 

threats against Members of Congress demonstrate, the security of Members, their staff, their 

constituents, and the public at-large remains paramount. In FY 2018, the Committee on 

Appropriations, Legislative Branch recommended an additional $7 million to the USCP and an 

additional $5 million to the House SAA. The Committee continues to support any additional 

funding for these programs. 
8 

The CHAIRMAN. Would any Member like to make a statement? 

Would any Member like to offer an amendment to the resolution? 

Seeing none, without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. 

Are there any other Members who wish to be recognized on the 

amendment? 

There are none. 

So the question is on the amendment offered to the views and 

estimates for fiscal year 2019—the question is on the motion to 

adopt Committee Resolution 115–6, the views and estimates for fiscal year 2019. 

The question is on the motion. 

All of those in favor, signify by saying aye. 

All of those opposed, signify by saying nay. 

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is 

agreed to. 

Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. 

Does any Member wish to submit supplemental or minority 

views? 

Mr. BRADY. Yes, Mr. Chairman, the minority does. 

[The information follows:] 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
9 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 14 here 32364A.005

Minority Views of Representatives Brady, Lofgren and Raskin on the Views and 

Estimates of the Committee on House Administration for the President's Fiscal 

Year 2019 Budget 

Majority Views 

We agree with several components of the Majority's proposal, and contest others. 

We support the bipartisan work to secure our information systems, improve our 

workplace environment and secure our district offices for Members, staff, and 

thousands of constituents who avail themselves of access to their Member of 

Congress. 

Federal Election Commission 

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is charged with administering and 

enforcing campaign finance laws. However, in recent years, complete partisan 

gridlock continues to plague the FEC. As a result, there has been a marked decrease 

in enforcement action and audits, two key elements to maintaining the integrity of 

our campaign finance system. 

We need a functioning FEC to enforce our existing laws, and to promulgate rules 

that respond to the changing media environment. During the 2016 election, Russia 

spread propaganda and misinformation on social media platforms without ever 

disclosing that they were behind the effort. The FEC must takes its duties seriously 

and promulgate rules that provide for similar disclosure regimes for political 

advertising on the internet as is required for radio and television advertisements. In 

addition, the FEC must enforce the existing laws and keep foreign actors out of our 

democracy. 

To make matters worse, the Commission is in danger oflosing its four-vote quorum. 

To take any significant action (e.g., rulemaking, opening an investigation, levying 

fines, offering guidance), there must be a minimum of four Commissioners. With 

two recent departures, the agency is down to four Commissioners. If any of them 

were to leave, the Commission would essentially be unable to function. 

The Democrats of House Administration believe the campaign finance system needs 

to be reformed to promote transparency and integrity, and that the FEC needs to be 

fully staffed and supported so that it can fulfill its mission of enforcing and 

administering campaign finance laws. 

1 
10 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 15 here 32364A.006

Proposed termination of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund 

The Presidential Election Campaign Fund (PECF) is in dire need of modernization. 

The campaign finance landscape changes rapidly and dramatically and 

commensurate changes are needed to the PECF. In the absence of public 

financing, presidential candidates will have no choice but to raise significant sums 

from private sources, many of whom represent special interests. 

The PECF was created in the wake of the Watergate scandal to restore the 

American public's faith in its elections and public institutions. We find ourselves 

in a similar situation today. We do not support wholesale repeal of the PECF. It is 

a system in need of reform. We also believe the choice between funding pediatric 

research and having a pragmatic campaign finance regime is a false choice. We 

should have both. The PECF needs to be reformed, not replaced. 

Election Assistance Commission 

The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) enjoys broad, bipartisan support from 

the constituencies it was designed to serve: voters and election officials. The EAC 

eases the considerable burden of election administration and it does this well. 

The EAC is the only federal agency charged with making American elections more 

accessible, accurate, secure, and transparent. The EAC administers grants, 

develops guidance to assist states, and serves as a national clearinghouse of 

information on election administration. In addition, the EAC tests and certifies 

voting machines, provides guidance on managing election technology, and works 

with state and local officials to assist them in preparing for elections. In 2016, the 

EAC launched a video series that featured election officials, advocacy groups, and 

academics and offered guidance on how to leverage high- and low-tech tools in 

administering elections. The Commission also provides easy-to-follow 

cybersecurity guidance on protecting voter registration data and securing election 

night reporting systems. 

