« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
Mr. WALSH. We should remind everyone that several agencies included as legislative branch agencies in the President's budget are not under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. For example, the U.S. Tax Court is one agency classified as a legislative agency in the President's budget, but that agency is actually funded in Commerce, Justice, State. Likewise, the Helsinki Commission, the Prospective Payment Commission and several other agencies are not within our bill.
The President's budget has not yet been delivered to Congress. However, for the past several weeks, the legislative agencies and all Federal agencies have been submitting their budget material to the Office of Management and Budget in preparation for the expected delivery to the Congress on Monday of next week.
Under statute, the legislative budget must be submitted to the Congress in the President's budget without change by OMB. During the process of preparing the Federal budget for 1999, we have asked those agencies under our jurisdiction to provide copies to the subcommittee of the material they are sending to OMB. We did that in order to get an early start. This has been the customary practice over the years, and both Majority and Minority have concurred.
The staff has compiled the customary budget material for use of the Members of the subcommittee.
The draft Subcommittee Print has been provided to the Members as a working document. That is this. Right?
Mr. LOMBARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. WALSH. It contains the bill language and funding requests that will be included in the President's budget documents, primarily in the budget appendix. The Subcommittee Print is labeled as a draft since the formal budget submission has not arrived. We believe it will not change in any significant extent, if at all. The print also contains a great deal of historical information that the Members may find useful.
Part 1 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Hearings for 1999 has also been distributed to the Members. It is this book here. It contains the budget justifications that the agencies have pre
ed in explanation of their budget requests. Part 1 will be made available as a public document when the hearings are completed.
The budget we are going to consider in this subcommittee totals $1.9 billion. That is up-and, again, this is the request. That is up 11 percent over last year. That figure does not include the operating budget of the Senate. That budget will be taken up the Senate budget will be taken up by our counterpart subcommittee in the other body.
Let me be clear, the budget request for the legislative branch without the Senate is up 11 percent.
The budget for congressional operations is $1.2 billion. That encompasses the operating budget of the House, the Joint Committees and various support agencies, such as Capitol Police, the Architect, the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Compliance, the Congressional Research Service and Congressional Printing.
The balance of the funds, $718 million, is for the other agencies in the legislative branch, including Library of Congress, Super
intendent of Documents, the Federal Depository Program, General Accounting Office, Botanic Garden and the care of the Library grounds. by the Architect.
I want to stress that these budgets have already been submitted separately and independently to the Office of Management and Budget by each of the legislative branch agencies. By law, OMB will include these budget requests in the President's budget without change.
Since OMB.cannot, by law, and should not, make policy or dollarlevel changes in these legislative budgets, this committee will perform a double function.
We will scrub these budgets much the same as OMB does with executive agency budgets. That is a function OMB performs before the executive appropriation requests are presented to the Congress. That is a policy scrub. Our agency heads more or less apply their own policy judgments to these budgets as they are being prepared. Our committee is the first and only stop along the way which looks at the entire legislative branch budget in its totality for the broader budgetary implications for this part of government. • In addition, when the and you may have been familiar
with the term 602(B) allocations, they are now referred to as 302(B) allocations, which I am told is what they used to be called. So what goes around, comes around. Henceforward, 602(B) allocations shall be known as 302(B) allocations.
When they are made by the Full Committee, we will mark up the legislative branch appropriations bill to conform with Congress' overall budget targets. That is the more traditional appropriations process.
As we proceed through this process, we will consult with the authorizing committees-House Oversight, Budget, Government Reform, perhaps Judiciary, if necessary. So the bill we bring to the floor will undergo several adjustments, and I fully expect reductions will be made along the way, especially considering the requests are up 11 percent.
So the $1.9 billion request will undergo careful scrutiny. Undoubtedly, it will be adjusted downward. We will evaluate the requests and the answers we get as we proceed with our hearings. I am certain we will find areas where we will not be able to fund all that is needed or justified.
The committee intends to be fair as well as fiscally responsible. We also expect our constituent agencies to be aware of the importance of bringing the Federal budget into balance.
My intention is to insure that the legislative branch contributes its fair share to that objective.
That is the end of my opening statement, and I would welcome any other opening statements from other Members, and I will begin with Congressman Serrano.
Mr. SERRANO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to, first of all, tell you I look forward to working with you this year.
As you know, last year you and I made a very serious attempt at having no stumbling blocks before this bill; but, unfortunately, as many people and the press know, our bill became involved in much larger issues on the House floor and, for a while, confused a lot of people who thought there was a problem with the bill when, in fact, our disagreements were maybe 5 percent based on the bill and 95 percent based on something else.
Hopefully, this year that issue won't be an issue; and, if it is, I will try to direct it towards another bill and not this one.
Mr. WALSH. Very much appreciate that.
Mr. SERRANO. I want to tell you that I look forward to working with you this year. You and I take this work very seriously. I know that there is always kidding around in our full Committee about who wants to serve on this committee, because the only fact-finding trip you can take is to the Library of Congress.
Mr. WALSH. Which is loaded with facts, by the way.
