Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E81]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INTRODUCTION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
______
HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON
of the district of columbia
in the house of representatives
Wednesday, January 23, 2019
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I introduce the District of
Columbia Paperwork Reduction Act to eliminate the wasteful
congressional review process for legislation passed by the District of
Columbia Council and to align longtime congressional practice and the
law. The congressional review process for D.C. bills is almost entirely
ignored by Congress, providing it no benefit, but imposes substantial
costs (in time and money) on the District. Congress has almost always
used the appropriations process, rather than the disapproval process,
to block or nullify D.C. bills and entirely abandoned the congressional
review process as its mechanism for nullifying D.C. bills 24 years ago,
having only used it three times before then. Yet Congress still
requires the D.C. Council to use Kafkaesque make-work procedures to
comply with the abandoned congressional review process established by
the D.C. Home Rule Act.
Our bill would eliminate the congressional review process for bills
passed by the D.C. Council. However, Congress would lose no authority
it currently exercises because, even upon enactment of this bill,
Congress would retain its authority under Clause 17 of Section 8 of
Article I of the U.S. Constitution to amend or overturn any D.C. laws
at any time.
The congressional review process (30 days for civil bills and 60 days
for criminal bills) includes those days when either house of Congress
is in session, delaying D.C. bills from becoming law, often for many
months. The delay forces the D.C. Council to pass most bills several
times, using a cumbersome and complicated process to ensure that the
operations of this large and rapidly changing city continue
uninterrupted, avoiding a lapse of a bill before it becomes final. The
congressional calendar means that a 30-day period usually lasts a
couple of months and often much longer because of congressional
recesses. For example, the congressional review period for a bill that
changed the word ``handicap'' to ``disability'' lasted nine months. The
Council estimates that 50 to 65 percent of the bills it passes could be
eliminated if the review process did not exist. To ensure that a bill
does not lapse, the Council often must pass the same bill in three
forms: emergency (in effect for 90 days), temporary (in effect for 225
days) and permanent. Moreover, the Council has to carefully track the
days the House and Senate are in session for each D.C. bill it passes
to avoid gaps and to determine when the bills have taken effect. The
Council estimates that it could save 5,000 employee hours and 160,000
sheets of paper per two-year Council period if the review process were
eliminated. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy addressed the issue of
saving such resources by eliminating the amount of paperwork sent to
Congress when he proposed a cut in the number of reports that federal
agencies are required to submit to Congress. Our bill is a perfect
candidate because it eliminates a paperwork process that repeats itself
without interruption.
My bill would do no more than align the Home Rule Act with
congressional practice over the last 24 years. Of the more than 5,000
legislative acts transmitted to Congress since the Home Rule Act was
passed in 1973, only three resolutions disapproving D.C. bills have
been enacted (in 1979, 1981, and 1991) and two of those mistakenly
involved federal interests--one in the Height Act and the other in the
location of chanceries. Placing a congressional hold on more than 5,000
D.C. bills has not only proven unnecessary, but has imposed costs on
the D.C. government, residents and businesses. District residents and
businesses are also placed on hold because they have no certainty when
D.C. bills, from taxes to regulations, will take effect, making it
difficult to plan. It is particularly unfair to require the D.C.
Council to engage in this unnecessary, labor-intensive and costly
process. My bill would only eliminate the automatic hold placed on D.C.
bills and the need for the D.C. Council to comply with a process
initially created for the convenience of Congress, but that is now
almost never used. This bill would promote efficiency and cost savings
for Congress, the District and D.C. residents and businesses without
reducing congressional oversight, and would carry out the policy
stressed by Congress of eliminating needless paperwork and make-work
redundancy.
I urge my colleagues to support this good-government measure.
____________________