ISSUES ADDRESSED Representative THOMPSON. The Advisory Committee began weekly meetings in early November and only concluded its schedule of meetings January 31 of this year. The Advisory Committee addressed the following six topics during its deliberations: One, the role of the Government Printing Office: How much centralization of the Federal Government's printing and publishing program is possible or desirable? Two, access and distribution of Government information: How much information, and in what formats and mediums, should be available? Who should pay for the information? Three, the impact of new technology: What is possible through new technology that the Federal Government isn't taking advantage of? How will these new technologies affect present and future employees? Four, the depository library system: Should there be a mandatory distribution of all Government documents? Should the Federal Government support depository libraries with direct financial aid? Five, the administration of policy: How should policy be administered? By whom? Six, the pricing of Government publications to the public: formulas and alternatives. The Advisory Committee is now in the process of completing its final report to the Joint Committee which we hope will be the foundation for legislation during this and succeeding Congresses. I hope to concurrently introduce legislation with other members of the Joint Committee by mid-May. I have every expectation that hearings could be completed by the appropriate subcommittees and committees of both Houses by the end of the first session or very early in the second session of the 96th Congress. I am hopeful that we can report out and pass a first revision of title 44 before the summer of 1980. While I recognize this is an ambitious schedule, with your support I think it is possible. JOINT COMMITTEE ON PRINTING SAVINGS Mr. Chairman, I am confident of the reasonableness of our funding request and particularly of the benefits to be derived therefrom. As Chairman of the Committee on House Administration, I cut our committee's budget by $815,000 for this year; so I do not lightly ask for an increase here today. However, I fully expect the savings the Joint Committee will produce in each of the next 2 years will more than equal our entire budget request: The savings we have demonstrated the capability of generating in our earlier submissions to your committee will be the standard by which I judge the effectiveness of the Joint Committee during my chairmanship. I will find ways both to improve the delivery of Government services and reduce costs at the same time. Therefore, I respectfully urge your approval of the Joint Committee's funding request in its entirety. I want to point out to the committee some of the savings which have been brought about by the attention which was given by Senator Pell in particular and certainly with my agreement and that of the minority in the past few months. [The information follows:] Item Directed that departments, agencies and offices of the executive and judicial branches must pay from their own appropriations for the U.S. Code (basic edition and supplements) Reduced automatic distribution of documents, such as biweekly and bound volumes of Congressional Record Contracted for GPO study for $186,119, instead of $500,000 appropri- Eliminated duplication of title printing on each congressional bill....... Ordered face and back printing on multipage congressional form letters, instead of printing on one side only. Total savings 2,500,000 These are annual savings, which will be repeated each fiscal year. INCREASE IN STAFF OF COMMITTEE Mr. THOMPSON. This is really just the beginning. The savings in themselves per year more than compensated for the total amount of the budget request of this year, which is increased to include four staff members, which, after careful consideration by Senator Pell, Senator Hatfield, myself and others, we feel are necessary. Thank you, sir. Senator SASSER. Thank you, Congressman Thompson. We have a vote on in the Senate. I will just make one brief comment. COST OF CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SUBSCRIPTION I am delighted to see that you have implemented some of these procedures to save money in the Government Printing Office. Last year, this subcommittee indicated that we would like to see the cost of the Congressional Record subscription more in line with the printing costs. I am delighted to see this has been done, and you are saving the taxpayers money in so doing. I think it is commendable. The subcommittee wishes to commend the Joint Committee on Printing for taking action in saving money in the Government Printing Office and other areas. I hope these efforts will continue under your very able leadership, Congressman Thompson. Representative THOMPSON. Thank you very much, Senator. We will be in recess for 10 minutes. [A brief recess was taken.] COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD STATEMENT OF ELMER B. STAATS, CHAIRMAN, COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD ACCOMPANIED BY: ARTHUR SCHOENHAUT, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY 1979 APPROPRIATION AND 1980 BUDGET REQUEST Senator SASSER. The subcommittee will come to order. Next we will hear from the Comptroller General, Mr. Elmer Staats. Mr. Staats will testify in support of a fiscal year 1980 budget of $1,800,000, a decrease of $50,000 below the fiscal 1979 level for the Cost Accounting Standards Board. Mr. Staats, you are always welcome when you appear before this subcommittee. But I must say in view of the fact that you are testifying in support of a reduction of $50,000 below last year, you are doubly welcome this afternoon. Please proceed, Mr. Staats. BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF Mr. STAATS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you know, in addition to being Comptroller General, I serve as the Statutory Chairman of the Cost Accounting Standards Board, which is charged with the establishment of cost accounting standards for negotiated defense contracts. This board was established by Congress in 1970 and was appropriated funds in 1971, so we have now been in business just 8 years in March. We have a board made up of two from the accounting profession, one from private industry, the Comptroller of the Defense Department, and myself. Mr. Schoenhaut is the Staff Director of the Board. We have now some 35 positions in the Board, 3 of whom are nongovernmental members that I referred to. And we have professional staff of 19 members and 10 support people. The Board to date has promulgated some 16 standards, and we have some 12 additional standards that are in process. And then there will be additional projects which are in the planning stage which we presume will be on the Board's agenda at some point in time. The Board meets about once a month, and in the interval, the staff, under Mr. Schoenhaut's direction, is responsible for development of standards. The staff research and development process includes visting with the contractors, consulting with professional accounting organizations and consulting with the agencies involved. The Board is, I think, moving along very well. We have been able to hold the original staff level pretty much steady from the beginning. We would hope that the committee would approve the budget request. COMPARISON OF CASB AND FASB BUDGETS I might say that the only thing which is similar in function to our Cost Accounting Standards Board is the Financial Accounting Standards Board, a private organization which has three times the budget of the Cost Accounting Standards Board and has a staff more than twice as large as ours. COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS I think the work of our Board is an essential function. Without the kind of standards and principles that the Board promulgates, the contracting agencies would not have a common base on which to compare costs among competing proposals from contractors. But also important in the work of the Board is a requirement that if you have more than $10 million of negotiated national defense contracts, you have to disclose your accounting practices to the Government. The requirement of the law is that you follow consistently those practices throughout the life of that contract. This means that you cannot change your practices in midstream in order to take advantage of a reallocation of your costs. PREPARED STATEMENT I will not take the time to read the entire statement unless you wish. Mr. Schoenhaut is here and with your permission, we would like to have the full statement included in the record. Senator SASSER. The full statement will be incorporated in the record. [The statement follows:] |