Periodically, concerns have been raised about the number and variety of products created to document congressional activity. Other concerns focus on the process for authorizing and distributing printed government documents to Members of Congress, congressional committees, and other officials in the House and Senate. Concerns regarding congressional activities are typically considered in the context of the congressional environment. In the field of information management, however, they reflect broader issues related to the manner in which government and private information is created, assembled, distributed, and preserved. A number of issues arise due to significant transformations in the areas of printing, publishing, and information management. Those changes have been initiated as a consequence of the emergence in the past three decades of electronic publishing and distribution, which has expanded the means of information creation and delivery beyond mechanical compilation and production of documents that only exist on paper. Since its establishment in 1861, and until the emergence and integration of digital dissemination, the Government Printing Office (GPO) has compiled, formatted, printed, bound, and distributed documents that recorded the activities of Congress (and the work of other governmental entities) through a series of labor- and resource-intensive steps. Over time, the agency has integrated new technologies into its production processes as they became available, or were mandated. The enactment of P.L. 103-40 , the Government Printing Office Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act of 1993 , required the production of electronic versions of the Congressional Record and the Federal Register , and provided authority for production and distribution of other government documents electronically. The act requires GPO to the "extent practicable, [to] accommodate any request by the head of a department or agency to include ... information that is under the control of the department or agency involved" in its electronic directory and systems of online access. Arguably, that language does not bind Congress to make its materials available, since it is not a department or agency. Nevertheless, Congress has made some of its materials available in electronic form through GPO since P.L. 103-40 was enacted. GPO began producing electronic versions of the daily edition of the Congressional Record and the Federal Register in 1994. Soon after, GPO began providing access to electronic versions of congressional documents authorized for distribution by Congress through its GPO Access website. The agency began distributing new documents through its Federal Digital System (FDsys), and migrating collections from GPO Access in the spring of 2009. In current practice, according to GPO, approximately 97% of all U.S. Government documents are "born digital," published electronically and available through the internet, and will never be printed by the federal government. As a consequence of electronic production and dissemination, some congressional materials are more readily available to wider congressional, governmental, and public audiences than when they were produced and distributed only in paper form. Further, changes in the production process from the creation of content through delivery to a user, in print or electronic form, have reduced the resources necessary to produce congressional information. In light of these changes, some have argued that eliminating paper versions of some congressional documents, and relying instead on electronic versions, could result in further cost and resource savings, and might provide environmental benefits. At the same time, however, current law regarding document production, authentication, and preservation, as well as some user demand, require a number of paper-based documents to be produced and distributed as part of the official record of congressional proceedings. As a result of requirements for both electronic and paper-based versions of congressional documents, GPO oversees an information distribution process that produces and distributes most of the congressional information for which it is responsible in both electronic and printed forms. This process provides the necessary information and appropriate formats for Congress to carry out and document its activities, but it may also result in some unwanted printed copies of congressional documents being delivered to congressional users who prefer to access those resources electronically. More broadly, the transition to electronic distribution of materials may raise questions about the capacity of congressional authorities to effectively oversee GPO's management and distribution responsibilities regarding congressional information under current law and congressional practices. This report provides an overview and analysis of issues related to the processing and distribution of congressional information by the Government Printing Office (GPO). Subsequent sections address several issues, including funding congressional printing, printing authorizations, current printing practices, and options for Congress. Finally, the report provides congressional printing appropriations, production, and distribution data in a number of tables. On January 12, 2011, Representative Christopher J. Lee introduced H.R. 292 , the Stop the OverPrinting (STOP) Act. As introduced, the measure would have amended Section 706 of Title 44 of the United States Code to "make bills and resolutions available for the use of the House of Representatives and Senate only in an electronic format which is accessible through the Internet," with some exceptions. Those exceptions would have included requests by committees for up to 75 printed copies of measures within their jurisdiction, or as many copies of individual bills or resolutions as may be requested by Members or committees of Congress. The measure was amended in the House to require the Public Printer to make bills and resolutions available for the use of offices of Members of Congress only in an electronic format which is accessible through the Internet. H.R. 292 was passed by the House under suspension of the rules by a vote of 399 to zero on January 18, 2011. The measure was referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on January 25, 2011. