Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

The results of this risk assessment indicate that, as early as the year 2000, CRS will experience diminished capacity in a growing number of subject areas, including civil rights, crime and criminal justice programs, congressional committee operations, executive management and personnel, global climate change and earth science, and defense policy and budgets. After the year 2000, the losses in analytic and research capacity accelerate, affecting areas such as tax, legislative and budget processes, elections, social security and pensions, and expertise on Asia. By 2006 virtually all areas of legislative support that CRS provides to the Congress would be affected.

The CRS staff eligible to retire in the next six years are our most senior, independent, and authoritative analysts and specialists. Unless we can get a "head start" on replacing them, we will have to wait until the year they retire, and hire their replacements without sufficient lead-time to bring those replacements up to the level of competence necessary to sustain our current analytic and research services. Under this scenario we would have to hire replacement staff at the mid- or senior-levels to minimize service disruptions. Our experience hiring at these levels results in concern that we would be less likely to find a sufficient degree of diversity in the applicant pool than would be the case with entry-level hires. In addition, midand senior-level experts may not have all of the quantitative skills that are now standard requirements in public policy graduate schools. These skills have become increasingly critical to serving the Congress as we analyze research and information and formulate methodologies to analyze alternative methods for approaching public policy issues like health, social security, transportation, and tax.

To address this risk, we have adopted a number of strategies within our current resources. We developed procedures to provide more flexibility in assigning work to staff on-board, including formal assignments and professional details; we also have undertaken organizational adjustments. We have provided upward mobility to staff through formal programs including participation in the National War College, the Industrial College, and the Fulbright fellowship program. In addition, we have reinstated the Graduate Recruit Program-a program that allows us to hire a limited number of students enrolled in graduate programs who anticipate completion of their graduate degrees during the subsequent academic year. We also are using a formal resource allocation process to fill vacancies in the highest risk areas and track the outcome of these hiring decisions.

In developing our succession initiative, we examined extensively other public and private sector succession efforts. We were careful in our design to minimize the likelihood of creating another workforce cohort that would cause the need for future succession planning of this scope. The combination of hiring at the entry-level (our intentions for the succession plan included in the budget request), and hiring at mid- and senior-levels (for some types of positions) will help us avoid creating a similar "bulge" in the future. This initiative represents our best thinking on how we can address the concentrated loss of expert staff while sustaining our analytic capacity in those subject areas most heavily affected.

Objectives and Structure of the Succession Plan

The plan is designed to bring new staff to CRS before our experts retire so that their institutional memory on issues, their knowledge of the legislative process, and the CRS service qualities of confidentiality, objectivity, timeliness, accuracy, and responsiveness can be passed on. We have tried to minimize the additional resources needed from the Congress for this plan by managing most of the succession initiative within current CRS resources. The assistance that we are requesting from the Congress through our budget request for fiscal 1999 would temporarily increase our staff by 60 over a three year period (fiscal 1999-2001) then reduce staff by ten each year for the following four fiscal years and by twenty in the final year of the plan (fiscal 2006). By 2006 CRS would return to the fiscal 1997 authorized staff level. We believe that our succession plan is fiscally sound and limited in scope we are asking for only 60 staff to transition through the potential loss of nearly 250. In addition, our analysis supports the conclusion that we can achieve the out-year reductions in staff through expected retirements. The Service's fiscal 1999 appropriation submission requests 20 FTE's and $871,770 to implement Phase I.

During the fiscal 1999 to fiscal 2001 period the new staff hired under the plan would work closely with senior analysts in an apprenticeship capacity, whereby the senior staff could share their knowledge and experience in their discipline within the legislative context. While entry-level staff will come with strong analytic and research skills, their academic training must be supplemented with on-the-job training and experience within the legislative environment. To maximize the development of subject expertise and knowledge of the legislative environment, our experience has been that the best training is working through budget and appropriation

cycles and reauthorizations of major legislation. This work exposes new staff to the type of analysis that uniquely informs the various stages of legislation from policy formulation and conceptualization to introduction and analysis of various bill proposals to hearings to committee reporting to floor debates to conference consideration to final passage to implementation and finally to oversight.

Our experience has shown that the development of these unique skills takes four to five years. During this time staff learn how to work independently. They acquire and refine skills and develop the ability to (1) understand the legislative and budget procedures as practiced; (2) examine issues from an unbiased, nonpartisan perspective; (3) present analysis and research in a manner and form that best meets the clients' legislative needs; (4) develop and maintain contacts with subject experts in academia, government agencies, and elsewhere; and (5) perhaps most importantly, develop trust relationships with Members and staff. Each of these attributes is critical if CRS is to continue the close support on which the Congress has come to rely.

