Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. For years Congresses have avoided difficult votes or built majorities for bad bills by combining unrelated legislation.

You need only to review a few back issues of Congressional Quarterly (CQ) to find evidence of this fact. In November of 1986 CQ reported that President Reagan was displeased at the prospect of signing an omnibus health bill "containing the texts of nine separate bills." I wonder if any member of Congress knew everything that was in that bill.

And that bill came on the heels of a deficit-reduction bill enacted that, according to CQ, "included enough changes in Medicare and Medicaid programs...to make it one of the major health bills of the 99th Congress."

Unbelievably, between 1981 and 1988, Congress avoided voting on a stand-alone foreign aid appropriations bill. Instead, funding for the politically unpopular program was rolled into omnibus continuing resolutions.

Certainly omnibus bills are among the worst of the legislative atrocities that Congress commits. The lack of a single-subject requirement also short-changes the deliberative process and impedes the progress of worthwhile legislation.

The earliest American single-subject requirement I have been able to find is contained in the instructions of Queen Anne to the first royal Governor of the colony of New Jersey in 1703. Queen Anne warned him of the danger of legislation that ties together issues that have no relation to one another. She sensibly advocated a single-subject rule for legislation which remains in the New Jersey state constitution today and has found its way into the constitutions of nearly every other state.

The Queen probably did not foresee aid for out-of-work Americans being tied to tariffs on Hungarian products, but she surely knew legislators would be tempted to piggyback self-serving legislation onto a popular bill and she also realized that legislators might attempt to build support for their bill by adding members' pet legislation to it.

She knew that a single-subject rule for legislation would prevent log-rolling and protect the integrity of the legislative process. It was good advice then, and is good advice today.

I would encourage the Committee to review the adoption of a single-subject rule for Congress and I am submitting for your consideration copies of my single-subject legislation that I introduced at the beginning of the 103rd Congress.

[Proposed House organization; Senate names in parentheses]

House Administration (Rules and Administration)
Governmental Affairs (same)

Veterans Affairs (same)

1. Members of an exclusive committee may have no other assignments.

2.

Members of a mutually exclusive committee may also serve

on a non-exclusive committee, though many will not.

3. A Member not serving on an exclusive or mutually exclusive committee may serve on two non-exclusive committees.

4. Seniority on current committee(s) would be carried over to a member's new committee(s), provided that new committee has at least a portion of old committee's jurisdiction. With regard to current members of the Appropriations Committee, such old jurisdiction would be determined by the member's current subcommittee assignments. Immediately preceding service on other relevant committees would also count for seniority purposes.

Changes from current House structure

Agriculture (no change)

Armed Services (no change)

Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs (add securities jurisdiction from current Energy and Commerce)

Budget (no change)

Commerce, Science and Transportation (merger of Small Business Committee and most of Science, Space and Technology Committee with commerce and transportation parts of Energy and Commerce, Public Works and Transportation, and Merchant Marine and Fisheries)

Education and Labor (no change)

Energy and Natural Resources (Natural Resources Committee plus energy part of Energy and Commerce and energy part of Science, Space and Technology)

Environment and Public Works (environment from Energy and Commerce, and Merchant Marine and Fisheries; non-transportation parts of Public Works and Transportation)

Foreign Affairs (no change)

Governmental Affairs (3-way merger of Government Operations, Post Office and Civil Service, and District of Columbia Committees) House Administration (no change)

Intelligence (no change)

Judiciary (no change)

Rules (no change)

Standards of Official Conduct (no change)

Veterans Affairs (no change)

Ways and Means (no change)

[Note: functions of Appropriations Committee are merged with all committees shown above, with each responsible for appropriations in its own area. Budget resolution will specify spending ceilings for each committee.]

TESTIMONY BEFORE JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ORGANIZATION OF CONGRESS By Rep. Michael N. Castle Delaware

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify here today. As other freshman congresspeople have testified, congressional reform certainly were buzzwords on the campaign trail. In my transition from Governor of Delaware to the First State's only Congressman, I was told, possibly warned, by a few members of Congress that I would be frustrated by the lack of substantative achievement in Congress and, like many of you are, would be frustrated by the process which contributes to this inefficiency and ineffectiveness.

After four weeks on the job, I do not have all the answers, and I defer to the expertise of the distinguished members of this Committee. However, I thought it might be helpful to hear the views of a freshman congressman who is encountering the problems for the first time.

I believe that by outlining a clear agenda each year, streamlining the committee structure, simplifying floor procedures and eliminating perks and privileges, Congress can be positioned to work in the nation's best interest. I propose several structural, procedural and leadership reforms.

A critical structural reform is to significantly reduce the number of committees and subcommittees and staff. We can begin by abolishing the four House Select Committees. With fewer committees and subcommittees to serve on, congresspeople could concentrate on key legislative areas, developing expertise in those areas.

With a congressional budget of 2.3 billion dollars, 20,000 staff members, 147 subcommittees, 22 standing committees, caucuses, task forces and research groups, and 140 congressional member organizations and legislative service groups, Congressional downsizing is sorely needed.

some

At a minimum, there needs to be better coordination in scheduling committee and subcommittee meetings. Ideally, a centralized computer system should be developed. Committee and subcommittee chairpersons scheduling their meetings would all be connected to this computer system, which could help avoid the scheduling conflicts which are now a daily part of congressional life.

The practice of assigning one bill to multiple committees should be stopped as well. This is a duplicative process that wastes precious time and resources.

To limit the seniority system, the terms of committee chairpersons and ranking minority members should be limited. Membership on committees also should be rotated.

The practice of proxy voting should be ELIMINATED as well. Members could be present to vote in committees and subcommittees if they did not have multiple, competing assignments.

At the beginning of each legislative session, both the House and Senate should set a clear, descriptive agenda articulating their priorities for the upcoming session. A legislative calendar also should be developed around these agendas that allows sufficient time for major policy issues to be discussed.

Special joint congressional committees with responsibility for key pieces of legislation should be established. By assigning primary legislation to joint Senate-House committees at the outset of a new session, Congress will demonstrate its commitment to seeing some action on. the issues, speed the deliberation process and engage a bi-partisan approach to problem-solving.

While I generally support the 10-month legislative session and allocation of days spent between Washington and our districts, I believe that when we are in session, we should start the legislative day earlier in the morning as opposed to mid

afternoon.

We must also dedicate more time IN SESSION ON THE HOUSE FLOOR to debate priority legislation and develop a process for reducing and expediting the process of essential legislation.

Procedurally, we should ABOLISH THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. This weakens our democratic form of government because it permits the U.S. House of Representatives to conduct the important business of this country without a majority of elected representatives present in the House chamber to debate legislation.

Another procedural change to enhance congressional responsibility is to require that every bill and committee report be made available to members at least 48 hours before it is voted Major legislation, such as the Family and Medical Leave Act,

on.