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing. On April 15, 2011, Representative Candace Miller introduced H.R. 1626 , the Prevent the Reckless, Irresponsible, Needless Typography (PRINT) Act of 2011. The measure would limit the number of copies of the Congressional Record that are authorized to be printed to the minimum number of copies that are necessary to be printed for archival purposes. H.R. 1626 was referred to the Committee on House Administration on April 15, 2011. No further action has been taken at the time of this testimony. On January 26, 2011, Senator Tom Coburn introduced S. 210 , the Stop the OverPrinting (STOP) Act. The measure would require the Public Printer to make bills and resolutions available for the use of offices of Members of Congress only in an electronic format which is accessible through the Internet. S. 210 was referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on January 26, 2011. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing. On March 30, 2011, Senator Coburn introduced S. 674 , the Congressional Record Printing Savings Act of 2011. The measure would limit the number of copies of the Congressional Record that are authorized to be printed to the minimum number of copies that are necessary to be printed for archival purposes. S. 674 was referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on March 30, 2011. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing. GPO is a legislative branch agency that serves all three branches of the federal government as a centralized resource for gathering, cataloging, producing, providing, authenticating, and preserving published information. The agency's activities are funded through three sources. These include appropriations, a revolving fund through which executive and judicial branch agencies pay GPO for information management and distribution services, and sales of products to nongovernmental entities and the general public. GPO's appropriation is included in the annual legislative branch appropriations bill. The bill funds three GPO accounts: congressional printing and binding (CPB); salaries and expenses of the Superintendent of Documents (S&E); and, on occasion, a small part of the revolving fund. Congress allocates a substantial proportion of the funds appropriated to GPO to the CPB account, which funds the production and dissemination of congressional documents. Since 1988, appropriations for CPB have comprised an average of 73.08% of funds provided to GPO by Congress. Activities funded in the revolving fund and S&E accounts do not directly support congressional publishing activity. Figure 1 provides the levels of funding of the CPB account since 1985, based on nominal and constant (2010) dollars. The data show that CPB spending has declined from $164.3 million in 1985 (2010 dollars) to $93.73 million in 2010. Part of the decline in appropriations reflects savings resulting from reduced staffing due to the implementation by GPO of less labor-intensive printing technologies, increased electronic distribution, and somewhat reduced demands for some types of congressional products. Table 6 , in the data tables below, provides GPO CPB account appropriations data in nominal and constant (2010) dollars and the percentage of appropriations allocated to CPB since 1987. In each Congress, thousands of products are created to document the activities of the House and Senate. The publication of congressional documents is carried out pursuant to statute, or by resolution of the House or Senate, acting separately or jointly. The number and distribution of paper-based congressional documents may be set in statute, by the House or Senate, acting separately or jointly, or by the Joint Committee on Printing (JCP). Table 1 summarizes the authority and authorized distribution for a number of printed products used by Congress. Current law provides that GPO "shall accommodate any request" from a government entity to distribute electronically any information under control of that entity. The publication and distribution of some categories of documents that may not be published on a regular basis is also authorized in statute. For example, at the conclusion of a Congress in which a sitting Member of the House or a former Member who served as Speaker dies, GPO, subject to the direction of JCP, compiles, prepares, and prints, with illustrations, a tribute book. The House or Senate, acting separately or jointly, may authorize the publication of other documents. Some examples include the following: unanimous consent agreements in the Senate that tributes to retiring Senators appearing in the Congressional Record be printed as Senate documents; H.Con.Res. 128 , 110 th Congress, authorizing the printing of a commemorative document in memory of the late President, Gerald R. Ford; a Senate order authorizing the printing of tributes to the late Senator Craig Thomas; H.Con.Res. 345 , 108 th Congress, authorizing the printing of the transcripts of the proceedings of "The Changing Nature of the House Speakership: The Cannon Centenary Conference," held on November 12, 2003; and H.Con.Res. 43 and H.Con.Res. 66 , 107 th Congress, authorizing revised and updated versions of the House documents entitled Black Americans in Congress, 