Mr. FAZIO. I think we will find regardless of whether or not we are able to make all the cuts, we will do an even better job of fulfilling our responsibility to review in great depth the requests made of us and make the best possible use of the funds that we appropriate.

Mr. Lewis, at this point, do you want to comment?

STATEMENT BY MR. LEWIS

Mr. LEWIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First, let me say both on and off the record that it is a pleasure working with you. I have the feeling that if we can work out a better coordination of subcommittee schedules, I may be able to continue as the Ranking Minority Member on the subcommittee this year. We will discuss that further later, I am sure. Mr. FAZIO. Anything we can do to help.

Mr. LEWIS. I would like to indicate, Mr. Chairman, that if in the future there should be another Democrat president and if in the future Republicans should control the House, it is my intention to maintain a copy of your statement for the record, for you make a number of points that I think are very important in our efforts to preserve the, separation of powers that have so long and well served the country.

I would endorse your expression of concern about, not the President's but I would suggest Mr. Stockman's, recommendation that the Administration should have some say over our final decisions regarding our budget.

Having said that, I think it is also important to mention or suggest that his having stumbled over this item does create an atmosphere that raises early on in our work the very difficult economic task that we face. You and I have discussed personally as well as within the works of this committee the potential value of an across-the-board freeze within government, one that is credible, the ten percent reduction that is suggested here really would reflect approximately a 1.6 percent reduction of that which we proposed last year, something just in excess of $3 million.

I have further expressed my own concern about the fact that there are a number of items in our budget that come before this committee and are proposed by us about which we hear no testimony. We essentially are a rubber stamp for sizable expenditures around here. For example, I have mentioned more than once my own concern about the House Information System and the need for some direct overview of the appropriations that involve an explosion of computers within our systems.

Further, I would mention that the House Administration Committee, as a policy committee, exercises a good deal of important work related to our committees that involve sizable expenditures and expansion of staff. Presently, the investigative staffs of our committees have reached the point of almost being outrageous.

I would suggest that the suggested ten percent cut might reflect as little as one body from each of those investigative staff assignments.

It seems to me, then, that Mr. Stockman has provided an opportunity for me once again to suggest to my Chairman that perhaps

it is long overdue, time for us to take a hard look at that which we are asked to rubber stamp coming from the House Administration Committee.

It is my understanding that the Chairman has submitted to those who would be directly affected a request that they present for staff review what would happen if reductions were made at a level of five percent, a level of ten percent. I think that will be helpful information. If we do instead take an across-the-board approach, which would look at our participating in a freeze, it seems to me that if everybody was affected equally, it would likely end up with more positive results.

While you might make a five percent cut on behalf of one area of work, that would mean we would have to cut 15 percent somewhere else if you and I were committed to a freeze. So I lean toward responding in a good faith way in an effort to participate in that which we are going to ask the rest of government, maybe even the defense system as well as much of our bureaucracy that I think we would find agreement in suggesting has room for cut, squeeze and trim.

Mr. Chairman, we have found working together so positive in the past because we have been able to discuss these issues in this room frankly, but often more productively not in this room, so with that I would like to welcome Mr. Traxler back to our exciting committee and evidence to him this is going to be an exciting year.

Mr. FAZIO. Yes. The man we know as the loyal opposition.

Mr. TRAXLER. I know when I am outnumbered. When the California gold dust twins get through with their act, there is nothing left for me. The public is well served with your good intentions.

Mr. FAZIO. I am reassured that the public will feel confident having you watch over us once again.

Mr. TRAXLER. We need to find a way to repeal the agriculture yearbooks.

Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to reserve the right, if I see fit, to strike my whole statement from the record.

Mr. TRAXLER. It is nice to be back with you and I look forward to working with you.

W

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1985.