Price Level Increases

The third item in our budget request is for funding to cover price level increases which support the conduct of our research and the delivery of our products. A significant element of this support is technology and the opportunities it provides to the Service to more effectively carry out our statutory mission. It is in this context that I offer the following summary of some of the many uses CRS is making of our electronic resources:

The CRS Home Page.-This secure web site makes key CRS services available to the Congress electronically through the CAPNET. We are continually enhancing the CRS Home Page to offer the Congress a dynamic, hyperlinked, and interactive platform that makes available the latest information and analysis to assist the Congress in its legislative work. Congressional users can access the full text of Issue Briefs and selected reports and the weekly Legislative Alert. In 1998, we hope to expand the Home Page to provide the Congress with the full text of more of our congressional distribution products. We are also designing "Electronic Briefing Books"-a new concept that will integrate key information and analysis on active legislative issues and present them in easy to use electronic formats. In addition, we are exploring new ways of preparing reports, taking advantage of electronic capabilities in graphics, map designs, and interlinking among information resources, particularly with the Congress' Legislative Information System.

Enhanced security of computer and information systems. CRS is working diligently to protect information from unauthorized access, to assure that congressional users will be provided uninterrupted service, and to plan for disaster recovery. Work is well under way in this area and is being led by a CRS Systems Security Team. This team has undertaken an agency-wide security assessment and has consulted with the National Security Agency; designed and delivered a program to educate all CRS staff on security matters; developed a formal process for reporting and tracking unusual activity on our electronic systems; and instituted strict password protocols for all CRS systems.

Year 2000 Compliance.-CRS has been aware of the implications of Y2K compliance for several years and has been formulating plans to test, certify, and replace our systems for some time. CRS prepared a report for the Congress in 1996 on the implications of Y2K for computer systems nation-wide. This report is cited in S. 22, a bill to establish a commission on the Year 2000 computer problem, sponsored by Senator Moynihan. We also have been developing contingency planning to address disruptions that might occur to the critical systems within our control. Our goal is to confirm Y2K compliance for all our systems by the end of this year.

The Legislative Information Retrieval System (LIS).-The_Service also remains committed to assisting the House and Senate refine its Legislative Information Retrieval System, the LIS, to advance the timely availability of and accessibility to critical legislative information. The LIS offers a wealth of information to the Čongress and to legislative branch agencies on current legislation, floor action, amendments, the full text of the Congressional Record, and its links to other legislative agency Internet sites. The Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and the Committee on House Oversight established policies and provided oversight as CRS worked with the Library of Congress' Information Technology Office to design, develop, and deliver the first release of the retrieval system at the start of the 105th Congress. CRS continues to work closely with these committees, the officers of the House and Senate, and with congressional users to enhance the system so that it can replace the previous systems by the start of the next Congress. The most recent enhancements to the LIS, specifically designed for the Senate, are links to information on recorded votes and amendments pending on the Floor. I am also pleased to report that the Congress has chosen to include in the LIS several sites on the CRS

Home Page, including our appropriations page, our appropriations status table, the Legislative Alert, our Public Policy Literature file, our guide to the legislative process, and our legislative reference sources and law sources.

I also would like to draw your attention to the results of a recent survey initiated by the Secretary of the Senate. The survey indicates that 92 percent of the Senate respondents go on-line, either often or always, for analysis and summary information about legislation. The LIS is the most cited resource for that information. I also found encouraging that when the respondents cannot find certain legislative information on-line, they most frequently go to CRS for assistance.

DISTRIBUTION OF CRS WRITTEN PRODUCTS TO THE PUBLIC

As my testimony today has emphasized, we are making every effort to concentrate CRS resources on direct service to the Congress and to take full advantage of existing and emerging technologies. It is therefore my responsibility to call to your attention the possible consequences of a proposal which, if adopted, could divert our focus significantly away from the immediate needs of the Congress.

As the Members of this Committee are aware, legislation has been introducedS. 1578 in the Senate and H.R. 3131 in the House-requiring that all CRS issue briefs and reports, which appear on our congressional Web site, be made directly available to the public by CRS via the Internet. While my colleagues and I appreciate the compliment inherent in the proposal for direct dissemination, I believe it is important to bear in mind the implications of such a major change in congressional policy.

