Recommendations to Reclaim Congress' Article One Powers: Report 116-561
Summary
Report 116-561 of the 116th Congress, 2d Session, Union Calendar No. 459, dated October 23, 2020, of the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, with recommendations on reclaiming Congress' Article One powers, boosting staff capacity, improving the schedule and calendar, improving the budget and appropriations process, identifying administrative inefficiencies and improving technology and continuity. The roster lists Derek Kilmer of Washington as Chair and Tom Graves of Georgia as Vice Chair. A closing votes section says no recorded votes were taken and that the recommendations were adopted by voice vote, two-thirds being in the affirmative, on a motion by Chair Kilmer.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- Crpt Crpt 116Hrpt561 Crpt 116Hrpt561
- Case
- Crpt Crpt 116Hrpt561 Crpt 116Hrpt561
Cite this document
“Recommendations to Reclaim Congress' Article One Powers: Report 116-561.”
Original at www.govinfo.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/crpt-crpt-116hrpt561-crpt-116hrpt561/
, SHA-256 38c9e9b14c5cb65b6d84aedfeeea52c40e7ccfe87ec9374dd3296dc76877fd14.Full text
1
Union Calendar No. 459
116TH CONGRESS REPORT
" HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES !
2d Session 116–561
RECOMMENDATIONS TO RECLAIM CONGRESS’ AR-
TICLE ONE POWERS, BOOST STAFF CAPACITY,
IMPROVE THE SCHEDULE AND CALENDAR, IM-
PROVE THE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS
PROCESS, IDENTIFY ADMINISTRATIVE INEFFI-
CIENCIES AND IMPROVE TECHNOLOGY AND
CONTINUITY
R E P O R T
THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE
MODERNIZATION OF CONGRESS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
OCTOBER 23, 2020.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
19–006 WASHINGTON : 2020
E:\Seals\Congress.#13
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE MODERNIZATION OF CONGRESS
DEREK KILMER, Washington, Chair
ZOE LOFGREN, California TOM GRAVES, Georgia, Vice Chair
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri ROBERT WOODALL, Georgia
SUZAN DELBENE, Washington SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
WILLIAM TIMMONS, South Carolina
COMMITTEE STAFF
ALLIE NEILL, Staff Director
JAKE OLSON, Deputy Staff Director
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
(II)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE MODERNIZATION OF CONGRESS,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, DC, October 20, 2020.
Hon. CHERYL L. JOHNSON,
Clerk, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
DEAR MS. JOHNSON: I present herewith a report entitled, ‘‘Rec-
ommendations to Reclaim Congress’s Article One Powers, Boost
Staff Capacity, Improve the Schedule and Calendar, Improve the
Budget and Appropriations Process, Identify Administrative Ineffi-
ciencies and Improve Technology and Continuity.’’
Sincerely,
DEREK KILMER,
Chair.
(III)
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 7633 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 7633 Sfmt 7633 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
CONTENTS
OCTOBER 23, 2020
Page
I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY ........................................................................ 1
II. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR RECOMMENDATIONS ..................... 2
III. HEARINGS AND VIRTUAL DISCUSSIONS ............................................. 7
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 9
V. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION AND VOTES ........................................ 21
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
(V)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
Union Calendar No. 459
116TH CONGRESS REPORT
" HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES !
2d Session 116–561
RECOMMENDATIONS TO RECLAIM CONGRESS’ ARTICLE ONE POWERS,
BOOST STAFF CAPACITY, IMPROVE THE SCHEDULE AND CALENDAR, IM-
PROVE THE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS PROCESS, IDENTIFY ADMIN-
ISTRATIVE INEFFICIENCIES AND IMPROVE TECHNOLOGY AND CON-
TINUITY
OCTOBER 23, 2020.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. KILMER, from the Select Committee on the Modernization of
Congress, submitted the following
R E P O R T
I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
The Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress has
been charged with the important responsibility of recommending
improvements to the U.S. House of Representatives to help Mem-
bers of Congress and their staff better serve the American people.
On May 23, 2019 the Select Committee passed its first set of rec-
ommendations to improve transparency in Congress. On July 25,
2019 the Select Committee passed its second set of recommenda-
tions to address key challenges and capacity issues throughout the
Legislative Branch. On December 19, 2019 the Select Committee
passed its third set of recommendations to boost civility and bipar-
tisanship in the House, streamline processes and save taxpayer
dollars, and increase the quality of constituent communication.
In early 2020, as the Select Committee continued its work of de-
veloping recommendations to make Congress work better for the
American people, a global public health crisis emerged. The
COVID–19 pandemic brought the need for congressional continuity
planning into clear focus as Members and staff had to quickly fig-
ure out how to work efficiently and effectively away from the U.S.
Capitol. Select Committee Members believe that Congress needs to
better prepare for continuity of governance and operations in the
face of crises. To address these challenges, the Select Committee
passed its fourth set of recommendations on July 31, 2020.
The Select Committee passed its fifth and final set of rec-
ommendations on September 24, 2020. These recommendations
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
focus on a range of important issues, including reclaiming Con-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
2
gress’ Article One powers, boosting staff capacity, improving the
schedule and calendar, improving the budget and appropriations
process, identifying administrative inefficiencies and improving
technology. This final set of recommendations addresses a number
of issues that the Select Committee took up in public hearings, vir-
tual discussions, and Member meetings over the course of its ten-
ure.
II. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
Reclaiming Congress’ Article One powers, boosting staff capacity,
improving the schedule and calendar, improving the budget and
appropriations process, identifying administrative inefficiencies and
improving technology will improve the way Congress works on be-
half of the American people. The Select Committee identified the
following issues to be addressed with recommendations:
1. Too often, committee hearings fail to produce substantive in-
formation because Members use the five minutes they are allotted
to make political statements or to ensure that a particular view or
assertion goes on the record. Witnesses can also run down the clock
by dodging questions or giving lengthy responses. Utilizing ex-
tended periods for witness questioning would encourage more sub-
stantive dialogue and thoughtful exchanges and discourage political
soundbites.
2. Unlike Senate committees, most House committees hire major-
ity and minority administrative personnel. This means there are
two staffers handling similar administrative duties. Senate com-
mittee staffers who are hired on a bipartisan basis know they work
for Members of both parties and approach their work with that un-
derstanding. In addition to encouraging bipartisanship, joint hires
save money by reducing staff overlap.
3. By establishing Chair, Ranking Member, and Member expecta-
tions in pre-hearing meetings, committee Members can better plan
and coordinate their witness questions, resulting in a more produc-
tive and substantive hearing. Bipartisan pre-hearing meetings also
would reduce the tendency to engage in surprise tactics and defuse
partisanship before it begins.