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND JOINT ITEMS

WITNESSES

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

BENJAMIN J. GUTHRIE, CLERK, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

W. RAYMOND COLLEY, DEPUTY CLERK

ROBERT S. MCGUIRE, CHIEF OF FINANCE

MICHAEL HENY, ASSISTANT CHIEF OF FINANCE

MICHAEL BUCKLEY, BUDGET ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF FINANCE
SUSAN L. ZELENIAK, TELECOMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR

OFFICE OF THE SERGEANT AT ARMS

JACK RUSS, SERGEANT AT ARMS

JAMES J. CARVINO, CHIEF OF THE CAPITOL POLICE

JAMES T. TROLLINGER, DEPUTY CHIEF OF THE CAPITOL POLICE
LAURA NEWMAN, AUDITOR, OFFICE OF SERGEANT AT ARMS

OFFICE OF THE DOORKEEPER

JAMES T. MOLLOY, DOORKEEPER

OFFICE OF THE POSTMASTER

ROBERT V. ROTA, POSTMASTER

C. ELMO BOYDSTON, DEPUTY POSTMASTER

OFFICE FOR THE BICENTENNIAL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RAYMOND W. SMOCK

LAW REVISION COUNSEL

EDWARD F. WILLETT, JR.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL

WARD M. HUSSEY

OPENING STATEMENT

Mr. FAZIO. As we open the hearings, I would like to call your attention to the ambiance of the hearing room. The Chairman of the Full Committee authorized the repainting and some other improvements. Mr. Lombard deserves most of the credit for the courage to plunge ahead. Anytime you renovate an office in this area, it takes courage, but more importantly, for his choice of colors and textures, fabrics and everything else that goes with it. I think he has done an excellent job.

Mr. Lewis, do you like the facilities here?

Mr. LEWIS. Is this coming out of the ten percent cut?

Mr. FAZIO. We anticipated that and this is out of the 1985 budget. In any case the paint and carpeting were already in the storeroom and we used our own employees, so the cost was minimal.

I do want to also thank Ed Kellaher, Ed Polen, and you, Mr. Guthrie, and others in your office. I don't want to limit my words of praise to just a few because it does add greatly to the atmosphere in which we work. It looks very nice and we want to thank all that helped us.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FY 1986 PROPOSED BUDGET

We now have Mr. Ben Guthrie, the Clerk of the House; and Bob McGuire, the Chief of Finance; Ray Colley, the Deputy Clerk, and with us will take up the budget of the House of Representatives and several joint items.

The House budget is $455,361,000 which is a $30,154,000 (+7.1 percent) above the $425,207,000 enacted to date for fiscal year 1985. If we include the pending supplementals, $17,249,000 the fiscal year 1986 budget is only $12,905,000 million or (+2.9 percent) over the fiscal year 1985 plan.

The joint items budget is $155,804,000. This is an increase of $59,363,812 over the current budget plan of $96,440,188 which includes almost $12 million in supplemental requests.

The joint items budget includes funding for the Joint Committees and we will hear from them at a later date.

The combined House and Joint Item budget which we will consider, the items in the bill which comprise the direct expenses for the Members, committees, and staff of the House and activities we share with the Senate, is just over $611 million. The Senate budget is another $319 million.

INTRODUCTION OF WITNESSES

We want to welcome the Officers of the House. Mr. Ben Guthrie, the Clerk of the House, will present the budget. He will defer in turn to the other Officers of the House who will outline their budget requests.

The other Officers who are with us: Mr. Jack Russ, the Sergeant at Arms; Mr. Jim Molloy, the Doorkeeper; and Mr. Bob Rota, the Postmaster.

Ben, do you wish to introduce anyone who I have failed to recognize at this time. Then, perhaps you can either summarize your statement or proceed with a brief version, whatever is your desire. Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Behind us are the two people very responsible for the preparation of the budget, Mike Heny is our Assistant Chief of Finance and Michael Buckley, Budget Assistant who helped us, and for the first time there is a new person with the Clerk, our Telecommunications Coordinator, Susan Zeleniak. I will be speaking more of her once we get into the testimony.

I appear before you today, Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, to present a detailed summary of the House budget estimates for the fiscal year 1986. It is our understanding that the subcommittee does wish to proceed promptly but thoroughly in

these hearings. Therefore, I will endeavor to move through this statement quickly, but I will welcome and expect questions on any particular item.

ANALYSIS OF INCREASES AND DECREASES

The format of our presentation will follow that of past years. The House Officers are here to discuss the operations of their respective offices and to present justification for their requests. Although the Clerk prepares the entire House budget, we do not authorize these funds nor obligate them. Many offices make such obligations.

I would like to insert into the Record an analysis of budget increases/decreases as of December 31, 1984.

[The analysis follows:]