Representative COCHRAN. All right. Let us take the words "Comptroller General" out, let us take the title "Auditor General."

Mr. BUCK. You have got to take the two functions away. Representative COCHRAN. Let us take the Comptroller General's name away and substitute the Auditor General. A name means nothing, it is the power Congress gives that counts.

Mr. BUCK. Yes, but you have given him the supervision of administrative accounting and the settlement of claims.

Representative COCHRAN. Why do you have to take away the settlement of claims from the Comptroller?

Mr. BUCK. That is a control function, that is an executive function.

Representative COCHRAN. You say that the settlement of claims belongs solely to the spending agency, in your opinion?

Mr. Buck. Yes, that is correct.

Representative COCHRAN. That is your viewpoint?
Mr. BUCK. Yes.

Senator BYRNES. Well, why should we do that?

Mr. BUCK. Well, as I have said several times, it is an executive function. The department or agency which enters into a contract should be able to complete the transaction and then it should be reviewable by a congressional agency in order that our system of control will be complete. You haven't got that now. That is what I would like to see the Congress have, a review at the end of the fiscal period of appropriations which it made at the beginning. Probably you cannot do anything about misexpenditures, but you can get that information. You can chastise the administrative officers in a way, and you will have the information in the preparation of the next Budget, which is very important. You can then deny to the administrative department that has transgressed certain appropria

tions.

Senator BYRNES. Could you make this action public, so that the people might hold responsible the officials who were guilty of misconduct?

Mr. Buck. It could be. The hearings of the joint committee could be open to the public, if you choose.

Senator TOWNSEND. Mr. Buck, the Comptroller General and General Accounting Office at the present time are under the control of the Congress-not the Executive?

Mr. BUCK. Well, we ordinarily understand it that way, but the Comptroller General is not reporting to you. I always thought it was encumbent upon the chief of an establishment to report at some time or other upon what he was doing and how he was doing it. But the Comptroller General just files all of the records he gets, and that is the end of it.

Senator TOWNSEND. It is your opinion that he is under the control of the Congress and not under the Executive, isn't it?

Mr. BUCK. Yes; that is the way it is understood.
Senator BYRD. That is what the act says.

Representative COCHRAN. Let me ask you to explain this: Assume you are an official of the Government, you have made a contract for the construction of a building, it is your duty to immediately file a copy of that contract with the new Comptroller General or Audi

tor General, you supervise the construction of that building, and under the contract, the contractor agreed to do certain things, and among other things he agrees to complete that job within a given period, and the contract is let partly on that basis, because the Government is going to have that building occupied at a given time and save rent; now, he fails to carry out the contract and you place a penalty on him, that the contract provides, for every day that he failed to turn that building over to the Government completed, and you deduct that from the amount of money that is due him; of course, he protests; now, if you take the settlement of claims away from the Comptroller General, who is the contractor going to appeal to from your decision? Is the bureau chief's decision final? Mr. Buck. No; he appeals to the fiscal control unit in the Treasury. Representative COCHRAN. He appeals to the Secretary of the Treasury, a man who at the present time is the superior of the men who handled the matter, because the Government agency that contracted for the building is under the Secretary of the Treasury?

Mr. Buck. He may also appeal to this Auditor General, who is an agent of Congress.

Representative COCHRAN. What objections can you have to the Comptroller General or Auditor General considering that claim, having your arguments and the contractor's arguments, and his decision being final, as it is today, unless there is an appeal to the Court of Claims? What objection is there in that?

Mr. Buck. The same argument that I stated before.

Representative COCHRAN. He does not control the expenditures, he is deciding whether or not you were right.

Mr. BUCK. Yes; but then he is stepping over into administrative affairs.

Representative COCHRAN. The claim did not reach him until you denied the contractor his money. He is not controlling. You want to be in complete control-your decision to be final.

Mr. Buck. Of course, under the system that we propose here it is possible for those contractors to file their complaints with the Auditor General, and it is possible for him in his postaudit, to investigate them and to make a report to this congressional committee. That can be done and that should be done, as a matter of fact.

Representative COCHRAN. Why put that burden on a congressional committee? Do you not think that the Members of Congress have got enough to do now without considering claims against the Government? We are in our offices from 8 o'clock in the morning until 7 o'clock at night, and are lucky to go home at 7 o'clock at night

on many occasions.

Mr. BUCK. You would not do the detailed work, you would simply sit on the major issues.

Representative COCHRAN. In other words, you would have men similar to bureau chiefs in Congress to say what the Comptroller General is now saying, and when you get through we would either put our stamp of approval or disapproval on that; is that right? Representative TABER. Is that correct?

Mr. BUCK. Yes; if you wish it.

Representative TABER. NOW, Mr. Buck, you have been into this situation from the standpoint of interference by the Comptroller with administration, have you not?

Mr. BUCK. Yes.

Representative TABER. You have?

Mr. Buck. I have looked into that.

Representative TABER. To quite an extent?
Mr. BUCK. Well, yes; I would say so.

Representative TABER. Well, now, you must understand that you are proposing a rather radical change in the method of handling the Government's business. Have you gone into it to an extent that makes you feel justified in giving us your views on that subject? Mr. Buck. You mean in recommending this proposed system? Representative TABER. Yes.

Mr. Buck. Yes; I have, undoubtedly.

Representative TABER. Now, can you give us three or four outstanding instances where administration has been interferred with by the Comptroller General?

Mr. Buck. I understand that you are receiving quite a number of those, and that they are being cataloged now.

Representative TABER. I haven't seen any.

Mr. Buck. I understand that the committee has. I prefer to let you consider them, if you will.

Representative TABER. But I feel that when a man comes here and proposes such a radical change he should have a basis for it. Mr. Buck. I think we can present to the committee a basis for it on the actual examples.

Representative TABER. Quite so.

Mr. Buck. I am confident of that.

Representative TABER. Are you able to put into the record outstanding examples of that character?

Mr. Buck. I think we shall; yes.

Senator BYRNES. Congressman, may I say someone was asked to present that for the record. I think Mr. Wren has some reports. I haven't talked to him.

Mr. WREN. I have, Senator.

Senator BYRNES. If you have, I wish you would turn them over to Congressman Taber at some time.

Mr. WREN. I will be glad to. I have reports from the various executive departments and independent agencies as to these specific instances. I am now cataloging them, as the witness says. I will be glad to turn them over to anybody that wants to see them, but I have only one copy of each.

Mr. BROWNLOW. Could not copies be made for the committee? Mr. WREN. Yes; but the copies would be almost as voluminous as the records of the hearings.

Senator BYRNES. I think you ought to turn them over to Congressman Taber. Let him look them over and determine what is to be put in the record.

Senator BYRD. I assume, Mr. Chairman, that the Comptroller General's office will have an opportunity to be heard as to these charges that have been made against it at the proper time. The committee, it seems to me, will have to have copies sooner or later. The CHAIRMAN. How voluminous are these records?

Mr. WREN. Well, I should say they are a stack of documents a foot high.

Representative TABER. Now, the set-up that you have suggested here for Treasury accounts offices is essentially a duplication of the work that is now being performed by the General Accounting Office, is it not? It involves an additional set-up beyond what now exists?

Mr. BUCK. Well, it involves some of those functions which it is proposed to transfer. Insofar as the Comptroller General performs a preaudit, that will be transferred.

Representative TABER. But a very large proportion of the job will be a duplication of the work now performed?

Mr. Buck. No; I would not say there would be any duplication. Representative TABER. There is nothing additional?

Mr. BUCK. No; I do not say that. You would transfer certain personnel from the General Accounting Office. So far as it can be used, it will be used in this new organization. You see, it is a realinement of the accounting functions; that is what it really is. You now have the Comptroller General controlling administrative accounts, running a general set of accounts, which he has started recently, and doing the control functions, and also the audit functions. We propose to transfer all except the postaudit functions, and consequently the staff that is engaged on those other functions. So you would not have a duplication so far as the staff is concerned, assuming that the staff was qualified and could be utilized properly. Representative TABER. I wish you would illustrate for the record, if you can, one of the most controversial items that might go through the General Accounting Office at the moment, and tell us the steps that are required, at the moment, with the present set-up, and tell us the steps that would be required and what would have to be done under the new proposed set-up. Trace one item clear through both steps.

Mr. BUCK. That is a rather long process. I have prepared a chart to show you what it is.

Representative TABER. If you acknowledge that you cannot do it, that is all I care about.

Mr. Buck. Well, I can do it. It involves a lot of tedious accounting operations.

Representative TABER. I know I can't do it.

Mr. Buck. It can be done.

Representative TABER. I would hesitate to come here and suggest this unless I had analyzed the situation in that way. That is my opinion.

Senator HARRISON. What you want is just an illustration to show how you do it presently and how you do it under this plan?

Representative TABER. Yes.

Mr. GULICK. Congressman, you say you would like to have a controversial example. What would you suggest?

Representative TABER. Well, for instance, a contract including the bids. I will give you an illustration that I know of. Take the contract and bids for a particular kind of bulbs required by the Tennessee Valley, where the Comptroller General has broken down a departmental attempt to prevent certain parties from bidding, and has opened it up. Now, if you can get one of those, I can give you the decision and you can work it out. That would be one of the controversial items, and one where probably some of these people might

say it interfered with administration, where the Department was very much better satisfied after they were all through than they were before. Now, I would suggest Mr. Buck chase one of those down. I will give you the dope to start with, if you would like to have it.

Senator BYRNES. Mr. Congressman, has the Comptroller preaudited the Tennessee Valley expenses?

Representative TABER. He has exercised that function in some of those contract instances. I do not know whether he has generally. Senator BYRNES. I think it is a postaudit, is it not?

Representative TABER. This is worked out so that it has been in effect a preaudit, anyway.

Senator BARKLEY. Mr. Chairman, in that connection and in connection with the previous discussion as to the Comptroller General being an agent of Congress, and going contrary to the will of Congress in the matter of expenditures, if it has not been done, I would like to have the right to insert in the record the list of lawsuits in the District of Columbia against the Comptroller General, charging him with exceeding his authority.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you wish to do it now?

Senator BARKLEY. Not now.

Senator BYRD. When that is done, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask that it be referred to the Comptroller General for his reply, in explanation of the different suits.

Senator BARKLEY. I have no objection to that. I think it would be well to have it in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. When you are ready to present the matter we can determine what action should be taken.

Representative GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I have been waiting to make a suggestion.

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly. Go ahead.

Representative GIFFORD. The suggestion was that the legislative function to appropriate money, and that it is practically none of our function, after we handed it over to the President to control the expending of it.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you concluded?

Mr. BUCK. I have, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?

Senator BYRD. Mr. Chairman, I would like to question Mr. Buck further in regard to the claims. Exactly what power would the Auditor General have in connection with the claims that had been settled by the Secretary of the Treasury?

Mr. BUCK. He can review them thoroughly, including all supporting documents.

Senator BYRD. Can he review it as to whether it was a proper settlement?

Mr. BUCK. Certainly.

Senator BYRD. What provision in the law provides for that?

Mr. BUCK. You mean at the present time?

Senator BYRD. No; your proposal.

Mr. Buck. I do not know. I am not familiar, I am sorry, with the bill.

Senator BYRD. My understanding is, so far as the claim is concerned, that the Auditor General cannot go into the merit of the settlement.