4. To build support for process and procedural overhauls at the
full committee level, some subcommittees should be encouraged to
experiment and adopt rule changes as test cases. Subcommittee
Members could then report to their full committees, as well as
their respective party caucuses, on successful experiments they’d
recommend be adopted on a broader level.
5. Because committees are the engines of the policy making proc-
ess, committees could be more productive if Members agreed to a
set of common principles and operational guidelines. A meeting of
a majority of committee Members at a bipartisan Member retreat
at the beginning of each Congress would allow for a unique oppor-
tunity to improve the committee process and functions. Creating a
more respectful tone is essential if Members are to build trust and
work collaboratively.
6. The House should create bipartisan opportunities for Members
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
to learn more about the federal programs within their committees’
jurisdictions. Domestic congressional delegation trips (CODELs)
would allow Members to have substantive, off-camera conversa-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
3
tions about their policy areas, while getting to know each other on
a bipartisan basis.
7. Oxford-style debates feature a debate on a predetermined topic
from two opposing perspectives. The two sides argue either for or
against the topic, within a structured format. Weekly Oxford-style
debates focusing on national issues would demonstrate that Con-
gress takes the Article One principle of debate and deliberation se-
riously, and that Members can grapple with important problems
while maintaining civility.
8. Members do not receive training on overall legislative debate,
Oxford-style debate principles and strategies, or how to process and
understand opposing policy views. To further foster bipartisanship,
Members and staff should receive training on how to effectively de-
bate and deliberate.
9. Too often, Congress delegates rulemaking power to the execu-
tive branch. Through this delegated power, the executive promul-
gates rules and regulations, and offers legal opinions to the courts.
As such, Congress needs a counterpart to similar offices in the ex-
ecutive and judicial branches. A congressional office responsible for
issuing legal opinions and clarifying guidance on policy objectives
in legislation could support Congress and counter Department of
Justice opinions that conflict with congressional intent.
10. Judicial proceedings are the only route to adjudicate conflicts
between the executive and legislative branches but these pro-
ceedings can take months or years to resolve. These delays impede
Congress’ ability to uphold its Article One responsibilities. Congres-
sional standing in the courts needs to be clarified.
11. Members need more opportunities to forge professional and
personal relationships. By visiting each other’s districts, Members
are more likely to find common issues to work on together and gain
an appreciation for the issues that their colleagues from different
districts confront.
12. Congress has seen a major reduction in committee staffing
levels over the past several decades. Committee staff tend to have
more experience and more policy and institutional expertise than
personal office staff. The number of policy experts who work at leg-
islative support agencies have also been cut dramatically. The de-
parture of these specialists and the resultant ‘‘brain drain’’ from
the Hill has sorely diminished Congress’ ability to carry out its Ar-
ticle One obligations. Capacity for policy staff and congressional
support agencies needs to be increased to address these challenges
while also evaluating the objectives and mission of congressional
support agencies.
13. Congress needs to reclaim its authority under Article One of
the Constitution to appropriate federal dollars in a way that em-
phasizes transparency and accountability, and that provides mean-
ingful investment in local communities. Doing so would help reduce
dysfunction in the annual budgeting process.
14. Certifications help staff become more marketable for pro-
motion or alternative employment. In addition, these programs also
help offices save time by training staffers and create a standard-
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
ized, base-level understanding of staff roles across the House. And
given the unique nature of the work on Capitol Hill, it can be dif-
ficult to move from one position to another. Training would provide
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
4
staff with an opportunity to learn new positions and be flexible in
their work goals.
15. For new staffers, the institutional knowledge of how Capitol
Hill operates can be difficult to find and understand. Providing in-
stitution-wide training for new employees would ensure all new
staff understand their role, how Congress operates, as well as logis-
tics like benefits. Training would empower staff to not only under-
stand the legislative process, but their rights as congressional staff.
16. Because both staff pay and the high costs of franked mail
both fall under the Members’ Representational Allowance (MRA),
Members are financially restricted in both the quantity and quality
of constituent correspondence and staff pay. Where some offices
have high franked-costs, others do not. This inadvertently dis-
advantages staff and Members, who are constrained by a collective
MRA.
17. Improving capacity and staff expertise will make Congress
work better for the American people, and less reliant on lobbyists
or outside experts. In order to provide sufficient compensation to
recruit and retain capable staff, a modern MRA is needed. A thor-
ough and updated evaluation of the formula—including a consider-
ation of staff pay in relation to the executive branch and to private
industry—will provide a data-driven means of modernizing the
MRA.
18. In order for Congress to retain staff and build capacity, staff
need to be paid more, and expect to receive standard cost of living
adjustments, as well as raises based on tenure and merit. An es-
tablished, nonbinding pay band system will encourage staff to stay
on Capitol Hill for longer because they will have greater clarity re-
garding what they can expect to be paid. Such a system can also
provide staff with an additional tool to ask for more compensation
and could also prevent major pay discrepancies between congres-
sional offices. In order to establish a nonbinding pay band system
in the House, current and reliable data on staff salaries is also
needed.
19. Health care benefits are particularly important to attracting
and retaining staff, but the transition to the D.C. exchange has
made it difficult for some district-based staff to find local health
care providers who accept the D.C. options. Additionally, the tran-
sition has been difficult for some D.C.-based staff who preferred the
coverage they had under the FEHB program. Allowing congres-
sional staff choice in coverage would bring them into alignment
with committee staff and the executive branch when it comes to
health provider choices.
20. While staff benefits are provided by all Members of Congress,
the stipulations of these requirements can differ by office. The
CARES Act allowed student loan borrowers, including congres-
sional staff, to avoid taxes on the benefits they receive. Reauthor-
izing this provision would help congressional staffers who partici-
pate in the student loan repayment program, regardless of personal
office policies.
21. Retaining senior staff is critical to improving institutional ca-
pacity and making Members more effective lawmakers on behalf of
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
their constituents. However, congressional staff salaries are limited
by a Member’s own salary because staff cannot earn more than
Members. This contributes to staff retention problems and means
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
5
that Congress loses experienced staff to the private sector and exec-
utive branch.
22. Like congressional party caucuses, Congressional Member
Organizations (CMOs) rely on staff and interns to help them serve
their Members and work on their organizational legislative objec-
tives. But staff who work for these organizations can’t always ac-
cess the same staff benefits as staff who work in personal offices.
This can make it difficult for these organizations to recruit and re-
tain staff.
