Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

ances, to perform our legislative mission, and to oversee the vast activities and expenditures of the entire Federal government.

There are those who do not believe that the legislature should have the resources to do its job or to oversee the activities of the other branches of government. Some people have taken exception to funding a number of agencies that play that critical role. But that is exactly what our duty is under the Constitution. We can't buckle under the imposition of an artificially severe constraint over our ability to govern and to legislate. We cannot let that happen. I hope other members of the committee share my concerns. These hearings are designed to ferret out the necessary from the desirable or even the frivolous. I believe our record shows we do that, and I don't think I need to point out to most of you that there isn't an OMB between the agencies and the Legislative Branch and this Subcommittee. The fact that we are having our hearings today based on what is a draft or unofficial version of the budget is simply indicative of the fact that the budget submitted by the Legislative Branch agencies are, by law, passed directly to this Committee and not altered by the Executive Branch.

COMMENTS IN RESPONSE TO RALPH NADER ATTACK ON CONGRESS

Before we begin, there is one more subject I want to mention just briefly. Last year, Ralph Nader and one of his research groups attacked the Congress for not imposing environmentally sound practices, indicating we were not environmentally conscious, that we do not use recycled paper are not energy efficient, and so forth in our own operations.

Because our record is so good in that regard—because his report was so faulty-because it was just the typical kind of Congressbashing we usually get from Mr. Nader-we did try to set the record straight with him. We sent him a long, wellresearched paper

outlining our activities over the years in this area, including the efforts of John Porter and myself to get the GPO to use recycled paper. Now, over 96 percent of printing and writing papers meet or exceed the EPA standards, and recycled newsprint, GPO just awarded a large contract for the Congressional Record and the Federal Register. We cited our directive to the Architect of the Capitol to study the use of energy-efficient lighting using criteria reported in a recent study by the Office of Technology Assessment.

We are testing actual energy-efficient lighting in this hearing room and other places in the Capitol complex. We pointed out to Mr. Nader: - our installation of solar collectors at the Ford House Office

Building, -our use of recycled products provided to Members' offices by the

House stationery room now over 50 percent of letter paper,

envelopes, etc., -our water and sewage metering program which has enabled us

to save on our reimbursements to the District government, -the installation of a baghouse and filters at the power plant to

control air contaminants,

the budget resolutions free of the pressures that sometimes come into the authorizing-appropriations trade-offs.

Every one of those transactions is also printed in the Clerk's report. This isn't hiding anything, or obfuscating, and it is not fair to describe it that way. If we wanted to hide it would be a lot easier for us to just bury everything into one massive account that would probably be impenetrable to anybody who wished to find out any fundamental information. To those who feel we are being arcane or obscure I suggest they compare this Committee's process to the Defense bill accounts or the large departmental administrative accounts in other Executive Branch agencies with our account structure.

Ours is easily the more detailed, more easily documented, more widely disclosed and our transactions are reported in much more detail. Where do you find comparable data on travel expenditures, individual contracts, salaries paid and consultant fees? Not one other large agency in government is as open or reveals as much of its operations and expenses as the Congress does.

So some observers just carp or accuse the Congress of being "obscure", but the facts are otherwise. I am pleased that we have press here today, particularly the type of members of the press corps who do spend a good deal of time on the agencies of this branch of government, and who do write extensively

about it. They never seem to be short of material to include in their stories.

HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE BRANCH BUDGET RESTRAINT

It is also important to note the history of restraint we have imposed on the Legislative budget over the years. We have kept our budget well below the growth in the Executive budget. Fiscal year 1982 was my first year as Chairman of this subcommittee. Since then, the annual compound rate of growth in the legislative appropriation has been 6.4 percent. The comparable growth rate in overall Federal funds outlays during this same time period has been 6.9 percent. The general government function of the Federal budget, which is dominated by executive direction and management in the Executive Branch, and which requires personnel intensive resources more comparable to those in the Legislative Branch, has grown at 8 percent per year on average. That is a 25-percent higher annual rate of growth than the Legislative budget. As we go through these hearings, we will review each request carefully and ask whether or not it is essential to the workings of the Legislative Branch, or can be cut back.

The fiscal year 1993 budget does represent an increase over 1992 appropriations. However, the Committee will undoubtedly make reductions when we mark the bill up just as we do every year. We should remember that the Legislative budget is much behind the growth in the other areas of the Federal budget. It is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain this type of restraint on the Legislative budget year after year. After all, we are one-third of the government under the Constitution, a key component of the checks and balances concept that is fundamental to our democratic procances, to perform our legislative mission, and to oversee the vast activities and expenditures of the entire Federal government.

There are those who do not believe that the legislature should have the resources to do its job or to oversee the activities of the other branches of government. Some people have taken exception to funding a number of agencies that play that critical role. But that is exactly what our duty is under the Constitution. We can't buckle under the imposition of an artificially severe constraint over our ability to govern and to legislate. We cannot let that happen. I hope other members of the committee share my concerns. These hearings are designed to ferret out the necessary from the desirable or even the frivolous. I believe our record shows we do that, and I don't think I need to point out to most of you that there isn't an OMB between the agencies and the Legislative Branch and this Subcommittee. The fact that we are having our hearings today based on what is a draft or unofficial version of the budget is simply indicative of the fact that the budget submitted by the Legislative Branch agencies are, by law, passed directly to this Committee and not altered by the Executive Branch.

COMMENTS IN RESPONSE TO RALPH NADER ATTACK ON CONGRESS

Before we begin, there is one more subject I want to mention just briefly. Last year, Ralph Nader and one of his research groups attacked the Congress for not imposing environmentally sound practices, indicating we were not environmentally conscious, that we do not use recycled paper are not energy efficient, and so forth in our own operations.

