Mr. PACKARD. That is the key. Mr. FAZIO. Yes. Mr. WILLETT. Which I think probably serves the public very well. I mean the response we have had in the first couple years of the CD-ROM was amazing. The small law firms, public interest law firms are saying we never had access to this. Now for $34 we have the entire U.S. Code and think it is marvelous. STAFFING-LAW REVISION COUNSEL Mr. FAZIO. You have 18 positions, 11 professional, 7 clerical-technical. Mr. WILLETT. Correct. Mr. FAZIO. How long have you had that kind of work force? Mr. FAZIO. Without augmentation? Mr. WILLETT. Without any augmentation, correct, and we are not asking for any increase. We can handle the job. Mr. FAZIO. I just think that is indicative of the kind of service we get without really adding anything but cost of living increases and upgrading equipment, personal computers, whatever to make you more productive and effective. But we really are against a very competitive market, would you say, in terms of the skills that the people bring, or is that not the case? Mr. WILLETT. It is very competitive. For me to bring somebody on board, it is five years before they are really up to speed. The database is so huge, the amount and breadth of the law, the amount of technicalities that go into executing all of the changes and making it all come out right is something that you just cannot replace overnight. Mr. FAZIO. Do these people have a potential benefit to, say, a large law firm of specialization? I mean would it be possible to envision a day when people are simply paid more than we can compete with here because of the specialties they develop? Mr. WILLETT. I am not sure. I have been very fortunate. The people we have selected have stayed with the office. We tell them right up front that this is an office that is a career office. Mr. FAZIO. You don't have a lot of turnover? Mr. WILLETT. We have turnover in the first couple years after we put somebody on board. We tell them, it is going to take us a year or two for us to determine whether we really like you and you are going to be able to do the job and whether you in turn like us. We are book worms. It takes a very special type of a person who is willing to sit down and day after day after day just look at laws. You know, very little interaction with anybody outside our staff. Mr. FAZIO. You have a resource here that is really hard to replace. Mr. WILLETT. It would be irreplaceable. I have been very fortunate with the people that we have on board and I very much think it would be a huge loss to the Congress if they were not retained. Mr. FAZIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. PACKARD. Thank you. Do you have any questions? Mr. THORNTON. No questions, Mr. Chairman. OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL Mr. PACKARD. Thank you very, very much. We appreciate very much you being here. I would like to recognize David Meade who is here with us. Do you have a prepared statement? Mr. MEADE. I do, and I would like to submit it for the record. Mr. PACKARD. David Meade is with the Legislative Counsel. Mr. MEADE. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Fazio, I have with me my Deputy, and my Chief Administrative Assistant, Ms. Lynne Richardson, who have been very helpful to me. This year we are requesting $4,592,000, which represents an increase, but essentially the increase is for personnel costs. To answer your first question that you posed, I would have to say that my office probably provides services which are absolutely essential to the operation of the House, and these services are not available certainly at your cost anywhere else. I and my staff are acquired without regard to political affiliation and solely on the basis of our fitness to perform our services. I now have a staff of 33 attorneys and 14 support staff. This is down four persons from my authorized level. Because of the change in the nature of the business of the Congress, my office is trying to go through a process now of determining exactly how we can fit to meet your needs and we hope to be able to do that. Fortunately, through the services of HIS, my office is entirely operated through our computer system which allows us free access, to government operations-Government Printing Office and the Senate office; tasks which in the old days took several days we can do now in several minutes, which I think is quite an improvement. I have really nothing more to say, Mr. Chairman. [The statement of Mr. Meade follows:] February 15, 1995 Office of the Legislative Counsel U.S. House of Representatives Statement of David E. Meade, Legislative Counsel Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to appear before you to present the fiscal year 1996 appropriation request for the Office of the Legislative Counsel. I am requesting $4,592,000 for fiscal year 1996. This is an increase of $192,000, or 4.4 percent, over our fiscal year 1995 appropriation of $4,400,000. Almost all of this increase is for personnel costs, with $71,000 for merit increases, $33,000 for annualization of the 1995 cost-of-living increases, and $86,000 for the projected 1996 cost-of-living increases. There is a $2,000 addition for increases in costs of supplies and telephone services. Given the turnover in the Congress and the fact that there are several new members of