Mr. SHIPLEY. I think it is a matter of going back and looking at where the Records were going. Many Members told me they were a little upset because we didn't make the reduction in this committee. But as they found out the inquiries as to whether or not they still wanted the Congressional Record, they found they didn't. That's probably as you indicated, many of the Members found out they didn't need as many as they had been receiving in the past. Mr. BOYLE. We have seen the number of copies requisitioned automatically from the committees decrease when they were asked, "Do you actually need this many copies of this publication?" I would say generally, across the board RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS Mr. SHIPLEY. You should have some ideas, too, Mr. Boyle. You have been around a long time. I would hope you would come up with some concrete steps. I think it is incumbent upon you to advise this committee, which does not have the knowledge of the inner workings of the printing office. I would hope you would bring forth to us the steps you can initiate. Mr. BOYLE. Many we can't initiate. I think the study the committee approved last year by the Joint Committee on Printing which is to be done by contract, that one of the items that is going to be looked at is the free distribution of government publications. I think in order to do it properly, someone will have to go through Title 44 and find out exactly who is getting what and whether they want to continue to get it or whether they really need it. I think that will be beneficial. Mr. COUGHLIN. Mr. Chairman, didn't we commission such a study by the Joint Committee on Printing? Mr. BOYLE. It is to be completed before the end of fiscal year 1978. REVISIONS TO TITLE 44 Mr. COUGHLIN. Completed before the end of 1978. It is going to involve recommendations as to revisions in Title 44? Mr. BOYLE. Yes, sir. Most of the changes in distribution are going to take changes in Title 44 because they are spelled out paragraph by paragraph, item by item, and many requirements are obsolete. Mr. COUGHLIN. For that study, the contract has been let? Mr. DEVAUGHN. It has not been let as yet, the bids are in. Mr. COUGHLIN. What else does that contract provide for? Mr. BOYLE. I have deliberately stayed out of the Joint Committee on Printing contracting procedures. I would rather you have the Joint Committee on Printing_answer that question. It involves several areas of study of the GPO. First of all, the free distribution of publications, another major study will be our cost collection procedures; how do we price binding, printing? It is a very wide study. Mr. COUGHLIN. Will we have the Joint Committee on Printing before us, Mr. Chairman? Mr. SHIPLEY. Thursday. PRICING OF THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Again, last year we discussed the pricing of documents in considerable detail, some of which you have no control over, such as Congressional Record and the Federal Register and a number of publications under the Special Sales Programs. As I recall, Mr. Boyle, at that time the subscribers to the Congressional Record were receiving a subsidy of $116 per year. How many subscribers are receiving this subsidy? Where do we stand on pricing this year? Mr. LABARRE. There are 4,800 names on our subscription list, receiving 5,300 copies. This is an increase of approximately six to seven hundred since last year. This primarily relates to the change in the Congressional allocation of free copies. Some of the people who were dropped as a result of Public Law 95-94 have entered subscriptions. Mr. SHIPLEY. Where do we stand on the pricing of the Record? Mr. LABARRE. The annual subscription price of the Record is $45. Mr. SHIPLEY. That is something you have nothing to do with? Mr. BOYLE. As a practical matter. Under Title 44 the price is determined by the Public Printer but, as a practical matter, to raise the price of the Congressional Record to fully recover its cost I would seek the advice of the Joint Committee on Printing which I have not yet done. Mr. SHIPLEY. To your knowledge, have they inquired within the last year or so as to the possibility of increasing this price? Mr. BOYLE. In the last year, no, sir. Mr. SHIPLEY. How long has it been $45, approximately? Mr. LABARRE. Since January 1971. Mr. SHIPLEY. Was there much of an increase at that time? Mr. LABARRE. It was raised from $18 to $45. Mr. DEVAUGHN. It was $18 and that price was written into the law. The law was later changed to allow the Public Printer to set the price. Mr. BOYLE. It is impractical for the Public Printer to raise the price and there are also some legitimate questions that may be raised. A subscriber pays the Superintendent of Documents $45 for the Record and yet many people don't pay anything. Mr. LABARRE. Twenty-seven thousand copies go out free to fifteen thousand names. Mr. SHIPLEY. They are the ones that the House and the Senate- Mr. LABARRE. Or other authorizing authorities under Title 44. Mr. BOYLE. It is sent to every circuit and district judge in the country, state library, plus the depositories. So the thing is, I have heard the question asked, why should some people have to pay for the Congressional Record and some not? Mr. SHIPLEY. That's a very valid question. I understand that. But, again, we are talking about a publication printed by the taxpayers