23. Beginning in the 114th Congress, the House began allowing
certain CMOs to be designated as Eligible Congressional Member
Organizations (ECMOs). Member organizations have increased in
number and influence, yet there is no publicly available list of
ECMOs. This lack of transparency prevents the public from access-
ing basic information about these organizations and their legisla-
tive objectives.
24. Members typically sit on an average of 5.4 committees and
subcommittees. Efforts to deconflict committee meetings, to the ex-
tent possible, would allow Members to spend more substantial time
on committee business and would hopefully reduce the need for cer-
tain committees to be prioritized over others.
25. In 1974, the House Select Committee on Committees (Bolling
Committee) recommended the establishment of a computerized
scheduling system for committees and subcommittees. This rec-
ommendation was adopted at the start of the 97th Congress and
remains in effect today. However, this system is only being used to
announce the date and time of hearings and meetings. A common
committee calendar portal that allows committees visibility into
other committee activities and potential committee member con-
flicts would help deconflict schedules.
26. Conflict between committee work and floor time is one of the
factors that make Member time in Washington less productive than
it could be. In a four-day week, committees only have two full days
to conduct business and even then, Members must split their time
between committee meetings and debate and votes on the House
floor. This compression of committee time results in the scheduling
conflicts. Committee-activity-only weeks—or even committee-activ-
ity-only days—without any floor activity would allow Members to
take deeper dives into their committee work.
27. Based on distance from D.C., family structure, and other
preferences, every Member of Congress has a different idea of what
the House calendar should look like. But despite differences in
travel habits, one thing all Members can agree on is they would
like to spend less time traveling. A calendar with less days inter-
rupted by travel would allow for more time for Members to fully
focus on legislative and district responsibilities.
28. Experts argue that the more time Members spend together,
the more likely they are to develop a productive working relation-
ship. Along those lines, making room in the congressional calendar
for a bipartisan retreat will improve the institution’s ability to ad-
vance an agenda for the American people and improve civility.
29. Members of Congress must have access to nonpartisan infor-
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
mation about the many factors contributing to the nation’s debt
and deficit in order to develop sound fiscal policies and meet our
long-debt and deficit reduction. To encourage communication be-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
6
tween the executive and legislative branches and ensure that all
parties involved in the budget and appropriations process are mak-
ing decisions based on a common set of facts, there needs to be im-
proved communication between agency officials and Members of
Congress. A yearly Fiscal State of the Nation discussion will facili-
tate these types of discussions and ensure all involved start off
with the same expectations and understanding.
30. The budget resolution has increasingly become a partisan
document, used by congressional leaders to highlight their policy
preferences, and in some cases as a political maneuver for Senate
passage. And when the budget process is inordinately delayed and
politicized, it slows down the important work of congressional ap-
propriations. By setting 302(a) discretionary spending levels at the
start of each Congress, appropriations will be more efficient and
able to plan ahead, avoiding unnecessary delays. A biennial budget
would also provide Congress additional time to conduct oversight
of federal agencies and departments.
31. Congress has continually failed to adopt a budget resolution
by the statutorily required April 15 deadline. In those years in
which Congress has adopted a budget resolution, it has adopted the
budget resolution an average of 36 days after the target date. The
current deadline does not reflect a realistic timeline.
32. Congress requires critical data from the executive branch to
begin the budget building process. Specifically, the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO) cannot begin constructing its baseline for the
upcoming fiscal year without receipt of data, particularly prior-year
and current-year spending, that is normally transmitted with the
President’s budget request. Without receipt of CBO’s baseline, Con-
gress generally cannot begin writing its budget resolution.
33. Under a new two-year budget resolution process, the Budget
and Appropriations Committees would need to review their sched-
ules and procedures to determine the best ways of using the resolu-
tion to expedite congressional work.
34. The budget process, particularly in the Senate, is susceptible
to being used as a procedural maneuver to bypass the filibuster
threshold. This has tainted the larger budget reconciliation process.
The budget reconciliation process should only be used to reduce
deficits.
35. Given the fact that tax expenditures are a major component
of the federal budget, an optional requirement for including a total
level of tax expenditures in the list of what could be in a budget
resolution would encourage transparency and flexibility in the
budget process.
36. Congress’ physical workspace affects the institution’s ability
to attract and retain talented, young workers. Members and staff
complain about a lack of open, bipartisan spaces where they can
meet in private, away from press. Quality workspace design leads
to a less stressful and more productive atmosphere.
37. Unlike individual Members of Congress, the Government
Services Administration (GSA) has a great deal of expertise in ne-
gotiating leases. Today, the GSA owns and leases nearly 400 mil-
lion square feet of space throughout the country, from ports of
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
entry, post offices, laboratories, and more. Allowing the GSA to
handle the responsibility of negotiating the lease for individual
Member’s district offices would save time and money.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
7
38. Congressional operations depend upon technology, but Con-
gress is often constrained by its own limited approach to pur-
chasing technology and providing technological services. The execu-
tive branch responded to similar challenges by creating the U.S.
Digital Service, which hires technologists to build tools that make
government work better for the American people. A more sophisti-
cated and coordinated approach to the provision of technology and
technological services in the House would help Members better
serve their constituents.
39. The Bulk Data Task Force brings together many technology
stakeholders inside the legislative branch as well as members of
civil society. Though it was established by Congress as a temporary
entity, it continues to hold public meetings on a quarterly basis.
This ongoing collaboration has been positive for the House Clerk’s
Office and for data transparency groups and has led to techno-
logical advances in how legislative data is made public.
40. The COVID–19 pandemic forced Congress into a continuity of
operations plan, but there is still much work to be done to prepare
for future crises. An evaluation of Congress’ response to the
COVID–19 pandemic could determine where there is room for im-
provement, as well as newly implemented practices that might no
longer be necessary.
III. HEARINGS AND VIRTUAL DISCUSSIONS
The COVID–19 pandemic compelled changes in committee oper-
ations and procedures. Because Members were away from the U.S.
Capitol for extended periods of time, many committees, including
the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, continued
to meet by videoconference. The Select Committee held four hear-
ings and six virtual discussions which helped shape these rec-
ommendations. The discussions included:
• ‘‘Recommendations for Improving the Budget and Appro-
priations Process: A Look at the Work of the Joint Select Com-
mittee,’’ on September 19, 2019. The Select Committee received
testimony from:
» Mr. G. William Hoagland, Senior Vice President, Bi-
partisan Policy Center
» The Honorable Nita M. Lowey, Member of Congress
» Ms. Megan Lynch, Specialist on Congress and the
Legislative Process, Congressional Research Service
» Mr. M. Matthew Owens, Participant, Convergence
Building a Better Budget Process Project, Executive VP
and VP for Federal Relations, Association of American
Universities
» The Honorable Steve Womack, Member of Congress
• ‘‘The House Calendar and Schedule: Evaluating Practices
and Challenges,’’ on October 16, 2019. The Select Committee
received testimony from:
» Ms. Ida Brudnick, Specialist on Congress, Congres-
sional Research Service
» Mr. Charles W. Johnson, on behalf of themselves
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
» Mr. Kyle Nevins, on behalf of themselves
» Ms. Susan Clarke Schaar, Clerk of the Senate, Vir-
ginia General Assembly
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
8
• ‘‘Article One: Restoring Capacity and Equipping Congress
to Better Serve the American People,’’ on January 14, 2020.