the subcommittee, it may be useful to briefly outline the functions performed for the House by the Office of the Legislative Counsel. The office was established in 1919 in response to the recognition by the House of a need for trained legislative drafters to assist the Members with increasingly complex legislation. Our statutory charter states that it is the purpose of the Office "to advise and assist the House of Representatives, and its committees and Members, in the achievement of a clear, faithful, and coherent expression of legislative policies". (2 U.S.C. 281a) The Office functions in an entirely nonpartisan matter and observes strict confidentiality with respect to each drafting request that it receives. Again, our charter provides that: "The Office shall maintain impartiality as to issues of legislative policy to be 2 determined by the House of Representatives, and shall not advocate the adoption or rejection of any legislation except when duly requested by the Speaker or a committee to comment on a proposal directly affecting the functions of the Office. The Office shall maintain the attorney-client relationship with respect to all communications between it and any Member or committee of the House." (2 U.S.C. 281a) By law, the Legislative Counsel and the attorneys and staff of the Office are appointed without regard to political affiliation and solely on the basis of fitness to perform the duties of the position to which appointed. (2 U.S.C. 282, 282a) The office has a long tradition of career service. From the start the office has sought to provide the House with trained legislative drafters, each of whom has a high level of expertise in 1 or more substantive areas of Federal law. We select the best people we can find, give them rigorous training, promote them within the existing salary structure as they become more skilled, and encourage them to make a long-term commitment to the office and to the House. I believe that our current staff members are fully and uniquely qualified to meet the tremendous responsibility placed on them. The amount that the House spends to retain such a qualified and experienced staff will be money well spent. I hope that this subcommittee will give me sufficient funding to reward my staff with merit increases for their long hours and diligent efforts on behalf of the House. It is important to the Congress and to the country that this tradition of excellence be continued. Although we have 51 authorized staff positions, we currently have 47 employees, who have logged 786 years of valuable service to the House. 60 percent of our staff have been with the office for 10 years or more, and 77 percent have been with the office for at least 5 years. We have 33 attorneys, down 5 from our maximum strength in 1992. The number of attorneys serving in our office has not increased significantly for 17 years. Unfortunately, in the past 3 years we have lost 7 very talented and experienced attorneys, only 2 of whom have been replaced. We need to have attorneys with a wide range of 3 expertise able to draft in nearly every area of Federal law. Given the ambitious legislative agenda of the 104th Congress, it is my hope that we will be able to retain all current staff members and fill our vacancies in the near future so that we may go on providing a needed service to the House in the skilled and professional manner that the House deserves and has come to expect. If we cannot maintain competent and experienced staff, the quality of the services we can provide to the House will be seriously impaired. A little known, but vital, part of our work involves assisting the committees in the preparation of committee reports. For most committees we prepare the reported bill, the identical copy of the reported bill which is printed in the report, and the so-called "Ramseyer", the part of each committee report that shows the changes made in existing law. This is required by the House Rules and is similar to the "redlining" done by many State legislatures. Centralizing this function in our office enables the committee staffs to respond to deadlines often imposed for the filing of reports. It is by far the most cost effective way to meet this requirement. Our staff can provide these materials for each committee very quickly and with maximum efficiency since they maintain up to date compilations of almost all Federal laws which may be amended in a given session of Congress. Without these compilations, the preparation of Ramseyers would be a timeconsuming process indeed, especially in the case of bills with multiple referrals. The compilations of the various laws used by many of the committees are prepared by our staff at the request of those committees. These are the same compilations we use in the preparation of Ramseyers. The fact that no one else, inside or outside of government, maintains up-to-date electronic compilations of such a wide range of existing Federal law is one reason why so many drafts done outside of Congress are technically incorrect and must be reworked by our staff. I am pleased to report that during the past year the Office of the Legislative Counsel continued to play a significant part in the drafting of a great deal of the major legislation passed by the House. During the last year, our staff worked on several major legislative |