The EAC is in the unique position of being a federal agency with relationships 

with state and local election officials, and with an expertise in election 

administration. The Commission has been vital to helping states work with DHS 

to understand and take advantage of the "critical infrastructure" designation. Since 

the designation was made in January 2017, the EAC has worked diligently to build 

trust between state election officials and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 

by facilitating, mediating, and participating in meetings between election officials 

and DHS. The EAC also produced educational materials to help states understand 

2 
11 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 16 here 32364A.007

and utilize the critical infrastructure designation and worked with DHS to help the 

agency understand election administration. 

Instead of attempting to terminate the agency, the President should nominate and 

the Senate should confirm a fourth commissioner, and Congress should work to 

provide the EAC with more resources so it can provide more robust assistance to 

states on election security and other important election administration issues. 

Election Security 

It is now well known that Russia targeted the voting systems of 21 states in 2016, 

and although there is no evidence of the attacks altering the vote count, Russian 

hackers were able to breach at least one state's voter registration databases. If 

these attacks had been successful, hackers would have been able to alter or delete 

voter registration records, causing a great deal of chaos on Election Day and 

undermining public confidence in election results. 

In addition, our voting machines can easily be hacked. In July, at DefCon, one of 

the world's largest, longest-running, and best-known hacker conferences, 25 pieces 

of election equipment were successfully breached by participants with little prior 

knowledge and limited tools. In over 40 states, elections are carried out using 

voting machines that were purchased more than a decade ago. These machines are 

now either obsolete or at the end of their useful life. Some of these machines rely 

on operating systems like Windows XP or Windows 2000 which pose a 

particularly significant security risk as those operating systems either do not 

receive regular security patches, or have stopped receiving support altogether. 

These issues are exacerbated by the fact that nearly twenty percent of Americans 

cast their ballot on voting machines that do not have any kind of paper backup. In 

other words, if these paperless machines were hacked, it would be nearly 

impossible to tell. 

The unprecedented attack by Russia exposed these serious national security 

vulnerabilities to our election infrastructure. Congress must take immediate action 

to secure our voting systems, because we know that Russian hackers are likely to 

continue to try and penetrate election systems in 2018 and beyond. Days before the 

2017 elections, Bob Kolasky, the acting Deputy Undersecretary of the National 

Protection and Programs Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security said, 

"We saw in 2016 that Russia had an intent to be involved in our elections and some 

capability to be active or to attempt to be active in scanning election systems. We 

have not seen any evidence that intent or capability has changed." Just a few weeks 

3 
12 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 17 here 32364A.008

ago, when appearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Trump 

administration's most senior intelligence officials warned that Russia will be back 

in 2018. 

State and local election officials are acutely aware of the threats they are facing, but 

they lack the necessary funds to safeguard their voting infrastructure. In most states, 

legislatures are not increasing their election security budgets, and in some cases, 

Governors are actively undermining election security efforts. Moreover, state and 

local officials have expressed a desire for Congress to step in. The majority of state 

election officials surveyed by Politico in late 2017 indicated that they needed 

additional funding from the federal government to replace obsolete election systems 

and technology and to bolster election security. Indeed, the National Association of 

Secretaries of State (NASS) issued a statement in December 2017 calling on 

Congress to provide the $396 million to help states secure their election systems. 

The group wrote: 

As election officials around the country work to update and maintain aging 

election systems, [NASS] calls on Congress to assist them in this effort by 

providing states with the remaining funding under [the Help America Vote 

Act] ... [This] will not solve all of the challenges election officials face, but it 

will help states enhance the efficiency and security of elections, including 

through the purchase of new voting systems, the implementation of additional 

cybersecurity tools, and the hiring of additional IT professionals. 

This issue is simply too important to sit back and watch state governments and the 

federal government pass responsibility back and forth. With the 2018 midterm 

elections rapidly approaching, it is imperative that the House of Representatives 

act to secure our elections and protect the integrity of the ballot box by 

appropriating, at the very least, the $396 million requested by state election 

officials. 

Strengthening Employee Protections 

H. Res 724 requires each employing authority covered by the Congressional 

Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA) to adopt an anti-discrimination, anti-harassment 

policy. In addition, the resolution creates the Office of Employee Advocacy 

(OEA) to provide legal assistance to covered employees of the House of 

Representative in the event of an action arising pursuant to the CAA. 