The Select Committee received testimony from:
» Ms. Elise Bean, Washington Co-Director, Levin Cen-
ter at Wayne Law
» Dr. John Hudak, on behalf of themselves
» Dr. Kevin Kosar, Vice President, Research Partner-
ships, R Street Institute
» Dr. Rachel Augustine Potter, on behalf of themselves
• ‘‘Article One: Fostering a More Deliberative Process in
Congress,’’ on February 5, 2020. The Select Committee received
testimony from:
» Dr. James M. Curry, on behalf of themselves
» Dr. Carolyn J. Lukensmeyer, on behalf of themselves
» Dr. Norman J. Ornstein, on behalf of themselves
• ‘‘Continuity of Committee Work,’’ on May 7, 2020. The Se-
lect Committee received testimony from:
» Marci Harris, CEO of PopVox
» Beth Noveck, Director of The Governance Lab and
Chief Innovation Officer for the State of New Jersey
• ‘‘Congress’ Tech Capacity,’’ on May 15, 2020. The Select
Committee received testimony from:
» Travis Moore, Founder and Director of Tech Congress
» Lorelei Kelly, Leader of the Resilient Democracy Coa-
lition, Beeck Center for Social Impact and Innovation
Georgetown University
• ‘‘Remote Office Work and Best Practices from Federal
Agencies,’’ on May 20, 2020. The Select Committee received
testimony from:
» Peter M. Weichlein, Chief Executive Officer, U.S. As-
sociation of Former Members of Congress
» Kristine Simmons, Vice President, Government Af-
fairs at the Partnership for Public Service
• ‘‘Conversations on Congressional Staffing,’’ on June 4,
2020. The Select Committee received:
» Casey Burgat, Director of Legislative Affairs, Grad-
uate School of Political Management at George Wash-
ington University
» Kathryn Pearson, Associate Professor, University of
Minnesota
• ‘‘Discussion with American Political Science Association
Task Force,’’ on June 18, 2020. The Select Committee received
testimony from:
» Dr. Eric Schickler, Professor of Political Science at the
University of California, Berkeley, and co-chair of the
APSA Task Force on Congressional Reform
» Dr. Ruth Bloch Rubin, Assistant Professor in the De-
partment of Political Science at the University of Chicago
» Dr. Michael D. Minta, Associate Professor in Political
Science at the University of Minnesota
• ‘‘Boosting Internal Expertise in Congress,’’ on June 25,
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
2020. The Select Committee received testimony from:
» Dr. Lee Drutman, Senior Fellow in the Political Re-
form Program at New America Foundation
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
9
» Paul Brathwaite, Former Executive Director of the
Congressional Black Caucus (CBC)
» Maria Meier, Former Senior Leadership Staffer and
Director of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS
The Select Committee made the following 40 recommendations to
address the problems identified above (see II. BACKGROUND
AND NEED FOR RECOMMENDATIONS):
(1) Recommendation: Committees or subcommittees should ex-
periment with alternative hearing formats and alternatives to the
five-minute rule for questioning witnesses.
Specifically . . . Alternative hearing formats could include allow-
ing thirty-minute rounds to question witnesses and encourage dis-
course. For larger committees, groups of Members could be granted
thirty-minute blocks and coordinate their questions. Committees
could also experiment with formats like seating Members and wit-
nesses at the same table, or seating Members of opposing parties
next to each other to encourage better dialogue and civility. Chairs
and Ranking Members could encourage use of these alternative for-
mats by agreeing to incorporate them into committee rules. The
Chair and Ranking Member of each committee or subcommittee
could also approve the Member(s) and their question topics in ad-
vance to ensure questioning is designed to shape policy.
(2) Recommendation: Committees should hire bipartisan staff ap-
proved by both the Chair and Ranking Member to promote strong
institutional knowledge, evidence-based policy making, and a less
partisan oversight agenda.
Specifically . . . Joint hires of administrative staff who handle
committee tasks such as setting up hearing rooms, handling re-
ports, and archiving materials encourage bipartisanship and save
money by reducing staff overlap. Additionally, joint hires can en-
sure bipartisan oversight and a focus on effective policy. Bipartisan
staff approach their jobs understanding that they work for Mem-
bers of both parties and have greater job security because their jobs
are not dependent on which party is in the majority.
(3) Recommendation: Committees should hold bipartisan pre-
hearing committee meetings.
Specifically . . . Members and staff from both parties should
meet to set hearing goals in order to defuse partisanship before it
begins and reduce the tendency to engage in surprise tactics. Pre-
hearing meetings also allow Members to better plan and coordinate
their witness questions, resulting in a more productive and sub-
stantive hearing.
(4) Recommendation: Encourage pilot rule changes in subcommit-
tees.
Specifically . . . To build support for process and procedural
overhauls at the full committee level, some subcommittees should
be encouraged to experiment and adopt rule changes as test cases.
Subcommittee Members should then report to their full commit-
tees, as well as their respective party caucuses, on successful ex-
periments they recommend for adoption on a broader level.
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
(5) Recommendation: At a bipartisan Member retreat (as rec-
ommended by the Select Committee) committees should have at
least two-thirds of their Members meet separately to determine the
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
10
committee’s goals for the year, and to discuss how the Members
will treat each other in public and in private, and how the com-
mittee will treat witnesses during hearings.
Specifically . . . Committee Members should agree to a set of
common principles and operational guidelines. Creating a more re-
spectful tone is essential if Members are to build trust and work
collaboratively.
(6) Recommendation: Establish committee-based domestic policy
congressional delegation trips (CODELs).
Specifically . . . The House should create bipartisan opportuni-
ties for Members to learn more about the federal programs within
their committees’ jurisdictions. Domestic CODELs would allow
Members to have substantive, off-camera conversations about their
policy areas, while getting to know each other on a bipartisan
basis.
(7) Recommendation: Establish a pilot for weekly Oxford-style de-
bates on the House floor to be managed by a task force of bipar-
tisan Members established by majority and minority leadership
and selected from Members of relevant Member Organizations.
