« PreviousContinue »
Mr. HARRISON. Twenty-seven percent more. Mr. ANDREWS. Wasn't that due primarily to the fact that the first session of the 90th Congress was in session longer than the last session of the 89th Congress?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes sir. Here is another matter which makes it difficult for us to estimate. We cannot tell at the beginning of the year how long Congress will be in session. Not only can't we tell but the Members themselves can't tell.
Mr. ANDREWS. Taking the first item in the breakdown, the Congressional Record, are there any new or unusual problems that surround the production of the Congressional Record that you think would be of interest to us since you were before us last year?
Mr. HARRISON. I do not believe there is. We are still using our same equipment. It is in good shape, thanks to our maintenance division.
Mr. ANDREWS. You are using the same number of employees?
Mr. HARRISON. Approximately the same. We cannot squeeze in any more employees in the building.
Mr. ANDREWS. When Congress recesses and there is no need for a Congressional Record what do the employees do who are assigned to work on the Congressional Record ?
Mr. HARRISON. Then they work on other work that comes in the plant. When Congress adjourns the committees seem to get very active with material to be printed. Everybody tries to catch up and very often the plant is flooded immediately after Congress adjourns. The income tax program hits about that time. Last year it did not. We had quite a problem last year. We printed income tax forms during the daytime and then lifted those forms and printed the Congressional Record at night. Many of our employees save their leave until Congress adjourns and then they take their leave. We have no problem keeping our employees busy when Congress is not in session.
Mr. ANDREWs. The permanent Record has to be done then?
Mr. HARRISON. The permanent Record, that is right, and many things we hold until Congress adjourns. As you know, last year we were flooded all the year because Congress stayed in session as long as it did. We are constantly trying to find shortcuts in the Record. The Joint Committee on Printing has worked with us on a number of things that you probably recall receiving notice on this year, concerning simplification of the Record. For example, there is no longer an Appendix. It is referred to as the Extensions of Remarks section of the Congressional Record. We hope more Members will put material in the Extensions of Remarks section of the Record rather than in the body of the Record. We are also attempting to have the committees and the Members who have tables to give them to us ahead of time so we can set them during the day.
Mr. ANDREWS. Is it cheaper to insert articles in the Appendix or in the body of the Record ?
Mr. HARRISON. It enables us to get the Record out earlier. We have adopted a method of numbering the pages in the House and in the Senate separately so if one House is delayed it does not delay us in getting the pagination for the other House. Delivery after 6:30 in the morning is a late time for the Record because the post offices want
the Record in their hands at 6:30 in the morning. We are currently attempting to expedite the Record, and that is why we were able to handle this 27-percent increase last year.
PUBLICATIONS FOR THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Mr. ANDREWS. As to item 4 on page 10, 150 copies of Government publications supplied to the Library of Congress, is that number specified by law?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes. Mr. ANDREWS. What are those Government publications? Mr. HARRISON. It includes the daily and bound editions of the Congressional Record and certain other congressional publications of which not to exceed 125 copies shall be for distribution through the Smithsonian Institution, to such Governments as may agree to send similar publications of their Governments to the United States.
Mr. ANDREWS. Do you know whether or not there has ever been a question raised as to whether that number is too high if it was set a number of years ago?
Mr. HARRISON. No. It seems to me the Library has asked us to increase within the 150. They don't get the full 150 on some publications. The limit is 150.
Mr. ANDREWS. Do they get 150 copies of each government publication?
Mr. HARRISON. Not automatically. There is a distribution that is controlled by the Joint Committee on Printing. Very few get 150 copies.
NONCONGRESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS Mr. ANDREWS. Referring to items 11 and 12 on page 8 of your breakdown, covering the Federal Register, U.S. Government Organization Manual, Public Papers of Presidents, Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, and Supplements to Code of Federal Regulations—is it fair to say those two items, which aggregate in next year's budget, $2,550,000, are not attributable to congressional operations?
Mr. HARRISON. I suppose you could say that. It does include actions by the Congress.
Mr. ANDREWS. Do you print all of those under directives from the Congress or under laws?
Mr. HARRISON. These are published under the acts of July 26, 1935, and July 11, 1946. The National Archives and Record Service has been authorized to handle the Federal Register.
VALUE OF COMMERCIALLY PROCURED PRINTING
Mr. ANDREWS. I notice on one of the tables submitted on page 22 that for fiscal year 1967 the value of commercial printing obtained by the Government Printing Office was $97,409,000, quite a substantial increase over fiscal year 1966 when the amount was $79,193,000. In fact, that table shows an increase steadily over these last 15 years. In 1954, for example, according to this sheet, the value of commercial printing obtained through the Government Printing Office as $20,685,000, and there seems to have been an increase every year since then, especially in recent years.
Tell us something about this and why the increase is so significant in recent years.
Mr. HARRISON. There are a number of reasons. I am a great believer in cooperating with the commercial printing industry in furnishing our requirements. I think this is in line with the administration's policy and it is a policy I have felt was good during the 20 years I have been connected with Government printing. That is one reason.