But our work is very important, especially these days when so many people outside this institution are taking very serious looks at how we do our work and how our agencies do their work and how the Congress in general functions. We take this work very seriously.
I know that our schedule is quick and tight this year as we try to finish with our hearings and move on with the bill, and I look forward to a very good and productive session.
Mr. WALSH. Thank you very much.
sir. Mr. WALSH. It is great to have you back.
THURSDAY, JANUARY 29, 1998.
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WITNESSES HON. JAY EAGEN, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER FRANK DERVILLE, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF FINANCE,
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER HON. ROBIN H. CARLE, CLERK, OFFICE OF THE CLERK JEFF TRANDAHL, DEPUTY CLERK, OFFICE OF THE CLERK HON. WILSON S. LIVINGOOD, SERGEANT AT ARMS, OFFICE OF THE
SERGEANT AT ARMS JOHN W. LAINHART IV, INSPECTOR GENERAL, OFFICE OF THE IN
SPECTOR GENERAL BOB FREY, DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL, OFFICE OF THE INSPEC
TOR GENERAL GERALDINE R. GENNET, GENERAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE GEN
ERAL COUNSEL JOHN R. MILLER, LAW REVISION COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE LAW REVI.
SION COUNSEL M. POPE BARROW, LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE LEGISLA.
TIVE COUNSEL DR. 'JOHN F. EISOLD, ATTENDING PHYSICIAN, OFFICE OF THE ATTENDING PHYSICIAN
Mr. WALSH. We will now take up the budget request for the House of Representatives and several joint items.
The Chief Administrative Officer, assisted by the Office of Finance, submits the House budget each year to the Office of Management and Budget. The material is then included in the President's budget. The budget this year has already been submitted to OMB and is incorporated in the budget documents that present the entire Federal budget for 1999.
The House budget request totals $765.6 million. That includes funds for the operations of Member offices, committees, the leadership and the administrative operations of the House.
The total joint items budget is $97.7 million. The joint items, such as the joint committees and Capitol Police, are shared with the Senate. The fiscal year 1999 budget for the Senate operations will be considered by the other body.
We want to welcome the officers of the House who are with us here today. Is Robin Carle here this morning?
Mr. WALSH. The Honorable Wilson Livingood, Sergeant at Arms, is also here. Welcome, Bill.
And the Honorable Jay Eagen, Chief Administrative Officer. Welcome, Jay.
We also have John Lainhart, the Inspector General; Ms. Geraldine Gennet, is it?
Ms. GENNET. Yes.
John Miller, Law Revision Counsel; and Pope Barrow, is that correct?
Mr. BARROW. Yes, right here.
We also expect Dr. Eisold, the Attending Physician, to join us later.
Mr. Eagen is the Chief Financial Officer for the House and will be presenting the fiscal year 1999 budget to the committee. Jay is the de facto budget officer and is capably assisted in that area by the House Finance Office's, Mr. Frank Derville, who is the head of that office; and we are pleased to have him here also. We welcome both of you to the witness table.
Jay and Frank are new to the hearings. Both of you were appointed to these jobs last year, although you are not unfamiliar with our operations prior to that, well after our appropriations hearings had begun. We have been working with you and Frank for the past several months, and it is apparent that each of you was an excellent choice for these important assignments.
As is customary for first time witnesses, we will ask that your biographical sketches be inserted in the record at this point.
[The information follows:) JAY EAGEN, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Jay Eagen was sworn in by Speaker Newt Gingrich as the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) of the United States House of Representatives on July 31, 1997 after approval of his nomination by the House. He was selected through a competitive process via a nation-wide search undertaken by the international personnel firm, Korn Ferry International. A bipartisan search committee comprised of Rep. Bill Thomas (R-Calif.), Rep. Vic Fazio (D-Calif.), Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) and Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) then unanimously selected Mr. Eagen.
Prior to his present position, Jay has had an extensive career of public service on Capitol Hill lasting fifteen years. For six years, Mr. Eagen served as Staff Director for the Republican staff of the Committee on Education and the Workforce (formerly Committee on Education and Labor) under Chairman Bill Goodling of Pennsylvania. From 1985 to 1991 he directed the personal office for Rep. Goodling as his chief of staff. Jay began his career in the House of Representatives as a Legislative Assistant in 1982 and a year later was appointed administrative assistant chief of staff to Rep. Steve Gunderson of Wisconsin.
Mr. Eagen is a native of Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania. He graduated with a history degree from Gettysburg College in 1979. He continued his education immediately at American University's School of International Service, receiving a masters degree with distinction, specializing in U.S. foreign policy and Western European relations. Jay also attended the Senior Managers in Government executive program at the John F. Kennedy School of Government.
The Chief Administrative Officer, one of three officers elected by the House, oversees the broad administrative operations of the House including finances, technology/communications, human resources, equipment, supplies and procurement. The CAO is supported by a team of Associate Administrators who direct the individual unit operations.
Jay is married to Catherine Rauth Eagen, a native of Michigan. Cathy is a public school teacher at the Thomas Jefferson School for Science and Technology, part of the Fairfax County School System in Virginia. They reside in Alexandria, Virginia.