Specifically . . . A bipartisan working group could determine de-
bate topics, pick teams of Members to argue either side of an issue,
and schedule the debates throughout the session. The debates
should begin on topics that cut across party lines to demonstrate
bipartisan consensus on certain issues.
(8) Recommendation: Provide Members and staff with training
for debate and deliberation skills.
Specifically . . . During new session orientations, Members
should attend training on overall legislative debate, principles and
strategies, as well as workshops on how to process and understand
opposing policy views. The training should be bipartisan, led by
professionals, and should occur outside of Congress. To further fos-
ter bipartisanship, staff should also receive this training.
(9) Recommendation: The Government Accountability Office
(GAO) should study the feasibility and effectiveness of a Congres-
sional Office on Regulatory Rules, and a Congressional Office of
Legal Counsel.
Specifically . . . This office would serve as a counterpart to simi-
lar offices in the executive and judicial branches and would be re-
sponsible for issuing legal opinions that support Congress and an-
swer Department of Justice opinions that conflict with congres-
sional intent. Such an office could be housed in the House’s Office
of General Counsel or the Congressional Research Service. The
Committee recommends an initial study of jurisdiction, logistics,
and cost to determine the feasibility of implementing these non-
partisan resources.
(10) Recommendation: Pass bipartisan legislation establishing
Congress has standing in the courts and set expedited procedures
for conflicts between the branches.
Specifically . . . Congress should enact bipartisan legislation es-
tablishing that Congress has judicial standing to bring inter-branch
conflicts to the courts, and that expedited procedures are necessary.
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
(11) Recommendation: The Committee on House Administration
should establish a district exchange program to allow Members to
use the MRA for traveling to other Members’ districts.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
11
Specifically . . . Members need more opportunities to forge pro-
fessional and personal relationships, especially with different-party
colleagues. By visiting each other’s districts, Members are more
likely to find common issues to work on together and gain an ap-
preciation for the issues that their colleagues from different dis-
tricts confront. The Member handbook should be updated to incor-
porate guardrails to ensure travel is for official purposes only.
(12) Recommendation: Increase capacity for policy staff, espe-
cially for committees, policy support organizations (GAO, CBO,
CRS) and a restored OTA, and perhaps restored capacity to mem-
ber-supporting legislative service organizations, and updated tech-
nology resources. Additionally, House support organizations (GAO,
CBO, CRS) should evaluate their mission, how they have evolved
over time, and if there is a further need to modernize, and incor-
porate the results of this review in their budget justifications to the
Legislative Branch Subcommittee on Appropriations and other rel-
evant committees.
Specifically . . . Congress has seen a major reduction in com-
mittee staffing levels over the past several decades. The number of
policy experts who work at legislative support agencies has also
been cut dramatically. Because the departure of these specialists
leaves Members more dependent on outside experts, Committee
Members agreed that increasing policy staff capacity is essential.
(13) Recommendation: Reduce dysfunction in the annual budg-
eting process through the establishment of a congressionally-di-
rected program that calls for transparency and accountability, and
that supports meaningful and transformative investments in local
communities across the United States. The program will harness
the authority of Congress under Article One of the Constitution to
appropriate federal dollars.
Specifically . . . The Committee provides the following pro-
grammatic description and framework for how a Community-Fo-
cused Grant Program should operate:
The Community-Focused Grant Program (CFGP) is a competitive
grant program intended to allow Congress to harness its unique
constitutional authority to appropriate federal dollars through a
congressional competitive award process, with an emphasis on sup-
porting projects that have the broad support of local communities
across the United States. Public entities, including certain non-
profits and including the public entity collaborating with a Member
of Congress to identify a local priority, may apply for grants, and
they must do so by submitting an application to at least one Mem-
ber of Congress. It is up to each Member to determine which
projects they will support via a uniform request process to the ap-
propriate congressional committee. For-profit entities are prohib-
ited from participating in the program, as are relatives of Members
of Congress.
A hallmark of CFGP is end-to-end accountability and trans-
parency, with public access to every Member request and sup-
porting documentation, and routine independent audits. For discre-
tionary programs, the grant program is limited to 1% of discre-
tionary spending. The grant program will give special consideration
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
to projects that have broad support at the local level, thorough sup-
porting documentation, bipartisan support and multi-Member sup-
port.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
12
Congress will aim to distribute grants equitably across states
and geographic regions, between rural, suburban and urban areas,
and throughout economic sectors. From time-to-time, major projects
of national or regional importance may merit a larger than normal
grant share.
ENHANCE HOUSE RULES AND IMPLEMENT
END-TO-END TRANSPARENCY
• Combine all rules governing congressionally directed
spending into the Rules of the House
» House Rules already contain numerous transparency
requirements, but several prior reforms were placed in the
House Code of Official Conduct or adopted as Committee
Rules—these should become House Rules
» This includes transparency requirements in place
prior to 2011
» Includes a ban on providing funds to for-profit entities
• Expand certification that the Member or Member’s spouse
has no financial interest to match the threshold of extensive
House nepotism rules
ONE PUBLIC WEBSITE WITH EVERY DETAIL
• A ‘‘.gov’’ public website should be created that contains de-
tails of every Member request, including supporting docu-
mentation, and is easily sortable
» The homepage of Member websites should have a
prominent link to this site
» This avoids a fractured process of 435 different
websites posting requests
» The Clerk’s office would serve as custodian of the
website
CREATE A NEW COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM
A PROCESS THAT STARTS IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES
• Establish the Community-Focused Grant Program (CFGP)
• Grant requests must originate with a public entity or
state, local, or tribal governments (including subdivisions of
state or local governments and including a local community or
public entity collaborating with a Member of Congress to iden-
tify a local priority) via formal application submitted to at least
one congressional office
» For the purposes of this recommendation, a ‘‘public
entity’’ includes not-for-profit entities that serve a public
interest
» The form used to make grant requests should be sim-
ple and allow communities and public entities to easily
navigate the grant application process
• Member offices would determine which CFGP projects to
support and submit those projects as individual requests to the
applicable committee
• Members are strongly encouraged to establish a process
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
which facilitates nonpartisan engagement of local elected offi-
cials and stakeholders
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
13
» A process could require input from local economic de-
velopment entities, state and local elected officials before
the Member moves forward with the request
» For public entities requesting funding for non-profit
programs, Members should encourage consensus from local
public leaders
• A standardized grant application request form for Mem-
bers should include but not limited to:
» Identification of if the grant requestor is a public enti-
ty, or a state, local, or tribal government
» Detailed description of the project including data or
evidence of project merits
» Explanation of how the project is a good use of tax-
payer dollars
» Total cost of the project including a breakdown of
costs
» Forecast of needed future federal funding
» Timeline for the project
» Previous federal funding used to advance the project,
if applicable
» Non-federal share of dollars for the project if it is a
public-private partnership
» Citation of authorizing language for the program
under which the project falls (to be completed by the Mem-
ber office)
» Letters of support from other state or local officials
and entities
» A list of support from other Members (to be completed
by the Member office)
» Indication if the request is bipartisan (to be completed
by the Member office)
• If a project would impact another state, district, or region,
Members are strongly encouraged to work together with other
affected Members on a robust, bipartisan (if applicable) re-
quest.