Implications for Member-Constituent Relations

First and foremost, I am concerned that this proposal threatens the important relationship that Members have with their constituents. Historically, constituents have gone to Members of Congress when they have questions about legislation. As such, the Congress has reserved for itself the right to distribute CRS materials to the public (either by utilizing the contents of a CRS analysis, forwarding the analysis in whole or in part, or downloading sections of an electronic version of the CRS analysis to be incorporated into the response). Likewise, receiving constituent correspondence directly assists Members in their understanding of constituent awareness, concerns, and preferences regarding public policy decisions. The wholesale direct dissemination of CRS products to the public would bypass this longstanding relationship by denying constituents the benefit of their Members' additional insights, party viewpoints, or regional perspectives on CRS analyses.

Consequences for CRS Operations

In addition to these direct impacts on Members, CRS believes that wholesale direct dissemination of CRS products would have serious consequences for the Service itself, requiring us to divert scarce resources away from our statutory mission. Our analysts inevitably would have to shift the focus of much of their work away from the direct needs of the Congress to address the much more diffused and varied perspectives and interests of the public. Currently, CRS is the only organization, public or private, that continually updates the same product to focus our analysis on the point where congressional decision-making in each Chamber is occurring at the moment. In order to meet the immediate demands of a pressed congressional calendar, CRS authors often provide minimal context and background in their analyses, assuming the congressional reader's knowledge of the various stages of the legislative process, the distinctions between authorizing and appropriating decisions, and similar matters. Were CRS authors to broaden the coverage and scope of their products to meet the needs of an expanded, non-congressional audience, they would do so at the expense of refined, concise analysis targeting the needs of Members and staff working directly in the legislative arena. Simply put, working for an audience of 535 Members is quite different from working for 535 million individuals, or whatever the world-wide Internet audience is today.

Another consequence of wholesale dissemination is that much of the efficiency envisioned in our business plan to deliver services in an electronic environment would be lost. We have designed our Home Page to make our reports, issue briefs, and services readily available and to present them in a format that can be customized by each congressional client, allowing the user to draw from it that information of greatest value, modify it, and easily explore related topics both within CRS and through links to outside sources. Increasingly, the analytic products created by CRS are drafted with the full expectation of the augmentation possible through those electronic links. As an evolving interactive, interconnected and constantly updated resource tool for the Congress, our Home Page is not merely a repository for completed documents; nor is it primarily a document delivery system. Having a second

46-108 99-6

CRS Web site directly available to the public, which cannot take advantage of such links will require us to establish two vehicles of service, and, given limited resources, will diminish our effectiveness in meeting your legislative needs.

Legal Issues

Additionally, S. 1578 and its companion House bill raise significant legal issues for CRS. Wholesale dissemination of CRS products could bring into question the availability of speech or debate clause protection undermining the presumption of confidentiality, which is so crucial to the trust relationship between CRS and our congressional clients. Relevant Supreme Court rulings indicate that the dissemination to the general public of CRS products would not be considered a legislative act but would be viewed by the courts as an exercise of Congress' representational function, for which speech or debate immunity is not available. Those engaged in the preparation and public distribution of CRS products could be vulnerable to a variety of judicial and administrative proceedings. Wholesale dissemination also carries with it the risk of copyright infringement claims. If access to CRS products is broadened, our ability to use copyrighted material in our reports might be restricted or denied altogether.

Cost Factors

A final concern posed by S. 1578 involves the costs to CRS of implementing this legislation. Some of these "costs" are quite difficult to quantify, such as the effects of possible loss of speech or debate protection or the consequences of diminishing the constitutional role of Members as direct providers of information to their constituents. In other areas, although cost estimates may be more feasible, they must be regarded as somewhat speculative, inasmuch as CRS has no previous experience dealing with direct large-scale dissemination of our products and thus cannot readily anticipate the behavior of Members and the public in this context.

With these caveats, and recognizing that our analysis is still ongoing, I can say to you with confidence that enactment of legislation such as S. 1578 would require a substantial commitment of CRS resources in four key areas:

First, staff time would have to be devoted to creating and maintaining a separate CRS Web site for dissemination to the public.

Second, additional costs can be expected to handle the anticipated, and indeed inevitable, large increase in direct contacts between CRS and the general public resulting from wholesale direct dissemination.

Third, we anticipate that the heightened public profile of our reports and issue briefs, combined with the fact that many non-congressional users do not have the capacity to down-load documents or may hear of CRS products but have no Internet access available to them, will lead to an increased demand for the paper copy of CRS products in the form of Member requests to CRS on behalf of their constitu

ents.