and the cost was $18 for how many years did you say? Mr. DEVAUGHN. Since 1883. Mr. SHIPLEY. Then it tripled in 1971. How much has the printing cost increased since 1971? Mr. BOYLE. One hundred percent. Mr. DEVAUGHN. Even the increase to $45 was not enough to cover the cost. There should be some reasonable charge, otherwise every citizen in the country would subscribe to the Record if it was free. Mr. SHIPLEY. It is a problem that we see here every year and, again, Larry, maybe there is something we can work out in this area. If nothing else, just make it part of the report that we feel something should be done and put the burden on the Joint Committee on Printing and when they come in tomorrow get them to take a closer look at it. Mr. COUGHLIN. I agree, Mr. Chairman. Mr. SHIPLEY. There has been a problem with that a long time and we have made hardly any headway at all. Give me those figures again. You said because of the limitation we placed on the House and Senate Members down to 34 and 50 copies respectively, there was an estimated 10,200 that was dropped and then you went to the various staff members and there was another 3,000 dropped. Now, what is the total overall figure projected for this year? Mr. LABARRE. Thirty-two thousand nine hundred copies being printed to cover both free and paid subscriptions. We expect some increase in the number of paid subscriptions in fiscal year 1979. Mr. SHIPLEY. Why? Mr. LABARRE. Because we normally have a few more subscriptions and a few more depository libraries. Mr. SHIPLEY. How many were there last year? Mr. LABARRE. Approximately 49 thousand. Mr. SHIPLEY. In other words, you are talking about 1976 would be 48,000 and you are projecting or saying it would be around 33,000? Mr. LABARRE. It is 33,000 today, sir. Mr. SHIPLEY. So we are talking about a 15,000 copy reduction, right? Mr. LABARRE. Yes, sir. Mr. SHIPLEY. That's substantial, even though the figures are not big, it is a pretty big reduction. Mr. BOYLE. It is 15,000 copies every day the Congress is in session. Mr. SHIPLEY. For the record, give us a cost figure on that. Mr. BOYLE. The cost figure for the 15,000 copy reduction is $2.6 million. CONSUMER INFORMATION PUBLICATIONS FUNDING Mr. SHIPLEY. You touched on the Consumer Information Center. Tell us about the current status of the funding for this program. Mr. LABARRE. We are being reimbursed by the GSA, as the law was changed last year and the money was removed from our S&E budget and it is working satisfactorily at the present. The volume is up. I expect we will handle 17 million publications this year where we handled about 14 million last year. Mr. DEVAUGHN. There has been a recent pronouncement from the OMB as to that. Mr. LABARRE. OMB has asked GSA to contact the originating agencies for fiscal year 1979 funding so they can also pay for the handling and postage which GSA reimburses GPO at present. Mr. DEVAUGHN. This could cause a reduction in volume if the agency has to pay for it. Mr. BOYLE. OMB is doing, in effect, the same thing the Congress did on the Federal Register Program saying the user will pay. PAGE COST OF CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Mr. SHIPLEY. To go back to the Congressional Record for a moment: I forgot to ask you, what is the current cost of the Congressional Record by page? Mr. BOYLE. Three hundred twenty-four dollars in fiscal 1977, and the fiscal 1978 cost is $328.50 per page. That is the figure we are using this year while Congress is in session when a Member asks for an estimate of the cost for extension of remarks. For 1979, we are estimating the cost will be $353.50 per page. Mr. SHIPLEY. Larry, do you have any general questions? CONGRESSIONAL PRINTING AND BINDING Mr. SHIPLEY. We will go into the printing and binding. Last year, we separated out the printing and binding costs for Congressional operations from the balance of the printing and binding appropriation. The request for Congressional Printing and Binding is $73,961,000. We will insert the budget schedule and justification material in the record at this point. [The information referred to follows:] GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE CONGRESSIONAL PRINTING AND BINDING For authorized printing and binding for the Congress; for printing and binding for the Architect of the Capitol; expenses necessary for preparing the semimonthly and session index to the Congressional Record, as authorized by law (44 U.S.C. 902); and printing and binding of Government publications authorized by law to be distributed to Members of Congress, [$71,674,000] $73,961,000: Provided, That this appropriation shall not be available for printing and binding part 2 of the annual report of the Secretary of Agriculture (known as the Yearbook of Agriculture): Provided further, That this appropriation shall be available for the payment of obligations incurred under the appropriations for similar purposes for preceding fiscal years []. [Provided further, That no part of this appropriation shall be used to print a Congressional Directory for the second regular session of the 95th Congress other than a pamphlet supplement to the Congressional Directory for the first session of such Congress.] (Public Law 95-94, Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1978) Congressional printing and binding estimated requirements for fiscal year 1979 |