• Standing committees should apply this framework to ap-
propriate legislation under their jurisdiction (example: the
highway bill considered by the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure, appropriations legislation, the National De-
fense Authorization Act, etc.)
• Committees should also strive to balance the prioritization
of bipartisan, multi-Member, and multi-district projects with
the requests of at-large and rural-representing Members; com-
mittees should ultimately fund projects that benefit rural and
urban districts alike
• Members should submit their requests through the same
website (CFGP.gov for example) so that the process from re-
quest, to public review, to approval or denial is seamless from
start to finish across committees
NEW CAPS AND TIGHTER GUARDRAILS
• Cap all requests to a combined total of 1% of discretionary
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
spending, not including project-based accounts. Such a cap
should encourage the applicable committee to ensure funds are
‘‘distributed equitably across geographic areas, between rural
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
14
and urban areas’’ and among project modes, similar to TIGER
grants
• The Committee recommends a cap to prevent the possi-
bility of inequitable distribution of funds, where, for example,
some Members are successful in directing vastly more funding
to their district than other Members. The Committee debated
caps on the number of successful project awards and also on
size of awards, but both proved to be very difficult to imple-
ment. Rather than be overly prescriptive, the Committee rec-
ommends that any adoption of this program be guided by the
principle of equitable distribution of funds and take great care
to avoid any situation where the program would allow a small
number of Members to direct far more investments than the
rest of the body
• If a Community-Focused Grant is funded in legislation, the
committee shall provide the following information to the Clerk
of the House to be included on the Community-Focused Grants
website: upgraded tables that detail Member justifications, rel-
evant grant application information, and a summary of statis-
tics and demographics impacted by grant awardees (urban
versus rural, average grant award, geographic disbursement,
etc.)
• Capacity for the Clerk of the House and any committee
that has plans to fund Community-Focused Grants should be
evaluated to accommodate the new process, review of project
requests, oversight of spending, oversight of spending, and de-
velopment of websites
HEAL THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS
• Ideally, Community-Focused Grants would only be pro-
vided to projects under authorized accounts. Understanding
this may not always be possible, any relevant committee shall
include, on its website, the scope and criteria for unauthorized
accounts that contain Community-Focused Grants
• We recommend that a Community-Focused Grant should
appear in a bill that has passed out of a committee. At a min-
imum, though, it should be required to appear on the
CFGP.gov website as a Member request. Prohibit imple-
menting grant projects into a Continuing Resolution
• Amendments on the floor for new projects will not be per-
mitted in order to prevent unvetted, politically motivated
projects to replace or take funding from projects that went
through the full process and were deemed to have merit
TRAINING FOR MEMBER OFFICES
• Training for staff and Members on how to participate in
the competitive grant program should be provided on a routine
basis
• Offices should also consider how to implement training for
constituents and grant applicants, perhaps through district
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
staff, with online resources (such as CRS)
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
15
INDEPENDENT AUDITS AND CLAWBACKS
• Require independent oversight from respective agencies’
Inspectors General in the form of a random audit of projects
and an annual public report
• Agencies’ Inspectors General should identify waste, fraud,
and abuse and recommend projects where funds should be
clawed back
• The effectiveness of the CFGP could be reviewed after one
or two years. The review of the pilot program could be per-
formed by GAO, and should analyze how the grant program is
functioning, highlighting areas of success or areas in need of
improvement.
(14) Recommendation: Congressional Staff Academy (CSA) must
design and offer certifications in addition to trainings to staffers.
The program must offer certificates for the following roles: Staff
Assistant, LC, LA, LD, Scheduler, Press Assistant, Communica-
tions Director, COS, and District Staff roles. The CSA must also
promote these certifications.
Specifically . . . Certifications help staff become more market-
able for promotion or alternative employment. These programs also
help offices save time by training staffers and create a standard-
ized, base-level understanding of staff roles across the House. For
example, these programs will include training on House procedure
for legislative aides, guidance on in-House communication re-
sources for press staff, and managerial training for senior-level po-
sitions. In addition, the Committee recommends incentivizing par-
ticipation in training by establishing a curriculum for senior staff,
creating a mentorship program for staff, and recommending bo-
nuses.
(15) Recommendation: Provide institution-wide, standard
onboarding training for new employees, including employee re-
source offices/contacts. Training includes constituent service train-
ing for entry level staffers who will deal with constituent concerns.
Specifically . . . The Committee recommends providing institu-
tion-wide training for new employees to ensure all new staff under-
stand their role, how Congress operates, as well as logistics like
benefits. Standardized training provides staff with skill sets that
are transferable across offices, which helps improve staff retention.
(16) Recommendation: Remove franking related costs from Mem-
ber MRAs and move to a central account which all Members can
use (up to a pre-determined cap) to pay for franking related costs
(this can include telephone town halls and ads on social media).
Specifically . . . Funding could be provided through the Chief
Administrative Officer with each office having a specific allotment
available to them. Individual offices use of funding would also be
disclosed in the quarterly statement of disbursements. All mass
communications will continue to be publicly disclosed via the cur-
rent franking website. Offices are not required to use these funds
and could still use the MRA for all mass communication costs. Ad-
ditionally, if offices reach the cap, they can still utilize the MRA
for mass communications.
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
(17) Recommendation: The Members’ Representational Allowance
(MRA) formula should be reevaluated and updated to reflect mod-
ern office needs and upcoming congressional redistricting, and in-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
16
creased to ensure Congress can meet current and future challenges
including the COVID–19 pandemic and the persistent retention
problems.
Specifically . . . The MRA currently is calculated through sev-
eral factors that require updating. Travel costs are calculated based
on distance from D.C. rather than actual cost to travel. The frank-
ing budget is determined by the number of non-business addresses
in a district. And lease costs for a given MRA are determined by
GSA’s office space prices in a given district. A thorough and up-
dated evaluation of the formula—including a consideration of staff
pay in relation to the executive branch and to private industry—
will provide data-driven means of modernizing the MRA.