1870-1989 , and Women in Congress, 1917-1990 , respectively. In its annual budget requests, GPO reports the volume of its work in terms of the number of pages produced, and the number of copies produced for each product. GPO expresses the overall production of congressional documents in the number of pages produced for several categories of documents. Generally, page production is a function of congressional activity; more activity, which may result in an increase in the number or length of days in session, the number of measures introduced, or the number of hearings held, typically means greater demand for printing services and increases the volume of pages produced. As noted in congressional testimony, the number of pages necessary to meet demand varies by Congress and session, according to workload and activity on the floor. For example, the page volume for the Congressional Record and bills, resolutions, and amendments may be higher as more measures are introduced during the first session of a Congress than in the second session. GPO's page production categories include the following: Congressional Record, daily edition . A substantially verbatim account capturing the proceedings of the House and Senate ; Miscellaneous Publications. Includes the Congressional Directory, House and Senate Journals, memorial addresses, nominations, serial sets, and unnumbered publications; Document Envelopes & Franks. Franked envelopes and perforated sheets with Members' signatures for the mailing of documents; Calendars. House and Senate business and committee calendars; Bills, Resolutions & Amendments. Printing of legislative measures, including prints as introduced, reported, and adopted or passed; Committee Reports. Documents of congressional committees on pending legislation that carry a congressional document number; Documents. House and Senate documents that carry a congressional number. Examples may include annual reports, engineers' reports made by government agencies, or estimates of appropriations; Hearings. All published hearings held before committees; and Committee Prints. Documents on pending legislation printed for the internal use of committees. Table 2 provides summary data reflecting the change in page volume levels since 1985. No particular pattern appears to apply to all categories. Between 2006 and 2010, five of nine categories increased in volume. Over the period between 1985 and 2010, six of nine categories decreased in overall volume. Three categories, including daily record, calendars, and hearings, decreased in both periods while two categories, bills, resolutions, and amendments, and committee reports increased. At the same time, all categories showed at least one significant increase or decrease in volume over two separate periods between 1985 and 2011. Table 7 , in the data table section below, provides GPO page data for a number of categories of congressional printing listed in the agency's annual appropriations requests. For most printed congressional products, there are differences between the authorized levels of printed versions and the actual number of those documents that are printed. An authorized number of copies for some printed congressional products is set in statute. In practice the actual number of copies printed of the Congressional Record ; measures introduced, reported, adopted, or enacted in the House or Senate; and reports and documents printed by the House or Senate is generally lower. In addition, the Congressional Record is published in fewer paper formats than authorized, and fewer copies of those remaining formats are produced. These differences reflect Member needs. At the same time, the variable distribution of paper copies and the lack of explicit, readily identifiable authority to disseminate electronic versions of some congressional documents in statute governing congressional printing may call into question the capacity of current controls and processes to ensure systematic management by Congress of its published products. This in turn may raise concerns about the extent to which the public records are available and retrievable, and whether they will be permanently available in electronic form. The JCP controls the arrangement and style of the Congressional Record , and is to provide "that it shall be substantially a verbatim report of proceedings," while taking "all needed action for the reduction of unnecessary bulk." Current law authorizes the printing of the Congressional Record in three formats: a daily edition, a semimonthly edition, and a bound edition (the semimonthly edition is no longer produced). P.L. 103-40 requires GPO to make a version available online. The daily edition, comprising the proceedings of the previous day's activities on the House and Senate floors, is typically available electronically by 6 AM and is distributed across Capitol Hill in paper form by 9 AM each day that Congress is in session. The authorized distribution of the daily edition and bound volumes is summarized in Table 14 , in the data table section below. More than 23,000 copies of the daily edition are authorized in 44 U.S.C. 906. Of that total, approximately 21,600 (93.9%) are to be distributed to Congress. Congressional copies include those for congressional use, and copies for distribution to others, as directed by individual Members. They are charged to the GPO CPB account. Other copies for noncongressional recipients are charged to requesting agencies and subscribers through GPO's revolving fund or the S&E account. Figure 2 displays the change in the number of copies of the Congressional Record daily edition produced from FY1985-FY2010. Distribution of the paper version of the daily edition of the Congressional Record has declined every year since FY1985, with the total number of copies declining