4 
13 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 18 here 32364A.009

Reforms to the procedure and policies aimed at preventing discrimination and 

harassment at the House of Representatives and throughout the legislative branch 

were long overdue. Those seeking justice for CAA violations found the system 

overwhelming, intimidating, and ineffective. As such, the House set out to 

overhaul the process and implement reforms that work for victims, not against. 

We support funding the OEA to ensure the office is fully resourced, as well as the 

necessary funding for anti-harassment and anti-discrimination training that is in 

person and interactive for the House of Representatives and all other employees of 

the legislative branch. 

National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped 

The National Library Services for the Blind and Physically Handicapped (NLS) 

was established by an Act of Congress in 1931 and offers free services to U.S. 

residents and citizens living abroad who are seeing impaired or who have physical 

disabilities that prevent them from reading regular print. There are a wide variety 

of materials available through NLS including books, magazines and music 

materials. All resources, including the playback equipment needed to read the 

materials, are available for free for eligible residents. NLS has a verbal agreement 

with a network of I 00 national libraries that distribute NLS materials, allowing 

easier access for customers. There are 450,000 patrons ofNLS and 60% of this 

population is over the age of 60. 

NLS constantly looks for ways to increase access to their resources, which can be 

difficult due to the specific challenges they face. One issue has been the 

distribution of hard copy braille titles. These titles can be bulky, an average braille 

book is between two to eight volumes per title, and distributing and transporting 

these titles can be cumbersome for the Library and the user. Finding innovative 

ways to get resources to their patrons in an easier format has always been a priority 

for NLS. In November 2015, Ranking Member Brady introduced H.R. 4093 

Library of Congress Administrative Reform Act of 2015. The first section of the 

bill authorized NLS to provide playback equipment in multiple formats. While 

Congress never passed H.R. 4093, in 2016 the Senate introduced, and Congress 

passed, S.320 authorizing NLS to provide the playback equipment. As a result, in 

2017, NLS partnered with Perkins Library in Massachusetts for a pilot program 

that would provide e-readers to registered borrowers. Historically, the high price of 

braille e-readers made large scale use of them impractical, but when a more 

affordable e-reader, the Orbit Reader 20, came to the market, Perkins Library 

started distributing them to their patrons. NLS has partnered with Perkins in hopes 

of learning about the effectiveness of distributing e-readers to their customers and 

5 
14 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 19 here 32364A.010

growing thee-reader program. The e-reader pilot was originally meant to test 200 

e-readers nationwide, but currently only 40 e-readers are part of the pilot. 

Resources like the e-readers are vital to the patrons ofNLS and the Committee is 

concerned that NLS does not have enough funding to run these programs. While 

NLS works to enhance the resources available for their customers, there was no 

increase in the NLS budget for programmatic changes in the 2019 budget request. 

The current request is $51.192 million, $1 million less than the 2018 budget 

request, and is only to support mandatory pay related and price level increases. The 

Committee wants to ensure that NLS has the funding they need to serve their 

patrons and develop their resources and with no increase in their programmatic 

budget, it does not seem that this will be possible. 

Robert A. Brady 

Ranking Democratic Member 

Zoe Lofgren 

Member 

6 

Jamie Raskin 

Member 
15 

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XI, the Member is 

entitled to 2 additional calendar days to file such views in writing 

and signed by that Member and file with the clerk of the Committee. 

I now call up and lay before the Committee Committee Resolution 115–7, a measure to clarify and make technical corrections to 

the Members’ Congressional Handbook. 

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with, and the 

Committee resolution is considered read and open for the Committee. 

[The resolution follows:] 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
16 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 21 here 32364A.011

Committee Resolution 115-~ 

Resolved, the Committee on House Administration adopts the following regulations amending 

and superseding prior regulations known collectively as the Members' Congressional Handbook: 

• After "I. The MRA may only be used for official and representational expenses." 

insert: 

"2. The MRA may not be used to pay a settlement or award in connection with 

conduct prohibited under the Congressional Accountability Act of 199 5." 

• After "19. Requests to obligate prior year funds after January 2 of the succeeding 

year will be considered by the Committee when a Member provides 

documentation demonstrating a bona fide intent to obligate the prior year's funds 

during the applicable year." strike the remainder of the paragraph and insert: 

"Applicable to equipment and software in both D.C. and district offices, and to 

furnishings and security enhancements in the district office only. Please see the 

Security section for more information on district office security enhancements." 