Another reason is the tremendous increase and since I have been in office 7 years which I completed on St. Patrick's Day, we have had a 100-percent increase, from $97 million to $200 million. The current plant was completed and moved into when the plant was doing about $20 million. It stands to reason the space I have just does not permit me to absorb at the same rate that I am buying. However, in-plant production has increased. In 1960 the main plant was doing around $50 million and today we are doing around $79 million or $80 million. Commercially it was $35 million and now it is $97 million.
Mr. ANDREWS. When you say the value of commercial printing obtained by the Government Printing Office was $97,409,000, what do you mean by that?
Mr. HARRISON. That is the value of the printing we purchased from the commercial industry.
Mr. ANDREWS. In other words, the commercial private businesses did $97,409,000 worth of printing for the Government Printing Office during 1967 ?
Mr. HARRISON. That is right. Mr. ANDREWS. You received the requests for printing from Gorernment agencies and farmed it out to private printers? Mr. Harrison. 55.1 percent was purchased from private printers. Mr. ANDREWS. That is 55.1 percent of all Government printing?
Mr. HARRISON. 55.1 percent of all Government printing that we handle.
Mr. ANDREWS. How much did you handle in 1967 as against that $97,409,000?
Mr. Harrison. $199,975,834, or roughly $200 million overall.
Mr. ANDREWS. So, for the Government, the Government Printing Office in 1967 did $79 million of work and farmed out $97,409,000?
Mr. HARRISON. Right. Mr. ANDREWS. Well, in years past some of the private printers have criticized you—not you personally but the Government Printing Office—for not farming out enough work. Do you have those complaints today?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes; in spite of the fact that in order to reach this $79 million volume in our work we processed about 216,000 jobs, which will average out to about $370 a job. When you go out on the open
market and attempt to buy by the bid process $370 average jobs, you are in trouble. The number of jobs we bought that amount to $97,409,000 was about 71,170.
Mr. ANDREWS. 71,170 contracts for $97 million of work? Mr. HARRISON. Yes, averaging about $1,368 per job. This bears out the fact that we are doing the short run, short schedule jobs in the plant and we are buying the big jobs, which gives the commercial printer a chance to make it worth while to bid.
Mr. ANDREWS. How much of the $79 million that you did was directly connected with Congress?
Mr. HARRISON. All the congressional work was done in our plant.
Mr. ANDREWS. Now let me ask you this: That $22 million of the $79 million was done for Congress?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir.
Mr. ANDREWS. So you did about $57 million for other Government agencies?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes.
Mr. ANDREWS. How do your rates on the $57 million compare with the rates on the $97 million-plus that you farmed out?
Mr. HARRISON. It is difficult to make a comparison in the bids at a given time. An individual plant may bid lower than anybody. It depends on the condition of their orders in the plant. Mr. ANDREWS. Whether they need business?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes. If they do not have enough work to keep their presses rolling they will cut deep just to pay their actual expenses. But by and large our prices are very favorable when compared to the general prices in private industry.
COST OF PAPER Mr. ANDREWS. What experience have you had in inflation in the last 2 years ? Mr. HARRISON. You mean in our commercial procurements ?
Mr. ANDREW's. In your operations, the purchase of paper, ink, material?
Mr. HARRISON. It is a peculiar thing, but the price of paper to us has actually decreased over the past few years.
Mr. ANDREWS. To what do you attribute that? Mr. HARRISON. A number of years ago we did not have so many mills. They have increased their plant capacity and put in new machines so that they have extended to the point-I would not say they have overextended, but it may be that.
Mr. ANDREWS. Do you buy all of your paper from the United States? Mr. HARRISON. Yes, we do.
Mr. ANDREWS. Canada furnishes a lot of newsprint paper in the United States, do they not?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes.
Mr. ANDREWS. They sell a lot in the United States? Mr. HARRISON. Yes, but our papers are domestic papers, including our newsprint.
Mr. YATES. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YATES. You stated the Government rates were more favorable than private rates yet you did not give any basis for the comparison. How do you know that?
Mr. HARRISON. From our estimators in dealing with jobs that we purchase. Very often when we receive bids for jobs we will find the lowest bid is considerably higher than our estimators estimated we could do the work. Sometimes we throw them out and rebid the job. Seldom do we find the low bid is under our estimated cost of furnishing the service required. I think that is the best answer I can give you. Dealing with the 71,000 jobs we buy, many of which are estimated in our own plant we know we are getting a fair bid or if not we go out and rebid the job.
LINOTRON MACHINES Mr. ANDREWS. What is the useful life you are assuming for the Linotron in your depreciation figures ?
Mr. HARRISON. We plan the savings will pay for those machines in 2 years provided the software-and here I don't know the full details of that term either, but that is the know-how our men have to use in programing it.
Mr. ANDREWs. Do the manufacturers of the Linotron train your men?
Mr. HARRISON. They have two men aboard and one will be on hand at least a year.
Mr. ANDREWS. You paid roughly $1 million for each machine?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes, but that included the machines and the software that went with it and that is almost as expensive as the equipment itself.
Mr. ANDREWS. The machines cost roughly $1 million each?
Mr. HARRISON. No, sir. The contract that was let for two machines and the software that goes with it.
Mr. ANDREWS. How much was the contract?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes.
Mr. ANDREWS. How long do you think that machine will last, 10 years, 15 vears, 20 vears?
Mr. HARRISON. Yes. Of course I have this feeling, that within 5 years the machine probably will be outmoded and there will be other