Mr. TAYLOR. I am going to stop and give the other members a chance to ask some questions. Then I will come back with some other questions later.

Mr. Moran.

Mr. MORAN. I will defer to Steny, the ranking member on House Administration.

Mr. TAYLOR. Sure.

CAO LITERACY PROGRAM

Mr. HOYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and you, Mr. Moran. First of all, Jay, I want to compliment you on your literacy program. I think it would be interesting for the subcommittee to hear about that and how that started and how it is working.

Mr. EAGEN. Well, I would like to take credit for it personally, but I have to give credit to a couple of employees who suggested it. We were approached about a year ago by some of our folks who work in our Labor Division, the folks that deliver furniture and move the House's inventory around, asking for ways to explore some education programs to allow them to upgrade their personal skill sets. We were interested in doing that, and the interest was having a literacy program for the folks that can't read. And we approached the Washington Literacy Council, a private, nonprofit program, that has literacy programs.

They came in, and we solicited volunteers in our workforce as tutors. They trained our tutors and also tested the students to see what level of reading they were at and gave us a pedagogical-a phonics-based program. We have CAO employees teaching some of their colleagues in literacy.

It is going to take us a while. The program is a multiyear program, but from a certain reading level to full reading level. The next phase that we are exploring is a GED program for some of our folks that do not have high school diplomas.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Bush is interested in adult literacy and all of us have been hearing ads on television about how many adults are not fully literate and what a problem that causes them as they strive to participate fully in society.

Jay, I congratulate you and the employees for this program. It is very positive and one that I am a big fan of.

HOUSE COPY CENTER POSSIBILITIES

The Senate Sergeant at Arms has a copy center for large jobs. Are we contemplating the House doing anything like that?

Mr. EAGEN. We explored an alternative approach last year to do more than just a copy center, but also to explore expanding the kinds of graphics, computer graphics services, that we offer. We right now have an in-house computer graphics service. We have it staffed with three or four people, and we think there is more business there.

We got a surprising result. We put out a request for proposals on the Internet, Commerce Business Daily; and the feedback we got from a number of businesses was that they did not think the market was big enough to justify the investment that would be nec

I think you are right. We have to take a look at how to provide that kind of service, whether it is in-house or-we do understand that there is somewhat of an issue relative to title 44, and what printing can be done and whether it is mass printing that has to be done by the Government Printing Office. It may be that you can help us sort through some of the legal and statutory barriers there.

HOUSE RESTAURANT PROFITS AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Mr. HOYER. Regarding the House restaurants, how are we doing on that vis-a-vis profit? And also discuss the customer satisfaction survey that I understand is being proposed.

Mr. EAGEN. We have two contracts with one with Guest Services Incorporated for the main House office buildings and a separate contract for the Ford Building. There are two separate contracts. I think you are referring primarily to Guest Services.

The contract requires that they pay the House a percentage of sales, 1.5 percent. They paid the House about $623,000 in the little over 3 years that they have been contracting. Financially, they planned that their first year would be an off year to set up the operation. And, in fact, they lost $460,000. The second year they made about $20,000. And last year they lost $120,000.

The contract provided that Guest Services would invest $1.4 million in House infrastructure. So a good chunk of the improvements in what is now the food court, that used to be the Longworth cafeteria; the upgrades to the Cannon carryout; the upgrades to the Rayburn deli, a large chunk of that was paid for by Guest Services. Mr. HOYER. You have proposed a customer service satisfaction survey. Is Guest Services paying any of that?

Mr. EAGEN. No, we want that to be an independent survey done by a professional firm, telling us what the customers think, not what the contractor wants us to think.

Mr. HOYER. I would be very interested, and I am sure the subcommittee would, in those results. I have for many years been concerned about the level of service and the quality of food. It is a continuing battle, because it is not really a profitable operation in many ways because of the hours that we keep and the lack of continuity of demand. So I understand it is difficult.

Mr. Chairman, my time is up. I will ask some additional questions later. Thank you.

ADJUSTING MEMBERS REPRESENTATIONAL ALLOWANCE

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, if I could, Congressman Boucher has brought up an issue that I think is shared by some other Members, and that is the issue of adjusting the Members' representational allowance. He has to travel, for example, to southwest Virginia, and the cost of airfare is two to three times what it is to Los Angeles, even though it is much closer.

And I don't know what the situation is for you, Charles, or you, Zach; but I think there is an issue with regard to the availability of flights to rural areas where the passenger traffic is not that much. And so they are wondering whether there can be any adjust

And it is not something that affects me, obviously, since I live just across the river. But it sounds like they have a legitimate con

cern.

Mr. EAGEN. That kind of question has been raised a number of times in the past. The authority for the formula for the authorization is actually established by the Committee on House Administration. And each year when the cycle comes along, you ask us for financial data, what the spending has been like, what the trends are; and the committee makes that call as to how the MRA formula and authorization should be adjusted.

I will be happy to pass that along.

Mr. MORAN. Okay.

I have a question here dealing with the fact that the average committee got a 13 percent increase, whereas Appropriations only got 11.7. But I would assume that if Appropriations wanted more, they would probably be the first ones to get more, wouldn't you? That is not the way the question was phrased. Let's just let that one lie there.

BI-WEEKLY PAYROLL

All right. One other question that there may be a quick answer to it. Have you considered biweekly paychecks?