• After "Ordinary and necessary expenses associated with security measures 

necessitated by official duties are reimbursable." insert: 

"For questions concerning security equipment and services in the district, please 

call the District Security Service Center maintained by the House Sergeant at 

Arms at 202-225-3380." 

• After "Non-Capital Improvements" strike the following paragraph and insert: 

"The House Sergeant at Arms (HSAA) will provide certain security 

enhancements for district offices. For any additional expenditures, the MRA is 

available if the item or expenditure has received approval from the HSAA.'' 

• After "Capital Improvements" strike the following paragraph and insert: 

"The costs of security enhancements considered capital improvements (e.g., 

constructing a new doorway, installing bulletproof glass) are not reimbursable and 

must be borne by the landlord. However, these costs can later be incorporated into 

the monthly rent of the district office lease. For questions on capital 

improvements or modifying district office leases, please contact the CAO Office 

of the Administrative Counsel at x56969." 

• After "Security Personnel Support" strike the following paragraph and insert: 
17 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 22 here 32364A.012

"Payment for security personnel is an ordinary and necessary reimbursable 

expense when such personnel is hired: 

I. To provide security at official, Member-hosted district events (e.g., town 

halls); 

2. To accompany Members during the performance of their official duties; or 

3. To be stationed inside or outside the district office during business hours. 

Members may contract with firms or individuals to provide personal security as 

referenced above. Please sec the Contractors section for additional information. 

Members should consult the District Security Service Center before hiring a 

security provider and should coordinate any security needs through the 

HSAA's Law Enforcement Coordinator Program." 

• After "Security Items" strike the following paragraph and insert: 

"If an item exceeds $500, it must be added to the office inventory. The purchase 

of a bulletproof vest for the Member is a reimbursable expense." 

• After "I 0. District office security" insert: 

"enhancements, including equipment, installation, labor, monitoring, and 

maintenance costs. Please sec the Security section for more information." 
18 

The CHAIRMAN. Would any Member like to make a statement? 

Would any Member like to offer an amendment to the resolution? 

If there are no amendments, I move the Committee to adopt 

Committee Resolution 115–7. 

The question is on the motion. 

All those in favor, signify by saying aye. 

All those opposed, signify by saying nay. 

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is 

agreed to. 

Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. 

Does any Member wish to submit supplemental or minority 

views? 

I now call up and lay before the Committee Committee Resolution 115–8, a measure making technical corrections to the Committee Congressional Handbook. 

Without objection, the first reading is dispensed with, and the 

resolution is considered read and open for amendment. 

[The resolution follows:] 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING
19 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 24 here 32364A.013

Committee Resolution 115-_A 

Resolved, the Committee on House Administration adopts the following regulations amending 

and superseding prior regulations known collectively as the Committee' Congressional 

Handbook: 

• After" I. Committee funds may only be used to support the conduct of official 

business ofthc Committee. Committee funds may not be used to defray any 

personal, campaign-related political party or campaign-related expenses, or 

expenses related to a Member's personal congressional office." insert: 

"2. Committee funds may not be used to pay a settlement or award in 

connection with conduct prohibited under the Congressional Accountability 

Actofl995." 

• Strike "Each Committee must submit to the Committee on House 

Administration, by the 18th of each month, an original and one copy of a report 

signed by the Committee Chair on the activities of the Committee during the 

preceding month. The monthly report must include the following:" and replace 

with: 

"Each Committee must submit to the Committee on House Administration, the 

later of, the 18th of each month, or five business days after the closing of the 

monthly financial statement for that respective month, a report signed by the 

Committee Chair on the activities of the Committee during the preceding 

month. The monthly report must include the following:" 
20 

The CHAIRMAN. Would any Member like to make a statement? 

Would any Member like to offer an amendment? 

If there are no amendments, I move the Committee adopt Committee Resolution 115–8. 

The question is on the motion. 

All those in favor, signify by saying aye. 

All those opposed, signify by saying nay. 

In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the motion is 

agreed to. 

Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. 

Does any Member wish to submit supplemental or minority 

views? 

Seeing none, for all of the matters considered today, I would ask 

unanimous consent that the staff be authorized to make technical 

and conforming changes, if necessary. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

That concludes today’s markup. 

Without objection, the markup is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:34 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with HEARING