(18) Recommendation: Establish a nonbinding, voluntary pay
band system for House staff that includes a salary floor and aver-
age salary for each position in Member offices based on various fac-
tors including seniority, tenure, comparable pay, and cost-of-living.
Specifically . . . In order for Congress to retain staff and build
capacity, staff need to be paid more, and expect to receive standard
cost of living adjustments, as well as raises based on tenure and
merit. An established, nonbinding pay band system will encourage
staff to stay on Capitol Hill for longer because they will have great-
er clarity regarding what they can expect to be paid. Such a system
can also provide staff with an additional tool to ask for more com-
pensation and could also prevent major pay discrepancies in pay
between congressional offices.
In order to establish a nonbinding pay band system in the House,
current and reliable data on staff salaries is needed. The Com-
mittee also recommends that information on annual salaries for the
positions in House Member offices, and for committees, should be
compiled either through available information or through a survey.
This data can then help the House establish a reasonable and non-
binding pay band system for staff positions.
(19) Recommendation: Eliminate requirement that district staff
purchase health insurance on D.C. exchange, allowing them to en-
roll either in a FEHB plan or their state exchange, and allow D.C.-
based staff to enroll in the D.C. exchange or FEHB plan.
Specifically . . . This recommendation would bring D.C. based
staff into alignment with committee staff and the executive branch
when it comes to health provider choices. It would also provide dis-
trict staff with local health insurance options by allowing them to
opt into local systems.
(20) Recommendation: Reauthorize appropriate provisions in-
cluded in the CARES Act (P.L. 116–136) related to the tax treat-
ment of the student loan repayment program.
Specifically . . . The Committee recommends that Congress ex-
tend the provision in the CARES Act that allowed student loan bor-
rowers to avoid taxes on the benefits they receive.
(21) Recommendation: Staff pay should be delinked from Member
pay and a new cap specific to staff should be established.
Specifically . . . Members should delink their own salaries from
those of their staff, so they can reward and retain their most senior
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
employees.
(22) Recommendation: Standardize Eligible Congressional Mem-
ber Organizations (ECMOs) to participate in the House’s paid in-
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
17
tern program and access staff benefits like the student loan repay-
ment program.
Specifically . . . This recommendation ensures that staff who
work for ECMOs can access the same staff benefits as staff who
work in personal offices. It also allows ECMOs to participate in the
House’s paid internship program, granting them one paid intern at
a time.
(23) Recommendation: Transparency of active Eligible Congres-
sional Member Organizations (ECMOs) should be improved, and a
list of approved ECMOs should be published and updated accord-
ingly each Congress.
Specifically . . . ECMOs have increased in number and influ-
ence, yet there is no publicly available list of these organizations.
This lack of transparency prevents the public from accessing basic
information about these organizations and their legislative objec-
tives. This recommendation ensures that the public can easily ac-
cess an updated list of approved ECMOs and learn more about
their policy concerns.
(24) Recommendation: Establish a blocked schedule when com-
mittees may meet and extend formal protections for committee
work.
Specifically . . . The Committee found that since the 110th Con-
gress, Members sit on an average of 5.4 committees and sub-
committees. Efforts to deconflict committee meetings, to the extent
possible, would allow Members to spend more substantial time on
committee business and would hopefully reduce the need for cer-
tain committees to be prioritized over others.
(25) Recommendation: Create a common committee calendar por-
tal so that committees can have visibility into other committee ac-
tivities and potential committee member conflicts.
Specifically . . . While congressional staff already has access to
the date and time of other committee meetings, it is not readily
available how many of their Members would be conflicted were
they to schedule their committee meeting in conflict with another
committee meeting. An internal portal that tracks Member obliga-
tions based on their committee assignments would help committees
schedule their meetings when most of their Members are available.
(26) Recommendation: To allow Members to take deeper dives
into their committee work, committee-activity-only weeks—or even
committee-activity-only days—without any floor activity could be
established, building on the precedent laid out during the COVID–
19 pandemic.
Specifically . . . Conflict between committee work and floor time
is one of the factors that make Member time in Washington less
productive than it could be. To allow Members to take deeper dives
into their committee work, committee-activity-only weeks or days
could be established, building on the precedent laid out during the
COVID–19 public health emergency.
(27) Recommendation: Future congressional calendars should
aim to maximize full working days to ensure there are substan-
tially more working days than travel days.
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
Specifically . . . By rearranging the intensity, duration, and fre-
quency of D.C. work, the number of travel days can be reduced, al-
lowing either more time legislating or more time in the district.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
18
(28) Recommendation: The congressional calendar should accom-
modate a bipartisan Member retreat.
Specifically . . . Making room in the congressional calendar for
a bipartisan retreat will improve the institution’s ability to advance
an agenda for the American people and improve civility.
(29) Recommendation: Require an annual Fiscal State of the Na-
tion, to be given by the appropriate official(s), as determined by or
in coordination with House leadership.
Specifically . . . For Congress to appropriately fund the govern-
ment, all parties need to be working with the same set of facts.
Issues like the national debt, federal budget requests, and dead-
lines should be understood and agreed upon by all negotiators. A
yearly Fiscal State of the Nation discussion will facilitate these
types of discussions and ensure all involved start off with the same
expectations and understanding.1
(30) Recommendation: Require a biennial budget resolution,
while maintaining annual appropriations bills.
Specifically . . . By setting 302(a) discretionary spending levels
at the start of each Congress, appropriations will be more efficient
and able to plan ahead, avoiding unnecessary delays. In addition,
the Committee recommends enabling a second-session revision of
the budget resolution for scoring purposes. This requirement would
give authority in the second year of a biennium to adjust the budg-
et resolution’s spending and revenue levels, committee allocations,
and other amounts to reflect an updated baseline used for scoring
purposes.
(31) Recommendation: Establish a realistic deadline for Congress
to complete action on a biennial budget.
Specifically . . . Congress has continually failed to adopt a budg-
et resolution by the statutorily required April 15 deadline. Because
the current deadline does not reflect a realistic timeline, the Com-
mittee recommends setting a realistic and achievable deadline of
May 1 for the first year of the biennium, which would give Con-
gress an opportunity to complete its work on time. This delay is
particularly necessary given the recommendation of a biennial
budget process.
(32) Recommendation: Require annual supplemental budget sub-
mission data from the President.
Specifically . . . The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cannot
begin constructing its baseline for the upcoming fiscal year without
receipt of data, particularly prior-year and current-year spending,
that is normally transmitted with the President’s budget request.