Because our record is so good in that regard—because his report was so faulty-because it was just the typical kind of Congressbashing we usually get from Mr. Nader—we did try to set the record straight with him. We sent him a long, wellresearched paper

outlining our activities over the years in this area, including the efforts of John Porter and myself to get the GPO to use recycled paper. Now, over 96 percent of printing and writing papers meet or exceed the EPA standards, and recycled newsprint, GPO just awarded a large contract for the Congressional Record and the Federal Register. We cited our directive to the Architect of the Capitol to study the use of energy-efficient lighting using criteria reported in a recent study by the Office of Technology Assessment.

We are testing actual energy-efficient lighting in this hearing room and other places in the Capitol complex. We pointed out to Mr. Nader: -our installation of solar collectors at the Ford House Office

Building, -our use of recycled products provided to Members' offices by the

House stationery room now over 50 percent of letter paper,

envelopes, etc., -our water and sewage metering program which has enabled us to save on our reimbursements

to the District government, - the installation of a baghouse and filters at the power plant to

control air contaminants,

Lour $10 million program to remove PCB's from building trans

formers, -our direction to the Architect to inaugurate an office waste

recycling program, and -our asbestos removal project at the General Accounting Office

headquarters building. I am going to insert this lengthy response to Mr. Nader in the record. I commend it to all who are concerned about our environment and are interested in what the Congress is doing in its own precincts to set an example. I have gone into this because we tend to hear a lot more about the charges, and absolutely nothing about the refutation of them, which ought to be on the record.

[The information follows:]

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives
Committee on Appropriations

Washington, DC 20515

MAJORITY MEMBERS
JAMIE L WHITTEN, MISSISSIPPI. CHAIRMAN
WILLIAM NATCHER KENTUCKY VICE CHAIRMAN
NEAL SMITH HOWA
SIONER YATES LLINOIS
DAVIO OBEY WISCONSIN
EDWARDR ROYAL CALIFORNIA
LOUIS STOKES. OMIO
TOM DFVILL ALABAMA
AL ALEXANDER ARKANSAS
JOHN MURTMA PENNSYLVANIA
DO TRAXLER MICHIGAN
JOSEPH D EARLY MASSACHUSETTS
CHARLES WILSON, TELAS
NORMAN DOCKS WASHINGTON
MATTHEW MCHUGH NEW YORK
WILLIAM LEMMAN FLORIOA
MARTIN OLAV SABO MINNESOTA
JULIAN DUMON CALIFORNIA
VCIANO CALIFORNIA
W8) HEFNER NORTH CAROLINA
LES AUCOIN OREGON
WILLIAM K GRAY PENNSYLVANIA
BERNARDOWYER NEW JERSEY
STENY N MOYER MARYLANO
BOB CARM MICHIGAN
KOHET MRAZEK NEW YORK
RICHARD DURAN LINOIS
RONALD O COLEMAN TEXAS
ALAN MOLLOHAN WEST VIRGINIA
UNOSAY THOMAS, GEORGIA
CHESTER G ATKINS MASSACHUSETTS

CHAPMAN TEXAS
MARCY KAPTUR OHIO
LAWRENCE SMITH FLORIDA
DAVO SRAGGS COLORADO
DAVO PRICE NORTH CAROLINA
NANCY PELOS CALL ORNA

MINORITY MEMBERS
JOSEPH M MCDADE PENNSYLVANA
JOHN T MYERS INDIANA
CLARENCE MILLER OHIO
LAWAENCE COUGHLIN PENNSYLVANIA
CW HILL YOUNG. FLORIDA
RALPH REGULA OMIO
CARL D PURSULL MCKIGAN
MICKEY EDWARDS OKLAHOMA
BOB LIVINGSTON LOUISIANA
BILL GALEN NEW YORK
JERRY LEWIS. CALIFORNIA
JOHN EDWARD PORTEN ELLINOIS
HAROLD ROGERS KENTUCKY
JOE SKEEN NEW MEXICO
FRANK A WOLF VIRGINIA
BILL LOWERY CALIFORNIA
VI WEBER MINNESOTA
TOM DILAY TEXAS
HM KOLBE ARIZONA
DEAN A GALLO. NEW JERSEY
BARBARA VUCANOVICH NEVADA
BM LIGNTFOOT. IOWA

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Ralph Nader
Government Procurement Project
P.O. Box 19367
Washington, DC 20036

Dear Mr. Nader:

From its very first sentence, your September 3, 1991, press
release, "Congress Is Not A Green Consumer Charges Ralph Nader,"
is misleading, distorted, and reflects flagrantly poor research.
Your September 11 cover letter sending this non-information to me
suggests that I take an "action-interest" in the so-called
"findings." Since those findings and real facts are a
contradiction in terms, I want to shed some light on your dark
analysis; call it an "information-interest" contribution to your
research efforts.

You contend that congress is "not being environmentally
conscious in the management of its office buildings" and go on to

. should lead the country. by buying recycled
paper, conserving water, and being energy efficient." That we are
not environmentally conscious is patently false. The allegations
that we do not buy recycled paper, conserve water, and are not
trying to be energy efficient is so easily refutable that even a
cursory research effort should have no difficulty in discerning
the truth.

say we "

During the past ten years that I have been the chairman of the
appropriations subcommittee that provides funds for the entire
legislative branch, including those for the operations of
Congress' office buildings, all of our agencies have been
encouraged to become environmentally prudent. Over that period,
and even before that, our subcommittee and those who operate our
infrastructure have repeatedly taken positive and proactive stands

« ZurückWeiter »