by 83.21% between FY1985 and FY2009. Since FY1987, the daily edition has been printed in lower quantities than authorized. The number of both CPB-charged copies and agency and subscription copies have declined since FY1987, the earliest year for which such data are available. Between FY1987 and FY2010, the number of copies charged to CPB fell 79.21%. During the same period the number of copies charged to agencies and subscriptions fell by 83.94%. More recently, between FY2005, and FY2010, the number of copies has fallen 21.28% for CPB copies and 52.15% for agencies and subscription copies. Table 3 provides summary data of the changes in copies produced between FY1985 and FY2009. Table 4 , in the data table section below, provides daily edition publication data and distribution to CPB and agency and subscription recipients between FY1987 and FY2010. Most recently, for FY2009, GPO reported the printing of approximately 4,242 copies of the daily edition, of which 3,118 (73.5%) copies were charged to its CPB account. Figure 3 provides the approximate authorized level set by statute for the daily edition of the Congressional Record , in proportion to the approximate distribution in FY2010. The decline in distribution of paper CPB copies of the C ongressional R ecord daily edition in the past 18 years may be attributable in part to two events. The first was the introduction of electronic versions of material printed in the Congressional Record . In 1994, GPO first produced an electronic version of the daily edition as required by Congress under P.L. 103-40 . This likely contributes to reductions in the number of printed copies that began as commercial firms began providing material from the Congressional Record to their subscribers in electronic format prior to 1994. The ongoing decline is presumably attributable to users turning to the electronic version in greater numbers over time. The second event occurred in 1996, when the House ordered the elimination of distribution of CPB copies issued by House Members "for constituent copies and by-law distribution of the Congressional Record . " The House's actions appear to have resulted in a sharp decline in the number of copies produced by GPO from FY1996 to FY1997 and a corresponding decline in the number of copies distributed by Congress to other users. Figure 4 provides the distribution of CPB copies of the Congressional Record daily edition between 1987 and 2010. Similar differences between authorized levels and actual practices apply to other formats of the Congressional Record . For example, the bound edition is considered the official, permanent version, and is typically available within four years of the final adjournment of a Congress. 44 U.S.C. 906 authorizes the printing of approximately 2,400 bound copies of the Congressional Record ; in practice GPO prints about 345 copies, of which 92 are paid through CPB. The semimonthly edition is no longer printed, but GPO continues to produce a semimonthly index. All bills and resolutions are printed at least once. Versions of measures that are considered in one chamber are authorized to be printed when introduced or submitted, reported to the chamber, and upon passage or adoption by the chamber. Under typical circumstances of consideration, bills and resolutions considered and passed by both chambers may be printed in seven different versions reflecting congressional action. S ome measures considered by both chambers may require fewer printings, while others require more. Measures enacted into law would be printed an additional three times. Figure 5 summarizes the various stages at whic h legislation and items adopt ed by Congress or enacted into law might be printed by GPO . The authorized numbers of copies, and their distribution to the House and Senate, as specified in statute, are summarized in Table 9 , in the data table section below. In practice, the printing and distribution of measures varies by the type of measure. With the exception of simple and concurrent resolutions considered in the House, the number of all other legislative measures printed is less than authorized. Table 10 provides a summary of current distribution of printed copies of legislative measures. The consideration of legislation , the conduct of oversight or investigation s by House or Senate committees, or orders of either chamber could necessitate the publication of committee hearings, meeting transcripts, and documents; reports to accompany legislation; conference reports; and other products. The "usual numbers" of printed copies for various types of congressional reports and documents are specified in 44 U.S.C. 701 , but have not been used in several years. Instead, GPO produces copies of reports or documents in the quantities directed by the House or Senate . It appears that copies of most types of documents and reports are printed in smaller increments than authorized. Table 11 summarizes the authorized numbers of printed copies for documents, and reports on bills and joint resolutions in the data tables below. Table 12 provides the authorized numbers of copies of reports on private bills, and concurrent or simple resolutions. The actual numbers of copies of various categories of congressional reports and documents produced by GPO for FY2009 is summarized in Table 13 . Any further adjustment to statutory printing requirements may be formally authorized by legislation, committee order, or through report language. In practice, GPO notes that it prints the number of copies of congressional documents requested. In past debate on proposed amendments to appropriations bills to reduce or eliminate printing of the daily edition of the Congressional Record , congressional leaders have said that current levels of distribution to Congress are based on the availability of appropriations to cover the costs of congressional printing. If that is the case, the further reduction or elimination of printed copies may impair the ability of some Members from carrying out their duties. Congressional leaders have also noted that any efforts to change congressional printing practices must proceed through JCP rather than through appropriations bills. Officials at GPO suggest that much of the reduction in the number of printed congressional documents could be ascribed to the use of newer printing technologies, and migration by congressional documents users to information technologies that provide congressional information through electronic means. Those transitions have generally resulted in a smaller work force at GPO, a reduction in the number of printed copies produced, arguably, reduced paper consumption, and smaller appropriations. While overall printing costs have gone down, it is not clear that continued reduction in print runs would result in significant reductions of costs. In line with printing industry practices, GPO estimates that prepress processes, actions that must be taken before multiple copies can be made, make up approximately two-thirds of the cost of producing the daily edition of the Congressional Record . The balance is spent on printing, binding, and mailing of the finished copies. For FY2011, GPO estimates the cost of producing one page of the Congressional Record at $782. The agency allocates $532 (68.03%) for prepress, which GPO refers to as "data preparation," and $250 (31.97%) for printing. In their budget requests, GPO does not provide estimates for other congressional products broken down by the cost of prepress and printing processes. Table 5 provides some the potential savings that might result by the elimination of the printed versions of several congressional products, based on the distribution of prepress and printing cost estimates for the Congressional Record . Since most of the prepress costs would be necessary to make the Congressional Record and other congressional documents available to users, whether in electronic or printed form, the extent of any statutory reduction in authorized printing levels or further reductions in the actual number of copies that GPO produces may result in somewhat modest cost savings. Any such cost savings may come at the expense of denying congressional materials to users who prefer the paper-based documents, or those who do not have access to electronic versions. Any effort to reduce the availability of centrally produced printed versions of congressional documents in favor of electronic delivery and storage may also raise concerns about the preservation and long-term ability to retrieve congressional records, and the need for reliable backup systems. While some of the printed records of Congress dating back to the First Congress (1789-1791) are retrievable in paper form, concerns have been raised about the ability to retrieve some electronic records created in the past few decades. Other related challenges might include the costs of document conversion as electronic document creation, management, and storage technologies evolve in a way that might not incorporate records and documents created with obsolete systems. Taken together, these concerns might raise questions about the long-term costs of a "paperless" system in comparison to the current hybrid process of making documents available in electronic and paper form. Of particular concern in the congressional environment could be the preservation of an official, definitive version of a document that is widely accepted by lawmakers, congressional officials, the executive branch, the courts, and the American public. Currently, GPO provides hard copies of the Congressional Record , legislative measures at various stages of consideration, related congressional documents, and laws passed by Congress. Similar materials are available electronically through the Legislative Information System (LIS) for congressional users, and through THOMAS, maintained by the Library of Congress, for the general public. Nevertheless, congressional rules require legislative measures to be signed by the Member sponsoring them before introduction, and the preservation of those original, official documents by congressional officials. The bound version of the Congressional Record , which may appear up to four years after the conclusion of a Congress, is considered, the official, archival product. Any transition to a more integrated use of electronic documents would likely need to take into account document verification and authentication procedures to ensure the provenance and accuracy of any official record of congressional activity, and facilitate the acceptance of those materials as legitimate. Depending on the degree to which Congress believes that action on matters relating to congressional printing activities might be necessary or desirable, it might consider the following options to maintain the status quo, conduct studies, or consider legislation. As information publishing and retrieval technologies evolve and demand for paper copies declines, congressional users may continue to access documents through electronic means in greater numbers than through the use of GPO-printed paper copies. This could continue the downward trend in the number of copies of congressional documents GPO provides, which likely would produce marginal reductions in printing costs. It is unlikely that the number of printed copies could be eliminated without legislation, since a number of paper copies must be preserved for archival purposes, and some users may prefer printed formats. If no congressional action is taken, it appears likely that GPO will continue to integrate newer prepress technologies as they become available. These changes