Finally, Members themselves, concerned that our products will be circulated far more extensively than in the past, would likely place many more requests for tailored, confidential memoranda in order to afford themselves the opportunity to reflect upon and consider questions emerging from legislative proposals before having to respond to public inquiries. Confidential memoranda designed for a single client, which cannot be released to other Members without the requestor's consent, are far more expensive on a per-unit basis than products which can be available (either electronically or in hard copy) to all interested congressional offices.

Mr. Chairman, in recent years the Congress has assumed proportionately larger cuts than the Executive Branch, thereby reducing the overall resources available for congressional operations. I am deeply concerned that the enactment of S. 1578 would create a new public mission for CRS that inevitably would divert precious funds from what must remain our primary mission to provide analysis and information to assist you in understanding and assessing the consequences, both intended and unintended, of the legislative proposals before you.

To summarize our position on this issue, we believe that S. 1578 raises significant issues, both for the Congress and for CRS, which you and your colleagues may wish to consider before you decide to change the policy governing the dissemination of our products. My testimony today does not represent a CRS position on this issue, for this decision clearly rests with the Congress, However, it is my responsibility to inform you of possible unintended consequences or implication of such a change in policy. To assist you in your deliberations, I would like to submit for the record additional materials concerning the history of congressional action on this issue, the legal and constitutional issues involved, the estimated cost of implementing this legislation, as well as the more general question of Members' potential liability for disseminating material over the Internet.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, CRS submits to you today a budget that takes into account the efforts throughout the legislative branch to adapt to continuing fiscal constraints. We ask you today to consider the three elements in our request: (1) to provide us funds to support increases in mandatory staff costs; (2) to support our succession initiative by permitting us to temporarily increase our staff size to ensure the availability of expertise to the Congress; and (3) to fund price level increases. The goal of this budget request is to support our critical programs within limited resources, and allow us to continue fulfilling our statutory mission. We want the Congress to turn to CRS first when legislative research and analysis are needed, and we keep this focus as we work each day with you and your staff.

Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to discuss these issues in more detail and to answer any questions that Members of the Subcommittee might have.

CONGRESSIONAL POLICY CONCERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF CRS WRITTEN
PRODUCTS TO THE PUBLIC JANUARY 2, 1998

The following discussion reviews congressional policy concerning distribution of CRS products to the public and addresses issues for consideration by the Congress in determining whether to alter current policy regarding public availability of various CRS products, such as Reports and Issue Briefs.

As set forth below, CRS at present is precluded by law from general public distribution of its materials without prior approval by a congressional oversight committee. The Congress has actively exercised its oversight authority regarding CRS publication practices and has developed and promulgated standards to be applied in evaluating specific proposals. Current guidelines from the Joint Committee on the Library and other congressional bodies, issued in 1980, restrict the vast majority of CRS written products to congressional use and distribution to the public on a selective basis only.

Many years of congressional consideration of this issue reveal serious concerns about the institutional and legal consequences likely to result from the wholesale direct public distribution of CRS products with a potentially large circulation (e.g., CRS Reports and Issue Briefs).

BACKGROUND ON CURRENT CONGRESSIONAL POLICY CONCERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF CRS WRITTEN PRODUCTS TO THE PUBLIC

Summary

Congress has historically reserved to itself control over the dissemination of CRS products to the public on the principle that CRS, as an extension of congressional staff, works exclusively for the Congress.

To maintain congressional control over dissemination, a provision has been included in CRS annual appropriations acts since fiscal year 1952 requiring prior oversight committee approval for any CRS publication (as noted above, "publication" refers to wholesale release of CRS products directly to the public).

Congress has never authorized the wholesale public dissemination of CRS analytical products such as Reports or Issue Briefs (and has seldom authorized publication of other products), whether by CRS or the Congress, but rather has preferred to rely on congressional release of individual products on a case-by-case basis.

To further indicate the degree of congressional control over CRS products, Congress, the courts, and administrative tribunals have declared CRS communications to the Congress to be privileged under the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution and to be under the custody and control of the Congress. These determinations have assured the maintenance of confidentiality in CRS relationships with congressional clients, a critical element of CRS effectiveness and an expectation of those who seek its assistance.

Current Restrictions and Guidelines.

At present, CRS is precluded by law from general public distribution of its materials without prior approval by one of its two congressional oversight committees. This restriction results from a limitation that has appeared in CRS annual appropriations acts in each year since fiscal year 1952. This provision reads as follows:

"Provided, that no part of this appropriation may be used to pay any salary or expense in connection with any publication, or preparation of material therefor (except the Digest of Public General Bills), to be issued by the Library of Congress unless such publication has obtained prior approval of

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »