ler of Florida; Roger Wicker of Mississippi; and then on the Democratic side, we are grateful to have Vic Fazio continue as the Ranking Minority Member, former Chairman of this subcommittee; and Ray Thornton of Arkansas; and Julian Dixon from California. All are experienced Legislative Branch members, and we are grateful to have the same committee members with us.

Also, for the information of those of you here, Bob Livingston, the Chairman of the full committee, and Dave Obey, the Ranking Minority of the full Committee on Appropriations are also members of this subcommittee.

JURISDICTION OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE

We at this time will take care of a formality and that is to insert in the record the actual jurisdiction of the subcommittee, which has been established under the rules of the Committee on Appropriations.

United States Capitol Preservation Commission.

Mr. PACKARD. We would like to remind everyone that several agencies of the government, actually of the President's designation of the Legislative Branch, there are several of those agencies that the President has under Legislative Branch that are not covered under this subcommittee. We won't go into detail, but there are some whose budget they place here that we do not have, that are under the jurisdiction of other Appropriation subcommittees.

The President's budget has not been delivered as yet, as most of you know. That is scheduled for March the 18th of this year. Under statute, the Legislative Branch must be submitted without change by OMB, and we have asked the agencies under our jurisdiction to provide copies of the material they are providing to OMB, to send that to our subcommittee. They have done that, and we are grateful for that, and of course that becomes the basis of their testimony today and throughout the hearings. That does allow us to have an early start on this subcommittee in our hearing process. We didn't wish to wait until after the President's budget was submitted; we wanted to move forward before then.

MEMBERS' INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS

The staff has consulted on all of the materials and made them available to the members of the subcommittee, and I think each of you have now a multitude of information at your disposal. You

have, of course, the hearing material for this year. You also have, as I do, the Legislative Branch appropriation bill requests from each of the departments and each of the agencies. You can use that, of course, as source material for verifying the various levels of public requests that are now being submitted and will be testified to.

The subcommittee print is labeled as a draft because we haven't received the President's budget submission, but it essentially does have, we think, what will be in the budget's request, and so you won't see a lot of changes I don't think from what we now have, and what will be submitted in the President's budget.

I introduced Ray Thornton. Let me at this point introduce Charles Taylor from North Carolina. Charles, we are grateful to have you back with us this year and present here for the hearings.

PART ONE AND OTHER AGENCIES

The Legislative Branch appropriations hearings for 1997 are divided into two parts. Part 1 contains the budget justifications that the agencies have prepared in explanation of their budget requests. Both Part 1 and the Subcommittee Print have been provided to the Members, and Part 1 will be available to the public when the President's budget is submitted. We normally do not release that; we leave that until the President releases the Budget.

The budget that we are going to consider in this subcommittee totals $1.8 billion. That figure does not include the operating budget of the Senate; they will take care of their own budget. The budget for congressional operations is $1.1 billion. That encompasses the House of Representatives' operating budget, the Joint Committees, the various support agencies such as the Capitol Police, the Architect of the Capitol, the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Compliance, the Congressional Research Service, and Congressional Printing.

In addition, there is $696 million in so-called other agencies. Included there is the Library of Congress, the Superintendent of Documents, the Federal Depository Program, the General Accounting Office, the Botanical Gardens and the care of the Library of Congress buildings and grounds by the Architect of the Capitol.

CONTRAST WITH PREVIOUS BUDGETS

This budget request stands in stark contrast to previous budgets. Last year, the budget submitted by this subcommittee was $2.1 billion, and we begin consideration this year down in the request; we are down $300 million below that request, last year's request. That is a 14.5 percent reduction in the request made by the legislative agencies. By any measure, we have had a major impact upon the mindset of the agency heads-I think throughout especially our agencies, but I think throughout government generally. We have sent a message that we are in a downsizing mode, and I will speak to that a little bit more in detail in a moment.

Last year we reduced the legislative spending by $225 million below the fiscal year 1995, and that was not an easy task, as most of you agency heads are aware. Our programs are important and we must have an effective legislative branch to carry out the checks and balances required by our Constitution, and we must

fund these programs, the staff and the resources necessary to conduct the business of the House and the Senate, the main difference being our physical plant and our research staff and our auditors. So our basic responsibility in this appropriations bill is to make sure that we provide the resources necessary to carry out these duties.

But we must also have a cost-effective program, and we think we are on the road to doing that. Last year's bill certainly put us on that track. We must isolate what is necessary from what is merely desirable or even of marginal value in our programs. I believe we have shown that the Congress can do just that. We can reduce our own budget and not sacrifice our fundamental capabilities. We have reduced resources and staff; we have eliminated some programs where possible, and we have increased our utilization of the very capable resources of the private sector. This effort produced a sizable savings for the current fiscal year 1996.

As I mentioned, we reduced about $225 million. Of course that required careful analysis of the programs, and last year we started a series of downsizing hearings that set the tone for what followed last year and what we think will be the tone of this year. I think every member of this subcommittee found those hearings to be of great value; it gave us a different outlook as to our resource needs, and I believe we took the best advice we could and from that developed I think a very effective budget.

CREDIT TO PREVIOUS SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN

We must also give credit to our predecessors. Vic Fazio, the former Chairman of this committee, had already begun that downsizing when I came on board. I was a participant of the committee, subcommittee during his efforts to downsize, and I give great credit to not only Vic Fazio, but the majority party members of the committee at that time that started this process of making reductions.

Last year's reductions I think were of historical levels. Our intent was to demonstrate that the Legislative Branch was participating completely in the program of bringing the Federal budget into balance. I think we have bipartisan agreement in the Congress, in the House and in the Senate, and between the Congress and the President that the balancing of the budget is of top priority. I am grateful for that agreement on principle, and obviously the details are the struggle, but nevertheless, the fact that balancing the budget is of critical importance I think we have general agreement by all parties involved in the process of trying to bring our budget into balance.

FURTHER DOWNSIZING ANTICIPATED

I believe we can continue this trend with this budget, our job of downsizing and rightsizing is not finished yet, and I think before we are done this year the agencies that will be before this subcommittee during the hearing process will come to realize that this is not going to be a year where we can make up for last year's cuts; this is not going to be a year where you can submit increases over last year's levels and expect to get them. To be very honest with you, we are going to be downsizing further, and any agencies that

are asking for increases will probably be disappointed in the outcome. I think the very best most agencies will be able to hope for is level funding and very, very few I suspect will even achieve that level of funding that they received last year, not that they requested, but that they received last year.

SEVEN-YEAR PROCESS TO ZERO DEFICIT

We don't have any levels of budget that we want to achieve at this point, but I do know that it is going to be less than last year. The agencies certainly will want to be aware of that. This is a 7year process; it is not a 1-year process. We have put our subcommittee I think on the glide path to help reach that zero deficit in 7 years, and we don't think that we are going to be let off the hook. So I think all of the agencies will need to expect that we will look very, very carefully at any requests for increasing the size of their agency in terms of FTEs and in terms of budget requests.

With that, ladies and gentlemen and members of the subcommittee, that concludes my opening statement.

I want to welcome also and introduce Julian Dixon, who has arrived since I made the initial introductions. Julian, we are very grateful to have you here at the beginning of our hearing process. I think you have, as we have stated earlier, the hearing schedule, and hopefully you will find time to attend.

With that, I would yield to Mr. Thornton of Arkansas for any statement he would like to make.

Mr. THORNTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I will be very brief.

MR. THORNTON'S STATEMENT

Mr. THORNTON. Let me begin by congratulating you on moving forward vigorously with the hearings and with the development of the appropriations package for this year. I want to congratulate you for your efforts last year. One of the reasons that the Legislative Branch was not caught up in the very damaging cutbacks and close-downs was because the bill had moved forward; it was vetoed, but your efforts were exemplary.

Mr. PACKARD. If you would yield, please, I think it was clear that the President was not disappointed in our bill. I think there were other reasons for him vetoing, and I think all members of the subcommittee ought to take heart in the fact that the President made the statement.

Mr. THORNTON. He did not feel it was appropriate to move forward with this bill in advance of others.

Mr. PACKARD. He said that it was a responsible bill, and I think that was well said.

Mr. THORNTON. Indeed.

Let me further congratulate you on continuing the movement that Vic Fazio started, while he was Chairman, of recognizing that we in the Legislative Branch have an obligation to be exemplary in our conduct, to set an example for other parts of government as we strive toward a balanced budget.

In that effort, it is of course important to recognize that our sole objective is not simply to save money, but to find the best, the most

cost-effective and efficient means of providing the serv are needed for the Legislative Branch. It's important for to be able to use their judgment to provide superior ser Legislative Branch as it seeks to accomplish its goals.

TRANSITION PERIOD IN DOWNSIZING EFFORT

Regrettably, in any downsizing or cutback or belt-tigh fort, there is a transition period, and that transition per difficulties. Indeed, there have been some difficulties ex and we want to use these hearings not only as a means ing the budget for next year, but as a way of improving tiveness with which the Legislative Branch conducts its

One of the things that we were told was that we wou ingly turn to electronics and move away from dependenc for information dissemination. That effort has brought pressures on House e-mail and other electronic means nication, and we have some problems to solve, as a result

Let me finally say how much I personally appreciate t tion of the staff of the different agencies which have res calls for downsizing. Their efforts have truly been exem it has been necessary that they be good, because they a with fewer dollars and fewer employees.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to statement.

Mr. PACKARD. I thank you for a very excellent stater tainly you speak my feelings as well.

Mr. Dixon, would you like to make an opening stateme Mr. DIXON. I have no comments, Mr. Chairman, at this Mr. PACKARD. Okay. Thank you.

DISCUSSION OF HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ITEM

Now, we are scheduled this afternoon to take up the Representatives' items. We have several people present t testifying today at one stage or another, and we are have each of you here.

The budget request totals $738.1 million for the Hou resentatives. The total joint items of the budget is $99 These are items such as the joint committees that we s the Senate; the Senate budget will be considered, like I s body, but we will take up the items that we deal with in

I want to welcome the officers of the House that are us today: Robin Carle, Scot Faulkner, and Wilson Li haven't seen Mr. Livingood yet, but he will be here I shortly, or when he is needed. We also have John Lainh here, the Inspector General; Ed Willett, the Law Revisio cannot appear today, but his deputy, John Miller, is with Meade, the Legislative Counsel; and of course Dr. Eiso with us when he is needed at a later time today as well. Mr. Faulkner, as the Chief Financial Officer of the H be presenting the fiscal year 1997 budget to the committe the de facto budget officer, and I know that you are ca sisted by Tom Anfinson, the Director of the House Fina We welcome both of you as our first witnesses.