might, or might not, contribute further to reductions in printing costs over the long term. Congress might consider authorizing JCP, the Advisory Committee on the Records of Congress, or another entity to conduct studies related to congressional printing policies. Potential topics might include the following: how users access congressional documents; whether current distribution practices for GPO-printed and electronic documents are effective or efficient; the costs of creating paper and electronic documents, including retention of archival documents, and disposal of obsolete materials; the extent to which current congressional printing and document distribution practices support Congress in its work; and what potential changes to congressional rules and practices might be necessary if Congress were to transition to "paperless" operations. The entity could be charged to report findings, or recommend potential administrative or legislative actions. Congress might amend current printing authorizations to reflect current printing practices. As written, 44 U.S.C. 906, regarding the Congressional Record , and 44 U.S.C. 701, authorizing a "usual number" of congressional documents and reports, provides authorization for the printing and distribution of thousands of copies more than GPO produces. Entities that no longer exist, including the Governor of the Canal Zone and national homes for disabled volunteer soldiers, are technically entitled to receive copies of one or more versions of the Congressional Record . Some officials, including the Delegates from American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, are not authorized to receive copies in the manner specified for other Members of Congress. Other recipients may no longer have a need for as many printed copies of congressional documents as they are authorized to receive. On the other hand, the relatively small number of copies of the daily and bound editions, and the elimination of the semimonthly edition, suggest that authorized recipients who want or need the Congressional Record may either have adequate access or no longer require access. Similar provisions may apply regarding congressional reports and documents. In addition, Congress might consider enacting more explicit statutory instructions defining the expectations for the production and dissemination of congressional information by GPO or other official entities.

Summary:
Periodically, concerns have been raised about the number and variety of products created to document congressional activity. Other concerns focus on the process for authorizing and distributing printed government documents to Members of Congress, committees, and other officials in the House and Senate. These concerns reflect broader issues related to the manner in which government and private information is created, assembled, distributed, and preserved in light of the emergence of electronic publishing and distribution. In the 112th Congress, H.R. 292, the Stop the OverPrinting (STOP) Act, was introduced on January 12, 2011. The House passed the measure on January 18, 2011. In addition to H.R. 292, three other measures regarding congressional printing have been introduced, including H.R. 1626, the Prevent the Reckless, Irresponsible, Needless Typography (PRINT) Act of 2011; S. 210, the Stop the OverPrinting (STOP) Act; and S. 674, the Congressional Record Printing Savings Act of 2011. From its establishment in 1861, the Government Printing Office (GPO) has compiled, formatted, printed, bound, and distributed documents that have recorded the activities of Congress (and the work of other governmental entities). In current practice, approximately 97% of all government documents originate in digital form, and are distributed electronically, but are not printed. As a consequence of electronic production and dissemination, some congressional materials are now more readily available to wider congressional, governmental, and public audiences than when they were only produced and distributed in paper form. Some have argued that eliminating paper versions of some congressional documents, and relying instead on electronic versions, could result in further cost and resource savings and might provide environmental benefits. At the same time, however, current law regarding document production, authentication, and preservation, as well as some user demand, require a number of paper-based documents to be produced and distributed as part of the official record of congressional proceedings. As a result of requirements for both electronic and paper-based versions of congressional documents, GPO oversees an information distribution process that produces and distributes most of the congressional information for which it is responsible in both electronic and printed forms. This process provides the necessary information and appropriate formats for Congress to carry out and document its activities, but it may also result in some unwanted printed copies of congressional documents being delivered to congressional users who prefer to access those resources electronically. More broadly, the transition to electronic distribution of materials may raise questions about the capacity of current law and congressional practices to effectively oversee GPO's management and distribution responsibilities regarding congressional information. This report, which will be updated as events warrant, provides an overview and analysis of issues related to the processing and distribution of congressional information by the Government Printing Office. Subsequent sections address several issues, including funding congressional printing, printing authorizations, current printing practices, and options for Congress. Finally, the report provides congressional printing data in a number of tables.