Mr. EAGEN. We have. That is a timely topic. We are in the process of seeking final approval on replacing the House payroll system, and frankly, one of the key topics of consideration in that— was whether to stay with the current monthly or to go to a biweekly similar to what the executive branch does. The recommendation at this point is to stay with the monthly.

We talked to a number of staff, the Committee on House Administration did the same, and it seemed to be almost 50-50, right down the middle, from employees as to whether they like the way it is or whether they wanted to go to the biweekly. It is like running for election, you are going to please 50 percent and not please 50 percent.

TRANSIT BENEFIT PROGRAM

Mr. MORAN. How about the transit vouchers? Have you thought about bringing it up to the full authorized level?

Mr. EAGEN. It is something that the Committee on House Administration makes the final determination on. There have been discussions about raising it.

Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?

We are going to be discussing that. I have discussed it with Bob Ney. As Jay said, we are trying to determine the appropriate level. We are trying to make sure that the legislative employees have what the executive branch

Mr. EAGEN. There was an expansion of the benefit this year. Because the subsidy is pretax, as well, it does give some employees the full allotment.

CAO ORGANIZATION ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Mr. WAMP. I don't want to take anything away from the very good job that many do, but I want to shine a light just a minute on what Jay Eagen actually has done. I think the CAO is at the cutting edge of so many breakthroughs. And I think about my 5 years on the subcommittee and 7 years in the House. With H.I.R., and their willingness-it is almost a corporate mentality that his office is going to be cutting edge.

We have seen firsthand, because my office is willing to go into these new territories with you, exactly how good Government can come about and how we serve our people really well. I appreciate you pushing the envelope and trying to stay ahead of the rest of the country.

And when people talk to me about information technology back home, they are always surprised that the House is as up to speed as we are and that we have the ability to communicate and handle e-mails. We can internally audit ourselves and clean up the House, so to speak. And that has happened over the last 6 years. I just really appreciate it.

My office and my staff appreciate it. And I can't say enough good things about how you do what you do.

And it kind of reminds me of CRS, because those two institutions seem to always be out ahead of the rest of our operations here. And there are some that lag way behind, and I am going to get to the Superintendent's office in a little while, because they are almost still in the Dark Ages compared to many of our institutions in the House.

But, Jay, thank you for what you do. I really do not have any questions unless you have got any crystal-ball predictions on where we go next. But I really do appreciate you really giving us the image and the reputation for being cutting edge and having almost a corporate, bottom-line, for-profit kind of competitive position for the House in the real world. Your willingness to go to places that the corporations in this country are going to, so that we can stay on edge is most appreciated.

So thank you very much.

Mr. EAGEN. Thank you, Mr. Wamp. We appreciate that.

I would simply turn it back to say that the support that this committee and House Administration Committee and leadership and Members have given us has given us an environment where we can try to do those things, to try to improve the services. Thank you.

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Mr. WAMP. One other thing I would ask, to get a feel. It seems like the longer I am here, the more I get caught in cross-fire personnel matters in a whole lot of different agencies and programs. In Food Services, where people always complain and in the parking garages, where the Sergeant at Arms always has some dispute raging do you all feel as leaders that this is the way it has always been? Do we have more complaints today than we ever have had? Or is this the way it is? The more senior you get, the more you hear about these things? Or sitting on this committee do you hear

Or do we have more people trying to file lawsuits or trying to stake claims? Or is this the way it pretty much is in the real world, and we are no exception?

Mr. EAGEN. Well, I think it is probably like this in the real world, though my whole career has been here in the House. One thing I coach people that come here from the outside and come and work with me about is that the legislative way of making decisions sometimes can be interesting, and because there are a lot of decision-makers that are part of the decision. So it sometimes is a challenge to talk to all of our people and make sure there is agreement, where you are going to go.

Mr. TRANDAHL. I feel that is where we have really gone I started up here in 1982, and I used to be involved in the Personnel Subcommittee of the Committee on House Administration before I became a House officer; and I really feel that everyone here collectively, Republican and Democrat, over the last 6 to 8 years has been trying to make huge strides to improve work environments and working conditions and professionalize a lot of the core functions and people who work here.

We are all blessed, the three of us and the other officials that are here in the room, with good, solid career people who have been here a lot longer than many of us. I am approaching 20 years, and I guarantee, probably a third of the people who work within the Clerk's organization have been on the Hill longer than I have. And I strive every day, just like Jay and Bill, to make our work environment better and better.

I am disappointed, I guess, that you feel like you hear more and more, because I think we hear less and less, because we are maintaining more improvements. Every time you make an improvement, expectation goes higher. So we are here to learn and to try to take people's opinions into the process and see if we can better improve what we are doing.

Mr. LIVINGOOD. I think that we get less complaints than we used to, at least from our divisions.

And I think what we have tried to do and I think I speak for all three, but I particularly speak for myself—is try to improve the professionalism of the organization. And when you do that, sometimes there are those that do not want to go along with the changes because to some-professionalizing it makes a difference, and there is change. Change is difficult.

I think that we continue to look at management in our organizations and try to improve management in the organizations, and sometimes that is difficult. Sometimes you would like to go and do the right thing for everybody, not just for one or two or three. And I think that is the goal, to make the organization the best that we can be.

Mr. EAGEN. I think, just to add one last thing, the reason we want to do the customer satisfaction survey that Mr. Hoyer referenced earlier, is to go from the anecdotal to the factual and find out a broad spectrum of opinion about quality of services. Because sometimes you get it from five different sources, but you are not sure that is really reflective of the raw opinion of satisfaction with