Mr. HENLOCK. I assume the Speaker of the House would be the official who should be spoken to. The House Office Building Commission has charge of the House garages and the direction of them. The Architect performs his duties on the House side under the House Commission.

SENATE AND HOUSE OFFICE BUILDINGS EXPENDITURES COMPARED

Senator PROXMIRE. Are you leaving the Senate Office Buildings yet?

Senator MONRONEY. I have no other notes on it.

Senator PROXMIRE. I am rather surprised at the amount here. I see it is close to the same amount as last year, $2,468,000 for the Senate Office Building, and I notice in looking at the record most of it is for compensation and maintenance and so forth; and then I compare it with the House and the House Office Buildings with three, compared to the two Senate Office Buildings-it has $4 million, roughly.

Allowing five rooms for each Senator and three rooms for each House Member, and I know there are variations, I find the Senate per room cost much higher. The Senate cost seemed to be almost twice as high, or considerably higher than it should be in view of the number of Senators, the number of rooms per Senator.

SENATE AND HOUSE OFFICE BUILDINGS FURNISHINGS

Mr. CARAWAY. I think that can be answered by the fact that we purchase our own furniture, rugs, and everything used in the building. In the House Office Building, the furniture and everything of that nature comes under a different setup over there.

SENATE AND HOUSE OFFICE BUILDINGS PERSONNEL

Senator PROXMIRE. How about personnel? I understand that we have under the Architect of the Capitol at least as many or more Senate personnel here as there were people in the three House Office Buildings.

Mr. CARAWAY. I could not answer that.

Mr. HENLOCK. We carry 679 in the budget for the three House Office Buildings and 373 in the two Senate Office Buildings.

Senator MONRONEY. The amount for maintenance includes charwomen and elevator operators and so on.

DIFFICULTY OF COMPARING HOUSE AND SENATE FURNISHINGS

Senator PROXMIRE. Can you give me any comparison including the cost of furniture and equipment and so forth so that I can get a comparison between the House and the Senate? Could that be made available?

Mr. ROOF. The Clerk of the House handles all items of furniture. and we really don't get into that. The only items of furniture we are involved in are when we construct a new building, we also furnish it initially but after that is is a matter for the Clerk. Whereas Mr. Caraway maintains the furniture and purchases additional furniture, he has a furniture repair shop; he has men in there, cabinet makers and so forth, which would not be reflected in our budget for the House Office Buildings. It is a pretty hard comparison to make.

Senator PROXMIRE. Do you have any other benchmark of comparison? There are other comparable buildings of the same size as the Senate and the House. Can we compare the commercial building cost of maintenance to find out if it is out of line or maybe even more economical here?

Mr. Roof. We have never attempted a comparison on that basis.

POSSIBLE EXCESSIVE SENATE BUILDING PERSONNEL

Senator PROXMIRE. I have always found Mr. Caraway an extremely cooperative and competent person but I have gotten the impression sometimes there are excessive personnel in the Senate, especially in the cleaning operations and maybe that is an unfair impression. I just wonder if there is any way we can get a comparison so we can know where we stand on this.

UNRELIABILITY OF CHARWOMEN

Mr. CARAWAY. I do not know about comparisons, but we have 100 charwomen and you can depend on quite a few of them being out every night. Each person is supposed to clean 13 rooms. Some of them do not show up and then they have to double up. I am not satisfied with our cleaning over here. I get too many complaints but with respect to the charwomen you cannot depend on all of them and if you fire them and hire some others you have the same situation, so you have to depend on 15 or 20 being out almost every night, either sick or on annual leave, or they just don't show up.

Senator PROXMIRE. Is this not pretty much the same all over town? Senator MONRONEY. General Service Administration should have some figures on absenteeism and it could probably give you the number of rooms that the charwomen are supposed to take care of and other comparable statistics. I think it would be a good idea to get a comparison.

Senator PROXMIRE. That figure may be perfectly proper but $2.5 million seems an awful lot to pay.

Mr. CARAWAY. We clean each building every night.

Senator PROXMIRE. It would be helpful for us to know. Maybe we can make a judgment that we don't have to have it done every night. Mr. CARAWAY. I would get more complaints than I could handle. Senator MONRONEY. Let's not get the Capitol any dirtier than it is. We are fussing all the time now in hearings about the lack of neatness in the Capitol Grounds and the Capitol automobiles and things of that kind.

DESIRABILITY OF COMPARATIVE DATA

Senator PROXMIRE. I am not arguing for a dirtier Capitol, but I am arguing for information on which we can decide whether or not to spend this $2.4 million. I think if we can get information so we can compare the cost here with the cost of maintaining the other buildings, Government or private, it would be helpful, and apparently no such information is now available.

Mr. CARAWAY. I do not think you can get a fair comparison between these buildings and any buildings because our people want service

and they get service. I think they get very good service. Downtown, when you ask for something, you might get it today and you might get it tomorrow or you might get it a week from now. We try to take care of all of our requests as soon as possible. If we do not, we hear about it.

Senator PROXMIRE. I am prejudiced. I believe that Senators should be given every consideration.

Mr. CARAWAY. That is the way we feel, too.

Senator PROXMIRE. At the same time, I want to know how high it comes. The $2.4 million is rather high. If we can save several hundred thousand dollars by following policies followed in other parts of the Government, the Senate may wish to take some stand on this.

BREAKDOWN OF SENATE EXPENDITURES

Senator MONRONEY. If the Senator will look on page 65 of the breakdowns, we do find a considerable number of bits of information. I believe this was put in the record earlier.

I think at this point it should be put in the record, pages 65, 66, 67, 68, and 69. The furniture repairs, incidentally, are on page 70, and come to $7,500, and general annual repairs to $23,000. The old building is an old building, and you have a considerable amount of repair work that has to go on.

Also, page 71, annual painting charge of $30,000, including the laundry at $10,000.

Page 72, page 73. If you will notice on page 74, "Equipment” appropriation for 1965 was $80,300, and it is reduced to $59,000. We will print that in the record. And replacement of firehose nozzles we have already developed that-down to the replacement of firehoses. Senator PROXMIRE. Looking over this material, it seems to me that this is expensive, but it is relatively minor compared to the total amount of $2.4 million.

Senator MONRONEY. I would like to get more in this. I am skipping the items we have already discussed.

Page 77, 78, and a tabulation and itemization of this amount on page 79. I believe that will complete that, and I think we will have it available that way for the public to see the breakdown and complete description of this $2.4 million.

(The information referred to follows:)

OBJECTIVES

This appropriation provides for the structural, mechanical, and domestic care of the two Senate office buildings, the operation of the mechanical equipment, and maintenance of the subway transportation system. The old building contains approximately 425 office and committee rooms, together with storage rooms, shops, electrical transformer station, and subway, and is 56 years old, having been occupied March 5, 1909. The new building contains approximately 500 offices and committee rooms, together with storage rooms, shops, cafeteria, auditorium, and telephone exchange, and was accepted for beneficial occupancy October 15, 1958.

A regular force of 373 employees is required for 1966 for the care of these 2 buildings and their mechanical equipment, which includes such items as the extensive air-conditioning and refrigeration systems; 26 high-speed elevators, and 2 lifts; electric fixtures and wiring; legislative bell and buzzer systems; plumbing and piping; and subway systems.

The force required, covering 3 shifts daily, is made up, for 1966, of 48 mechanics in the general shops; 17 engineers, 10 attendants in the heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning departments; 48 operators for the elevators; 3 mechanics and 9 subway car operators: 96 general laborers, 1 matron, 8 restroom attendants, 100 charwomen, and 5 char-force inspectors; 1 superintendent, and 20 clerical and other assistants; 2 nurses and 5 aids.

The Architect performs his duties in connection with the old building under authority of the act of June 8, 1942 (56 Stat. 343), and in connection with the new building under authority of the act of June 25, 1948 (62 Stat. 1029).

DETAILED JUSTIFICATION

The following table shows a comparison of the cost of full-time and temporary employment and other objects of expense for the fiscal years 1964, 1965, and 1966. The savings realized in 1964 are also indicated in the table: