Mr. FAZIO. If you would yield further, what we really did is respond to concerns that money was remaining available for too many years, and have instituted some changes that make it clear that that doesn't get perpetuated.

This was of course caught up in this annual debate that I am sure we will have again about a Speaker's slush fund. Such things as that are often thrown around, depending on who is in the Minority at any given time, I am sure.

But the bottom line is, we require reprogrammings like we did earlier today any time any of those funds are drawn down upon, even after the fiscal year is complete. Is that correct?

Mr. ANFINSON. Yes.

Mr. PACKARD. I see there is one other question.

CLARIFICATION OF “SPEAKERS SLUSH FUND"

Mr. MILLER. Following up on this issue of the Speaker's slush fund, explain to me why that can't exist, why there cannot be a Speaker's slush fund anymore.

Mr. ANFINSON. That is something I cannot address, because I have been here for six weeks. I have not been exposed to the Speaker's fund. But we would be happy to get information to you on that.

Mr. FAZIO. Can I take a crack, Mr. Miller?

Actually no Speaker ever had a slush fund. There is this reprogramming authority which we have seen right here on CSPAN today, and it is the same kind of authority that exists in every agency of the government, where the appropriations committee of jurisdiction, usually in a bipartisan manner or through a vote of the committee, will transfer funds within their area of responsibility from one account to another.

It is done within the fiscal year only or in some cases you can reach back to unobligated funds from prior fiscal years. But there is no slush fund per se, and it isn't available to the Speaker.

If the Speaker wants something, I am sure he will go to Mr. Faulkner, who will then see whether or not some source can be found to reprogram funds. And then he still has to come to Mr. Packard and the Ranking Minority Member for approval, in that sense, like any other person whose budget is in the Legislative Branch.

Mr. PACKARD. Several years ago I was disabused of the idea that the Speaker has a slush fund, and you have stated it correctly. He has to go through the same procedure that any other agency or person goes through. And they can deny him as they can deny anybody else. I think that is an important point to have on the record. On page 9 of your report, the committee employees, does that reflect the one-third cut that has already been imposed?

Mr. ANFINSON. No, it does not.

Mr. PACKARD. These figures were formulated in 1993

Mr. ANFINSON. That is right. They have not been adjusted to reflect the one-third cut.

HOUSE CALENDARS

Mr. PACKARD. Lastly, I would like to ask the Members of the committee on page 16 to evaluate the calendars, whether we want

to-I see that that is an $850,000 price tag. Page 16. I have used the calendars, I like them, I give them out, they are always appreciated, but I didn't realize they cost that much to the Congress. That is close to $1 million.

Mr. FAZIO. Of course, it does relate to the Historical Society and its very important function here, and we need to flesh that out. Mr. PACKARD. The question is, if they are going to be printed, maybe the additional quantity is not all that much.

Mr. FAZIO. It is a periodic debate.

Mr. PACKARD. Other than that, we have five minutes left. That is fine. But I think we have wrapped it up.

Any further questions of Mr. Faulkner?

Mr. MILLER. I am sure you asked this question before I got here. However, I am curious of the cost of compliance, now that we are under OSHA.

Mr. PACKARD. That is a discussion for the future.

Mr. FAULKNER. There has also been lively discussion with Oversight. There is a lot involved.

DISCUSSION ON HOUSE OFFICER REORGANIZATIONS

Mr. FAZIO. Mr. Chairman, can I ask Mr. Faulkner one question? I didn't have a chance earlier and I didn't get a chance to hear from Robin Carle, but I would be interested in knowing when some of the discussions will come to closure in terms of the ultimate decision on some of the reorganization that occurs. I assume I may hear about that in the other committee.

This committee does need to know ultimately the decisions between the Clerk and CAO and any other entity within the legislative branch, as to how we are ultimately going to divide up responsibility. These are ongoing, I gather, discussions.

Mr. FAULKNER. What we are hoping is to bring everything to closure this month and have detailed numbers on not only how the costs get allocated among the different officers but ultimately how our functions are going to be how we are going to proceed.

Mr. FAZIO. I appreciate that. I know we normally have produced budgets for the Legislative Branch, 5, 6, 7 percent. I would be obviously interested-you are going to provide us with your cut on the budget that wasn't yours as submitted before we go to markup; is that correct?

Mr. FAULKNER. Absolutely. We are hoping to have that the first part of March.

Mr. PACKARD. We think there are some House oversight functions that that committee will have to do or will want to do. We think that by consensus they may want and we may want to do things through our bill that would maybe fast-track it. And so I think they are aware of what the needs are. We are going to be marking up our bill in the first part of April, and I think that means we get the information by then.

[The information follows:]

Subcommittee on Legislative Appropriations of the House Committee

on Appropriations on the fiscal year 1996 (FY '96) Budget estimates for the U. S. House of Representatives and certain

Joint Items".

February 15, 1995

U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

WITNESSES

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OF THE HOUSE SCOT M. FAULKNER, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

THOMAS E. ANFINSON, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF FINANCE

OFFICE OF THE CLERK
HONORABLE ROBIN H. CARLE, CLERK
LINDA G. NAVE, DEPUTY CLERK

OFFICE OF THE SERGEANT AT ARMS

HONORABLE WILSON S. LIVINGOOD, SERGEANT AT ARMS
JIM VAREY, DEPUTY SERGEANT AT ARMS
BILL SIMS, SUPERVISOR OF CHAMBER SECURITY

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
JOHN W. LAINHART IV, INSPECTOR GENERAL

OFFICE OF THE LAW REVISION COUNSEL
EDWARD F. WILLETT, JR.

OFFICE OF THE ATTENDING PHYSICIAN
DR. JOHN F. EISOLD, ATTENDING PHYSICIAN

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased and honored to appear before you today as the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives. As you know, the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer was established in House Resolution 1 which also designated certain entities that would be combined under this directorate. I also want to take this opportunity to thank the Clerk of the House and the Sergeant at Arms and their staffs for their assistance and courtesy during the complex process of restructuring House support functions.

The fiscal year 1996 budget numbers presented herein reflect the requests proposed by of the 103rd Congress. They do not reflect the recent reorganization activities of the 104th Congress, nor the reform initiatives being considered at the current time. Prior to Markup, revised fiscal year budget numbers reflecting the restructuring and reforms of the 104th Congress will be submitted to you and the Subcommittee members, Mr. Chairman.

When the House officers and other key witnesses appear, they will present testimony and answer your questions. Accompanying me at the table is Mr. Thomas E Anfinson, Associate Administrator for Finance. Also with me today are Mr. Anfinson's Chief of Staff, Patricia A. Mattimore, Mr. Michael Buckley, of our budget office, and Don Mutersbaugh and Rick Endres from Information Resouces Management who are here to provide additional detailed information should the Committee require it. I look forward to a productive and successful working relationship with this Committee as we all build a better managed and more open Congress