Page images
PDF
EPUB

REPRESENTATIVE MARTY MEEHAN'S

CONGRESSIONAL REFORM PROPOSALS

streamline congressional subcommittees and eliminate select committees

approve a Presidential line-item veto

limit PAC contributions to $1,000

enact voluntary spending caps for congressional races

establish a system of matching federal funds for candidates

provide vouchers for radio and television advertising

establish threshold for in-district and in-state campaign contributions

within the framework of the Constitution, we must debate the merits of a term-limit amendment

mandate an up or down vote on any congressional payraise

TESTIMONY

The Honorable Michael D. Crapo, M.C.
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE JOINT COMMITTEE
ON THE ORGANIZATION OF CONGRESS

Thursday, February 4, 1993

As Member of the Freshman Class of 1993 and a newcomer to Congress, I appreciate this opportunity to represent my views in this comprehensive series of hearings on proposals to reform the Congress. It is my fervent hope, and the hope of millions of Americans grown disillusioned by the conduct of this institution, that this bipartisan and bicameral forum will yield meaningful and long-term reforms.

One of the primary reasons I ran for this office, and for many of the 110 new members of Congress this year, was my firm conviction that the Congress requires fundamental reform. For too many people in this country, Congress is seen as an institution that places self-service above public service. Too many of us are seen as politicians who place confrontation and self-promotion ahead of solving problems.

I believe that these hearings are as much the result of public concern as our own efforts to institute reform of this institution. I believe there will be strong support for our task ahead and for seeing it through to the end.

Many people realize that Congress must establish stricter standards of conduct and behavior for itself if it is to confront the larger issue of the federal budget deficit with discipline. With a substantive reorganization of Congress, including a more solid process of accountability for Members, we can make progress in being able to say "no" to unnecessary federal programs or special interests. Greater accountability and limits on Members' own means of self-promotion will help restore the Congress's integrity, respect, and character.

Part of the problem was illustrated to me last week when I received a note from a concerned mother from my district whose son had written a poem about Congress as a school assignment. The student, a 16-year old Eagle Scout with a genuine pride in his country, has this alarming end of a poem about the institutional vagaries of Congress:

Life to them is a game of cards,
They throw away what they can't use;

The pride of the American people.

They keep the rest for their full house.

The king of money, the joker of power.

Part of the public's frustration is the image of a monolithic institution, with a large and arcane bureaucracy. The size and scope of this system has grown incomprehensible to the average citizen. The rising numbers of subcommittees, special committees, and individual committee jurisdictions give the impression of government leaders intent on padding their own narrow, careerist agenda.

A game of cards is indeed an apt metaphor for the kind of power shuffling and calculation that occurs within some 300 House and Senate committees and subcommittees. While the student's concerns expressed in the poem could be related to the whole of

Congressional Reorganization and Reform, this centralization of power is roughly comparable to stacking a deck of cards in the minds of many American citizens.

One of my central reasons for running for this office was to change Congress, specifically to reduce committees, committee staff, and committee leaders' tenure. I feel that I share these concerns with many other Freshman Members of the House.

Last Tuesday, a solid majority of Republicans and Democrats (237 in all) voted for true reform and against government bureaucracy when they voted against reestablishment of the Select Committees. Many in this group are Freshman Members of Congress who are reflecting the interests and concerns of their constituents, the most vocal for true reform.

What the public does not want is business as usual, instead of the old stalls and dodges. We Freshmen Congressmen were sent here because we promised prompt action for real reform of House and Senate Committees. If we want to transform the way Washington works, then we must move quickly and unambiguously in reorganizing our basic framework.

In a

Many of my more experienced colleagues in Washington have told me that the House has witnessed countless committees intended to reform the way Congress is run and nothing ever happens. That is a very troubling notion. One example is the Rules Committee resolution against the proliferation of select of committees. report, the Committee commented on the spiralling costs of Congress, the exacerbation of space problems, the imposition of additional burdens on Members, and their overall effect on standing committees' effectiveness. While the evidence overwhelmingly points against this bureaucracy, that advice and every recommendation thereafter has gone largely unheeded.

With the calls for reform continuing to mount, we now have an

opportunity to make some sound changes to the organization of Congress. Our accountability to public pressure is too great to avoid any further these fundamental changes. I ask that you carefully consider and then recommend to the Congress the following needed changes:

Substantive reform cannot be addressed without mention of a Balanced Budget Amendment without loopholes. The imperative of deficit reduction is hollow without this measure.

A line-item veto to enhance presidential authority is a necessary and perennial reform recommendation.

With regard to the Budget process, all mandatory spending programs should be placed on equal footing with annually appropriated discretionary programs. This would create greater budgetary control because spending would be reduced absent specific Congressional action to provide funding.

Congress should require periodic reauthorization for all mandatory spending. This would allow for any spending programs be

reviewed and reestablished at specified times.

O I support efforts to require a rollcall vote on all tax and appropriations bills. Recorded votes would make Members more accountable to the U.S. taxpayer.

O Non-germane amendments in either body, whether allowed by rule or suspension of rules, must be prohibited.

[ocr errors]

Furthermore, constraints must be placed on restrictive special rules in the House. There is a rising proportion of special rules restricting amendments to a specified list, or affecting the order of their consideration. Restrictive special rules also too often prohibit instructions in the motion to recommit. The range of choice permitted on amendments considered is inadequate.

of the agenda must be exercised fairly.

[ocr errors]

Control

Congress should adhere to the same laws, rules, and regulations

it applies to the rest of the country.

One of the most critical straightforward reforms is to reduce the number of committees. As committee numbers become more streamlined, committee staff should undergo proportional adjustments.

House rules should set strict rules on the size of committees. As a Reformer, I am concerned that some panels are too large, which results in too many assignments per member. Unwieldy panels tend to become fragmented, and policymaking tends to become more difficult. To streamline the way Congress is run and to avoid confusion, one option would be to categorize committees into being major and non-major committees. The size of each standing committee could be limited to 25 members.

O Additionally, the creation of subcommittees should be limited. I would be in favor of limiting the number of subcommittees each committee could have. Subunits other than subcommittees should be prohibited. Currently, the Senate does not limit the number of subcommittees that each committee may create. And in the House, each standing committee with at least 20 members (except Budget) is required to have at least four subcommittees.

O Another needed reform to streamline and reorder the committee system is to ensure that party ratios on panels are strictly patterned after ratios in the entire House.

[ocr errors]

Committee staff also should be allocated strictly by the same party ratios.

O With the proper balance and uniform numbers of Members on committees, it would be useful to give committee staff levels "statutory" status. Staffing levels could be set for each committee with the exception of Appropriations and the Budget Committee, which set their own limits. The ultimate goal would be to reduce the total number of staff and the aggregate level of funds for each committee. Number of staff should be directly related to its activity and workload.

O One of the most critical of committee reforms would be to limit the tenure of committee and subcommittee leaders. The increased competition and turnover would result in more effective leadership, and would allow new Members to assert a greater role in committee policy.

O We need to ban all proxy voting within committees. This would ensure that all votes taken were made by members present at the time of a vote.

Because

The philosophy of consolidation and uniformity that these proposals address would have an immediate public impact. so many people believe the current organization of Congress is tainted, a conscientious effort to streamline committees and put limits on their expansion is long overdue.

« PreviousContinue »