Without receipt of CBO’s baseline, Congress generally cannot begin
writing its budget resolution. To create additional time for devel-
oping the baseline, and therefore, the budget resolution and var-
ious appropriations bills, the executive branch should be required
to provide a supplemental budget submission that is separate from
the President’s policy proposals no later than December 1 of each
calendar year.
This supplemental budget submission would include:
• Prior year fiscal data
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
1 Recommendations 29–35 were formed in close consultation with former Members of the Joint
Select Committee on Budget and Appropriations Process Reform (JCBA) and build off the
JCBA’s bicameral, bipartisan package in the 115th Congress to significantly reform the congres-
sional budget process.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
19
• Current year fiscal data
• Credit re-estimates for the current year
This data would allow CBO to begin constructing the baseline, as
well as subsequently to enable the Budget and Appropriations
Committees to begin preliminary work in writing the budget reso-
lution and appropriations bills earlier in the process.
(33) Recommendation: Encourage examination of how a two-year
budget resolution will change the schedule or approach in the
budget process.
Specifically . . . The Budget and Appropriations Committees
should review their schedules and procedures to determine the best
ways of using the new biennial budget resolution to expedite con-
gressional work on appropriations and other budgetary legislation.
(34) Recommendation: Strengthen budget enforcement.
Specifically . . . The Committee recommends that the budget
reconciliation process only be used to reduce deficits. If Congress
adds to the deficit, it should follow regular order to allow a fuller
debate. In addition, Congress could consider requiring an expla-
nation in the budget resolution committee report and conference
agreement as to why assumed changes in direct spending or rev-
enue have not been reconciled. Reconciliation is the principle en-
forcement procedure for direct spending and revenue changes.
There are reasons why some items may not be reconciled but re-
quiring an explanation may stop the assumption of large savings
that are not intended to be implemented. Thus, it would help
produce a more realistic budget path in the budget resolution.
(35) Recommendation: Include total combined outlays and reve-
nues for tax expenditures as an optional item in the budget resolu-
tion.
Specifically . . . The Committee recommends an optional re-
quirement for including a total level of tax expenditures, a major
component of the federal budget, in the list of what could be in a
budget resolution. This recommendation also brings needed flexi-
bility to the budget process.
(36) Recommendation: The Architect of the Capitol should evalu-
ate the use of space in the U.S. Capitol Complex and identify op-
portunities for modernization.
Specifically . . . Congress’ physical workspace is another factor
that affects the institution’s ability to attract and retain talented,
young workers. The private sector has responded to numerous
studies that demonstrate the office environment’s impact on em-
ployee health and wellbeing, but Congress has not evolved in the
same way. Members, as well as staff, desire private, bipartisan
spaces to work together.
(37) Recommendation: Similar to efforts currently underway, the
Committee on House Administration and the Government Services
Administration (GSA) should develop a practice of negotiating an
MOU covering leases for House district offices with the goal of low-
ering costs, improving consistency of rental rates, and guaranteeing
House offices are offered the lowest available rates in GSA build-
ings and receive tenant protections and benefits in line with the
Senate.
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
Specifically . . . The Committee encourages the Committee on
House Administration and the GSA to negotiate leases on behalf of
congressional offices in local districts. Allowing the GSA to handle
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
20
the responsibility of negotiating the lease for individual Member’s
district offices would save time and money. This change would re-
sult also in more time for Members and staff to work on con-
stituent services and could create additional funding within the
MRA that could be used to compensate staff.
(38) Recommendation: The House should direct the establish-
ment of a Congressional Digital Services Task Force to examine the
need for and role of a specialized group of technologists, designers,
and others to support the House’s internal and public facing oper-
ations.
Specifically . . . A more sophisticated and coordinated approach
to the provision of technology and technological services in the
House would help Members better serve their constituents. For ex-
ample, a Congressional Digital Services Office could develop more
modern and streamlined technologies for congressional offices to
interface with constituents and manage their questions and re-
quests. The Committee recommends the Task Force fall under the
umbrella of the newly restructured OTA.
(39) Recommendation: Make permanent the Bulk Data Task
Force and rename it the Congressional Data Task Force.
Specifically . . . Congress established the Bulk Data Task Force
with a focus on the question of determining whether Congress
should make the data behind THOMAS and LIS available to the
public as structured data. Ultimately the Task Force recommended,
and GPO implemented the publication of bill summary, status, and
text information online as structured data. In this sense, the Task
Force completed its intended mission. However, in completing its
mission, the Task Force brought together many of the technology
stakeholders inside the legislative branch as well as members of
civil society and continues to hold public meetings on a quarterly
basis.
This ongoing collaboration has been positive for the Clerk’s Office
and for data transparency groups, ultimately leading to techno-
logical advances in how legislative data is made public. The Com-
mittee recommends the Task Force’s mission expand beyond pub-
lishing bills and the data attendant to them to allow for consider-
ation of other legislative documents and congressional operations
data. The Task Force should be renamed the Congressional Data
Task Force to accurately capture the Task Force’s expanded mis-
sion.
(40) Recommendation: A study should be conducted related to
House functions during the COVID–19 pandemic to evaluate addi-
tional operational needs or changes to operations that are no longer
appropriate.
Specifically . . . This evaluation should include:
• Staffing levels to ensure the Clerk’s office has the proper
amount of FTEs to support legislative operations.
• Expenses related to floor/legislative operations including
the cost e-processes as well as what e-processes will remain
after the pandemic is over.
• Systems are in use/or available to the Clerk’s office and
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
the amount needed to support/develop/procure relevant sys-
tems to operations.
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
21
• Operations in use by the standing and select committees
to ensure that there is a standard system for the committees
as they update their internal processes.
V. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION AND VOTES
CONSIDERATION
On September 24, 2020, the Select Committee held a Business
Meeting, a quorum being present, and reported favorably the rec-
ommendations herein contained in this report.
VOTES
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, there were no recorded votes taken on
these recommendations. The recommendations herein contained in
this report were adopted by voice vote, two-thirds being in the af-
firmative. A motion by Chair Derek Kilmer of Washington to report
these recommendations to the House of Representatives was adopt-
ed by voice vote, two-thirds being in the affirmative.
Æ
rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with HEARING
VerDate Sep 11 2014 03:13 Oct 26, 2020 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6611 E:\HR\OC\HR561.XXX HR561
File and source
- File
- CRPT_crpt-116hrpt561_crpt-116hrpt561.pdf
- Size
- 286,809 bytes
- SHA-256
- 38c9e9b14c5cb65b6d84aedfeeea52c40e7ccfe87ec9374dd3296dc76877fd14
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov