H. Rept. 112-137 - 112th Congress (2011-2012)
July 07, 2011, As Reported by the House Administration Committee

Report text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this legislative 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.




House Report 112-137 - FIRST SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES of the COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES during the ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS together with MINORITY VIEWS




[House Report 112-137]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


112th Congress 
 1st Session            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 Report
                                                                112-137
_______________________________________________________________________

                                                  Union Calendar No. 87
 
               FIRST SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES

                                 of the

                   COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

                                 of the

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                               during the

                      ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>


  July 7, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed
                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
                         Committee on House Administration,
                                      Washington, DC, July 6, 2011.
Hon. Karen Haas,
Clerk of the House, The Capitol,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Ms. Haas: Pursuant to rule XI, clause 1, paragraph (d) 
of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, I am hereby 
transmitting the first Semiannual Report on the Activities of 
the Committee on House Administration. This report summarizes 
the activities of the Committee with respect to its legislative 
and oversight responsibilities in the 112th Congress to date.
            Sincerely,
                                         Daniel E. Lungren,


                                                          Chairman.
                                                  Union Calendar No. 87

112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    112-137

======================================================================




 FIRST SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 
                ADMINISTRATION DURING THE 112TH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

  July 7, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California, from the Committee on House 
                Administration, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                              Introduction

    The Committee on House Administration (Committee) oversees 
appropriations for the salaries and expenses of all House 
committees (except for the Committee on Appropriations); 
allowance and expenses of House Members, officers, and 
administrative offices; and the auditing and settling of these 
accounts. The Committee further oversees the employment of 
staff for House Members, committees, and stenographers. The 
Committee has jurisdiction over the House Library; the statuary 
and art in the Capitol; the Franking Commission; the 
Congressional Record; accounts of the House; and the assignment 
of office space for House Members and committees. The Committee 
also has the important duty of overseeing the Capitol Police 
and security of the House office buildings and grounds.
    Additionally, the Committee's jurisdiction covers the 
election of the President and Vice President, House Members, 
Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, and Senators as well as 
House contested elections, credentials and qualifications of 
candidates, and corrupt practices. Regarding Member services, 
the Committee oversees the House restaurant, parking 
facilities, and administration of the House office buildings 
and of the House wing of the Capitol. The Committee also deals 
with the travel of Members; campaign finance matters in federal 
elections; and the compensation, retirement and other benefits 
of Members, officers and employees of Congress. Lastly, the 
Committee has jurisdiction over the Library of Congress, the 
purchase of books and manuscripts, the Botanic Garden, and the 
Smithsonian Institution.
    The Committee has two subcommittees established by the 
Committee in 2011: the Subcommittee on Elections and the 
Subcommittee on Oversight.
    The Subcommittee on Elections has jurisdiction over matters 
pertaining to the Federal Election Campaign Act, the Federal 
Contested Elections Act, the Help America Vote Act, the 
National Voter Registration Act, the Uniformed and Overseas 
Citizens Absentee Voting Act, the Federal Voting Assistance 
Program, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (accessibility for voters with disabilities), 
the Federal Election Commission, the Election Assistance 
Commission, and other election-related issues.
    The Subcommittee on Oversight has jurisdiction over matters 
pertaining to operations of the Library of Congress, the 
Botanic Garden, the Smithsonian Institution, the Architect of 
the Capitol, the Capitol Visitors Center, the Chief 
Administrative Officer, House Information Resources, the Clerk 
of the House, the House Inspector General, the Congressional 
Research Service, and the Office of Compliance.

                 COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

    On January 5, 2011, the House elected Rep. Daniel E. 
Lungren of California as Chairman of the Committee on House 
Administration. Also elected to the Committee were Rep. Gregg 
Harper of Mississippi, Rep. Phil Gingrey of Georgia, Rep. Aaron 
Schock of Illinois, Rep. Todd Rokita of Indiana, and Rep. Rich 
Nugent of Florida. The three minority Members elected were Rep. 
Robert A. Brady of Pennsylvania, the Ranking Minority Member, 
Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, and Rep. Charles A. Gonzalez of 
Texas.
    On January, 25, 2011, the Committee met to organize for the 
112th Congress. During this organizational meeting, the 
Committee adopted its rules and oversight plan, and appointed 
the members of its subcommittees. Rep. Harper was appointed 
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Elections. Reps. Schock, 
Nugent, and Rokita were elected to the subcommittee. Reps. 
Brady and Gonzalez were elected to represent the minority. Rep. 
Gingrey was appointed Chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Oversight. Additionally, Reps. Schock, Nugent, and Rokita were 
elected to the subcommittee. Reps. Lofgren and Gonzalez were 
elected to represent the minority.

                           COMMITTEE FUNDING

    The Committee on House Administration reports a biennial 
primary expense resolution by which standing and select 
committees of the House (except the Committee on 
Appropriations) are authorized operating funds for each 
Congress. During the first three months of each new Congress, 
House Rule X, clause 7, authorizes House committees to continue 
operations based on their funding authorizations from the 
preceding session. This continuing authorization allows 
committees to organize, adopt legislative and oversight 
agendas, and seek spending authority through the adoption of a 
primary expense resolution by the House.
    The funding process begins after a House standing or select 
committee determines its biennial funding needs, and introduces 
a House resolution seeking those funds. Under House Rule X, 
clause 6, all funding resolutions, which are referred to as 
primary expense resolutions, are referred to the Committee on 
House Administration. After all committee expense resolutions 
have been introduced, the Committee combines the resolutions 
into a single, omnibus primary expense resolution. Working with 
whatever funds are or will be made available through 
appropriations acts, and after requesting and reviewing 
committee budget submissions, the Committee has historically 
recommended an appropriate allocation of the available funds.

112th Congress proceedings

    To gather the information necessary to create the omnibus 
primary expense resolution, the Committee required the standing 
and select committees to submit estimates for their expected 
expenses for both sessions of the 112th Congress. The Committee 
asked that committees provide line item estimates for the 
following expenses: personnel compensation (including salaries 
and lump sum payments), overtime, transit benefits, travel, 
communications, and printing and reproduction costs. The 
Committee also requested that the standing and select 
committees estimate their expenses for other services, 
including consultant contracts, detailees from executive and 
other agencies, training, representational expenses, 
specialized training, and miscellaneous expenses. Finally, the 
Committee requested budget estimates for the costs of supplies, 
materials, and equipment.
    In addition to requiring the above information, the 
Committee asked that the standing and select committee budget 
requests conform to H. Res. 22, a previously passed resolution 
that, inter alia, mandated the aggregate amount of funding for 
committees not exceed 95% of the funding for the 111th 
Congress. In submitting their budget requests, every standing 
and select committee met this goal.
    To further gather the information necessary to create the 
omnibus primary expense resolution, the Committee convened a 
hearing to provide the Chairs and Ranking Members of the 
standing and select committees an opportunity to present and 
share their views on their respective budget requests for the 
112th Congress.
    During the hearing, Members of the Committee asked the 
Chairs and Ranking Members if these smaller budget requests 
would impact their ability to conduct effective oversight or 
pursue their legislative goals. Chairs and Ranking Members 
uniformly assured the Committee that they will be able to meet 
their legislative and oversight responsibilities with the 
requested level of funding. However, some Chairs and Ranking 
Members did state that their ability to provide oversight over 
the Executive Branch agencies in their jurisdiction would be 
impaired if further cuts were undertaken.
    Members of the Committee also asked the Chairs and Ranking 
Members how they were managing and will manage their resources 
with equity and prudence. Since the 104th Congress, House 
majority leadership and the Chair and Ranking Member of the 
Committee have encouraged the Chairs of the standing and select 
committees to provide the minority with one-third of committee 
staff and/or resources authorized in the primary expense 
resolutions. During the hearings, the Committee sought to 
ensure that the minority in each committee was treated 
equitably in the funding process. Each Ranking Member was asked 
if he or she was allocated the traditional one-third share of 
committee staff positions and/or committee resources, as 
determined by each committee. These exchanges indicated that 
all of the committees appear to be in compliance with the 
traditional ``two-thirds/one-third'' distribution of funds 
among the majority and minority.
    After the hearing, the Committee used the budget 
submissions and Member testimony to create an omnibus expense 
resolution, introduced by Chairman Lungren, to authorize 
funding for all of the committees. The resolution includes a 
provision to require the Chairs and Ranking Members to return 
to the Committee after one year for an additional oversight 
hearing to review the use of funds from the first session. 
These proceedings will be open to the public, and will provide 
an opportunity to discover how effectively and efficiently 
funding allocations are being used. The provision is intended 
to promote accountability, transparency, and oversight of each 
committee's resources.
    The Committee conducted the hearing on March 1, 2011, and 
continued it on March 2. On March 9, 2011, by voice vote, the 
Committee met and agreed to a motion to report H. Res. 147, the 
omnibus expense resolution, favorably to the House without 
amendment. This resolution utilized the standing and select 
committees' initial requests after consideration of available 
funds and budget constraints. H. Res. 147 was ordered favorably 
reported by the Committee to the House with a total 
authorization of $284,828,657.
    The House agreed to H. Res. 147 on March 17, 2011 by voice 
vote.

                  MEMBERS' REPRESENTATIONAL ALLOWANCE

    The Committee has jurisdiction over the use of 
appropriations from the accounts of the U.S. House of 
Representatives for the Members' Representational Allowance 
(MRA) as well as official travel by Members and staff, and 
compensation, retirement and other benefits of Member office 
employees. The MRA is the annual authorization made to each 
Member of the House to obligate U.S. Treasury funds not to 
exceed a certain amount. These funds may be used by the Member 
to pay ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred by the 
Member and his or her congressional office employees in support 
of the conduct of the Member's official and representational 
duties on behalf of the district from which the Member is 
elected. The annual MRA is available for one legislative year 
(i.e., January 3 of one year through January 2 of the following 
year).
    The MRA is made up of three primary expense components: 
personnel compensation, official expenses, and official 
(franked) mail expenses. The amount of the MRA varies from 
Member to Member based on the distance of a Member's district 
from Washington, D.C., the cost of federal office space serving 
a Member's district, and the number of U.S. Postal Service 
private delivery stops in a Member's district. The use of funds 
in any expense category is not limited by the amount factored 
into a corresponding expense component, e.g., a Member may 
spend more or less than the amount of the personnel component 
to compensate his or her staff. Each Member has complete 
discretion in budgeting the total amount of his or her MRA as 
he or she determines to support the operation of his or her 
Washington, D.C., and district congressional offices, 
consistent with applicable Federal law and House Rules and 
regulations.
    Federal law authorizes the Committee, by order of the 
Committee, to fix and adjust the amounts, terms, and conditions 
of, and other matters relating to the MRA (including all 
aspects of official mail) by reason of:
          1. A change in the price of materials, services, or 
        office space;
          2. A technological change or other improvement in 
        office equipment; or
          3. An increase in rates of pay under the General 
        Schedule, e.g., a comparability and/or locality wage 
        adjustment.
    This Congress, the House passed H. Res. 22, a resolution 
that mandated the aggregate amount of funding for Member 
Allowances not exceed 95% of the funding for 2010. The total 
amount authorized for all Members' Representational Allowances 
for 2011 was $638,155,686. The average MRA for 2011 was 
$1,447,065.

             COMMISSION ON CONGRESSIONAL MAILING STANDARDS

    The Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards of the 
U.S. House of Representatives (Franking Commission), 
established by Public Law 93-191, is composed of six Members 
appointed by the Speaker of the House, three from the majority 
and three from the minority. The Speaker designates as Chairman 
of the Franking Commission, from among the Members of the 
Committee on House Administration, one of the Members appointed 
to the Commission.
    In the 112th Congress, Rep. Aaron Schock was appointed 
Chairman of the Franking Commission. Additionally, Rep. Tom 
Price of Georgia and Rep. Bob Latta of Ohio were appointed as 
majority Members to the Commission. Rep. Susan Davis of 
California was appointed as the Ranking Democratic Member, and 
Rep. Brad Sherman of California and Rep. Cedric Richmond of 
Louisiana were appointed as Democratic Members to the 
Commission.
    By law, House Rule and regulation the jurisdiction and 
related functions of the Franking Commission are:
          1. To prescribe regulations governing the proper use 
        of the franking privilege by those entitled to use the 
        privilege in connection with the mailing or 
        contemplated mailing of franked mail under Title 39 
        U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 3210, 3211, 3212, 3213(2), 3218, 3219 
        or in connection with the operation of section 3215; in 
        connection with any other Federal law (other than any 
        law which imposes any criminal penalty), or in 
        connection with any rule of the U.S. House of 
        Representatives relating to franked mail (2 U.S.C. 
        501(d)).
          2. Upon the request of any person entitled to use the 
        franking privilege, to provide guidance, assistance, 
        advice, and counsel, through Advisory Opinions or 
        consultations, in connection with the mailing or 
        contemplated mailing of franked mail regarding the 
        application and/or compliance with applicable Federal 
        statutes and House rules and/or regulations. The staff 
        assigned to the Commission is delegated authority by 
        the Commission to perform advisory and counseling 
        functions, subject to review by the Commission. (2 
        U.S.C. 501(d)).
          3. To investigate, decide, and dispose of complaints 
        regarding the misuse of the franking privilege. (2 
        U.S.C. 501(e)).
          4. Upon request of a Member of the U.S. House of 
        Representatives, to provide guidance, assistance, 
        advice, and counsel, through Advisory Opinions or 
        consultations, in connection with the distribution or 
        contemplated distribution of a communication, 
        regardless of media, regarding the application and/or 
        compliance with applicable Federal statutes and House 
        rules and/or regulations.
          5. To provide written reminders to offices of the 
        House regarding restrictions on the distribution of 
        mass mailings and communications prior to primary, 
        general, special or runoff elections.
    Effective January 3, 1996, all communications required to 
receive an Advisory Opinion from the Franking Commission are 
subject to full public disclosure. These Advisory Opinions are 
made available for review (and duplication) to the public 
through the Legislative Resource Center, B-106 Cannon House 
Office Building. Communications that require an Advisory 
Opinion include mass mailings, mass communications (regardless 
of media), and communications for which a third party 
production and/or printing expense exceeding $350 will be 
incurred. A mass mailing or communication is considered to be 
any unsolicited communication of substantially identical 
content initiated by a Member that will potentially be 
distributed to, i.e., read by, heard by, or seen by, 500 or 
more individuals. So far, during the 112th Congress, the 
Franking Commission has reviewed, considered, and approved 
2,822 requests for Advisory Opinions.
    The Franking Commission is also responsible for monitoring 
requests to review Advisory Opinions filed at the Legislative 
Resource Center to ensure that the applicable public disclosure 
requirements are fully complied with. In addition, it is the 
practice of the Franking Commission to provide notice to a 
Member whenever his or her public disclosure file has been 
reviewed in whole or in part. So far, during the 112th 
Congress, the Commission has issued 79 Notifications of Review.

         OVERSIGHT AND LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE

Officers of the House

    One of the key responsibilities of the Committee is to 
provide oversight of the Officers of the House, whose 
organizations serve primary roles in the operation of the 
legislative process and in providing the day to day 
administrative and operational infrastructure necessary to 
support the Members and staff of the House.

Clerk of the House

    The Honorable Karen Haas was elected as the 34th Clerk of 
the House on January 5, 2011. Ms. Haas served as the Clerk 
previously from 2005-2007. The Office of the Clerk is charged 
with overseeing nine departments including the Office of Art 
and Archives, the Legislative Resource Center, and the Page 
Program, but its primary responsibilities involve the 
legislative activities of the House. This includes managing the 
legislative bills originating in the House as well as 
overseeing the voting system.
    During the first six months of the 112th Congress, a 
bipartisan group of House Administration Committee staff met 
weekly with the Clerk and her staff and received regular 
updates on issues requiring Committee approval or guidance.
    Recently, two departments within the Clerk's operation 
underwent re-organizations with the concurrence of the 
Committee. On March 29, 2011, the Committee approved the 
renaming of the Office of Publication Services (OPS) to the 
Office of Communications. The Clerk reviewed the 
responsibilities of OPS and recognized a need for a strategic 
communications team. The Clerk adjusted the duties and titles 
of several communications positions within OPS, and moved the 
printing, publications and records management positions to the 
Legislative Resource Center.
    On May 31, 2011, the Committee approved the creation of a 
new division within the Office of the Clerk titled Office of 
the Historian Staff (OHS). This new division, which became 
effective June 1, 2011, includes the historical research staff 
from both the Office of Art and Archives (OAA) and the Office 
of the Historian, thus eliminating duplicative positions. The 
OAA will continue to provide archival and curatorial services, 
while the OHS will be responsible for historical research, 
publications, records management and web based historical 
information. Although OHS's budget falls within the Clerk's 
budget, the Historian's salary will remain separate.
    The Committee has also received updates on the Clerk's 
Houselive.gov website, the Page Program, and Member Office 
vacancies. On Houselive.gov, new player buttons, video 
clipping, archiving and streaming capabilities were added to 
make it user-friendly. With respect to the Page Program, the 
Committee approved a total of sixty-four pages for the spring 
semester and seventy-one pages for the summer program. 
Additionally, the Clerk has managed four Member offices vacated 
during the 112th Congress. The Committee has received updates 
about steps taken to ensure the continuity of operations in 
both the Washington, DC and district offices.

                            SERGEANT AT ARMS

    The Honorable Wilson Livingood was re-elected as the 36th 
House Sergeant at Arms on January 5, 2011. Mr. Livingood has 
served as the Sergeant at Arms since 1995. The Committee 
continues to exercise its oversight responsibility of the House 
Sergeant at Arms (HSAA) and the United States Capitol Police 
(USCP), the two offices responsible for the security of the 
U.S. House of Representatives. These matters are handled by the 
full Committee under the guidance of the Chairman. This 
represents a change from the practice of forming a Subcommittee 
on Capitol Security in previous congresses. There are multiple 
challenges associated with providing an appropriate level of 
security to the Capitol grounds while still maintaining the 
public's access to the ``People's House.'' The Committee staff 
has focused extensively on meeting all necessary security 
requirements. A bipartisan group of Committee staff meets with 
the HSAA and the USCP staffs on a weekly basis to discuss items 
of interest.
    At 10:10 am on Saturday, January 8, 2011, a lone gunman 
killed six people and severely wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. 
This horrific event drew an immediate reaction by the security 
apparatus for the Congress. In concert with the bipartisan 
leadership and the federal law enforcement community, the 
Committee commenced initiatives to improve security for Members 
in their District offices. The Committee directed the HSAA to 
look at security enhancements for District offices, starting 
with vulnerability and physical security assessments conducted 
by the private security company ADT with the option to have 
security systems installed. To date, 231 Member offices have 
requested physical security surveys, of which 221 have been 
completed. Additionally, the HSAA designed a new program, the 
Law Enforcement Coordinator program, for Member District 
offices in January. The program has initiated and improved the 
communication between Member District offices and local law 
enforcement agencies. Law Enforcement Coordinators are 
responsible for coordinating with local law enforcement 
agencies to establish security arrangements for their Member's 
events, identify the various security elements that may be 
needed due to the subject matter and climate of the event, and 
identify various other site considerations to be addressed when 
requesting security for upcoming events. These two immediate 
steps have strengthened both security and awareness. This work 
is ongoing.
    During the last two weeks of April 2011, the HSAA Office of 
Emergency Management (OEM) conducted multiple Emergency 
Response exercises validating the comprehensive emergency 
response plans for the House Daycare Facility and in the Ford, 
Cannon, Longworth, and Rayburn House Office Buildings. The 
exercises tested the ability of the HSAA and USCP to manage a 
potential crisis and were highly successful. The exercises 
tested responses to fire or aircraft threat evacuation. By the 
end of August 2011, the HSAA will implement a desktop pop-up 
notification to all House computers for emergency purposes. 
Additionally, the HSAA OEM is in the process of examining new 
evacuation modeling software that would be able to streamline 
evacuation drills and refine emergency response course of 
action development for the U.S. Capitol Complex.
    With regards to the U.S. Capitol Police, the USCP Office of 
Inspector General identified and recommended eight financial 
management process improvements. The USCP Chief Administrative 
Officer has completed and implemented all eight 
recommendations. In addition, the USCP Chief Administrative 
Officer produced a Force Development Standard Operating 
Procedure to resolve the FY 2010 budget projection shortfalls.
    The USCP continues to work toward completion of the Radio 
Modernization Project, which will substantially upgrade the 
communications capabilities of the USCP. The project is 
tentatively scheduled to be completed in 2013. On June 1, 2011, 
the largest of the Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for the 
project was released and posted to the NAVAIR website. This 
transformative project is in phase three of its four phases.

Chief Administrative Officer

    The Honorable Dan Strodel was elected as the 5th Chief 
Administrative Officer of the House on January 5, 2011. The 
Office of the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) supports the 
budget, finance, procurement, facilities, and information 
technology needs of the House and all of its components. The 
Committee is charged with oversight of the CAO. During the 
112th Congress, Committee staff has met with the CAO weekly to 
provide feedback, guidance and approval on procurement actions, 
personnel, and other House-wide programs and projects.
    One of the earliest Committee actions taken this Congress 
was the termination of the House's composting program. In early 
2010, the House Inspector General produced a report on the CAO-
managed program that revealed the program was not achieving 
energy savings and cost the House an extra $650,000 in 2008. 
Since 2008, program costs decreased, but they still amounted to 
more than $475,000 in 2010 due to compostable supplies, labor 
and hauling. As a result, on January 24, 2011, the composting 
program was suspended.
    The Committee worked with the CAO to examine other service 
options that would provide functionality with the least cost to 
the House. Thus on February 22, the Committee approved a CAO 
proposal to conduct a reusable dishware pilot program alongside 
a change to plastic and polystyrene products. Since the pilot 
program's inception in late March, the Committee has received 
weekly dishware usage statistics in order to evaluate its 
effectiveness. Simultaneously, the Committee worked with the 
CAO to offer customer discounts on coffee in the cafeterias 
when purchased in reusable travel mugs.
    The Committee has worked with the CAO's Office of Finance 
to finalize a revised pilot program for its Member and 
Committee purchase card program. Once internal controls and 
card procedures are completed, the Committee intends to 
authorize the expansion of the program from fourteen Member and 
Committee offices to seventy-four offices. The benefits of the 
program are numerous as it streamlines processes that 
consolidate and expedite vendor payments, improves 
accountability, and reduces House staff costs for voucher 
processing. The program also includes a 1% credit card rebate 
to the House. Safeguards for the program include restricting 
purchases to specific approved budget items and in amounts 
under $500. If the expanded pilot program is successful, the 
program will be made available to all interested Member and 
Committee offices.
    The Office of Procurement is in the process of updating its 
standard terms and conditions for contracts and purchase 
orders. Some of the standard language has not been updated 
since 1996. With these revisions, competition will expand 
resulting in reduced costs to the House, and the terms and 
conditions will meet best practices and procedures. At the 
suggestion of the Committee, the Office of Procurement is also 
revising its notification template for procurement actions. 
With the new template, the Committee will be able to more 
easily review and approve Advance Procurement Plans, make sure 
they flow as part of an overall program strategy, and allow for 
the timely execution of contract renewals.
    The CAO provided the Committee with a two year roadmap on 
May 18, 2011, for its enterprise applications which include 
PeopleSoft (Accounting, Procurement, and Assets), FinMart 
(Reporting, Data Warehouse and Budget Submission System), CAPS 
(Congressional Accounting and Personnel System), and 
Procurement Desktop (being phased out). The enterprise 
applications encompass an integrated solution for House fiscal, 
personnel, asset management, and procurement applications. The 
Committee will monitor the timely and fiscally responsible, 
staged roll-out of the enterprise applications as they occur.

House Information Resources

    The Committee also provided bipartisan oversight of one of 
CAO's largest subunits, House Information Resources (HIR), 
through weekly meetings held with Committee staff and CAO 
management. In these meetings, staff reviewed new initiatives 
and discussed issues and opportunities related to existing 
House services provided to the Members and committees, 
Leadership, and other support offices.
    In the beginning of the year, the Committee oversaw HIR's 
support for the 112th Congress transition. HIR completed the 
set up of Members' Washington, D.C. and district offices which 
included website development, telecommunications, and general 
systems support. New Members' servers are now hosted in a 
virtual environment at HIR and backed up at a second location. 
HIR enabled smooth transitions for Committees and Leadership 
offices as well.
    HIR conducted, and continues to conduct, several technology 
education sessions for system administrators aimed at providing 
ongoing technical instruction for House technical services. In 
addition, forums have been provided for vendors in order to 
educate Members and staff on new products and how they would 
work in the House environment. Finally, HIR's Information 
Security Office briefed freshman Member offices on House IT 
Security policies and best practices. Due to the important 
nature of the topic, HIR began publishing a monthly IT security 
newsletter in May 2011.
    The Committee's oversight of HIR has included other 
initiatives: HIR's support for additional mobile devices, 
internet-based communications services and wireless access. 
Apple iPhones, iPads, and Android phones and tablets are now 
available. They receive House email via a higher security 
application named ``Good'' which supports encryption at rest 
for data and requires a password. HIR has completed technical 
work to securely provide support for Skype and ooVoo. Vendors 
modified the legal agreements contained in the End User License 
Agreement (EULA) to conform to House Rules and statutes. 
Finally, HIR has completed the installation of public and 
internal wireless access points in Members' DC offices and 
selected public spaces and continues to install them for 
committees.
    In response to recommendations in the House's FY09 
Financial Statements Audits, HIR is in the process of 
completing Certification and Accreditation (C&A) on core 
financial systems. This is required by auditing standards to 
verify the accuracy of the annual financial statements. The 
Committee will continue to monitor their work in this area.
    In addition, under the oversight of the Committee, HIR 
released a new House.Gov web site using Drupal technology to 
increase functionality and reduce long-term support costs. 
Outside vendors are being qualified to support Member web sites 
using Drupal. Use of this standard is expected to increase 
competition and reduce costs to Members.

Inspector General

    Theresa Grafenstine was selected as the House Inspector 
General on July 30, 2010. Ms. Grafenstine previously served as 
Inspector General in the 111th Congress. House Rule II creates 
the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and charges the 
Committee with policy direction and oversight of the office. On 
a bipartisan basis, Committee staff meets with the OIG weekly 
to provide feedback on and ensure the successful implementation 
of the IG's annual work plan. The work plan includes a host of 
management advisory reviews as well as audits that identify 
inefficiencies, cost-savings, and areas of improvement 
throughout House operations. The OIG most frequently conducts 
reviews on matters within the jurisdiction of the Chief 
Administrative Officer, but also engages in projects pertaining 
to the Office of the Clerk, the Sergeant at Arms and those 
which are considered House-wide.
    To date in the 112th Congress, the OIG, with the approval 
and support of the Committee, produced two management advisory 
reports and six audit reports. Several evaluate whether 
appropriate controls are in place over the use of peer-to-peer 
software, software licensing, personally identifiable 
information, and contract monitoring. Others evaluate the 
deployment of the House's new financial system, ATLAS, and 
provide insight into whether Active Directory email accounts 
are being appropriately maintained.
    The report that is most notable, however, is the audit of 
the House's Fiscal Year 2009 Financial Statements, which was 
released May 26, 2011. The House received an unqualified 
opinion on its financial statements for the twelfth year in a 
row; however, it also received an adverse opinion on its 
internal controls over financial reporting. The lack of a 
management control program along with weaknesses in controls 
over information security contributed to this opinion. It is 
significant because this is the first time in twelve years the 
House has received an adverse opinion. The deficiencies were 
noted in previous audits, but CAO management at that time took 
no corrective action. Their disinterest and lack of cooperation 
is responsible for the delayed release of the report as well. 
The current CAO, appointed in July 2010, has been working 
tirelessly to implement the Inspector General's recommendations 
and ensure the FY11 audit will receive an unqualified opinion 
in all respects. The Committee's Subcommittee on Oversight held 
a hearing on the matter, on May 26, 2011, to highlight the 
importance of the issue and to receive assurance that 
corrective measures are being implemented in a timely manner. 
Throughout the remainder of the Congress, the Committee will 
continue to provide guidance and policy direction to the Office 
of the Inspector General and support its mission. The office 
serves a critical role in both ensuring the House's compliance 
with generally accepted accounting principles and applicable 
governmental policies, and detecting waste, fraud and abuse.

The Architect of the Capitol

    The Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is responsible for the 
maintenance, operation, development and preservation of the 
entire Capitol Complex which includes 17.4 million square feet 
of buildings and more than 460 acres of land. Although some 
decisions regarding the management of the House buildings and 
grounds are the responsibility of the House Office Building 
Commission, the Committee is charged with overseeing the AOC 
per House Rules.
    Over the past six months, a bipartisan group of Committee 
staff met regularly with the Architect and his Superintendent 
of House Office Buildings to discuss the status of a variety of 
ongoing construction, renovation, and maintenance projects 
aimed at improving the safety and accessibility of the Capitol 
Complex while also maintaining the aesthetics. The Committee 
helps ensure these projects are both on time and within budget 
while causing the least disruption to the work of the Congress. 
These projects include the renovation of the East House 
Underground Garage, the replacement of the Rayburn House Office 
Building's roof, the restoration of the Bartholdi Fountain, and 
extensive repairs to the campus' utility tunnel system. Work is 
also nearing completion on the Longworth House Office 
Building's Prescriptive Egress, an important fire and life 
safety project. Although major renovation of the Cannon House 
Office Building is not set to commence until at least FY 2016, 
bipartisan Committee staff and representatives from the House 
leadership offices have been participating in regular planning 
meetings.
    In addition to overseeing the AOC's construction projects, 
the Committee was apprised of the energy conservation measures 
instituted by the AOC to ensure that they are achieving the 
goals set forth by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 
2007 (EISA), and that they are cost-effective. Recent focus has 
been placed on the AOC's next waste hauling contract, which is 
due to expire in August. The Committee has encouraged the AOC 
to examine waste-to-energy as a potential option and include it 
in the Request for Proposal on the next contract.
    H. Con. Res. 135, which passed the House and then the 
Senate on July 10, 2009, directed the AOC to design and install 
a marker in Emancipation Hall commemorating the role that slave 
labor played in the construction of the Capitol. Since that 
time, the AOC developed a proposal for the marker which was 
extensively reviewed by both House and Senate stakeholders 
including the Committee. The design features a bronze plaque 
mounted above a block of sandstone that was quarried by slaves 
and originally part of the Capitol's East Front. On February 
28, 2011, Chairman Lungren approved the design and placement of 
the marker for the western end of the northern wall of 
Emancipation Hall and the Senate concurred. Upon securing 
funding, the AOC will continue with the fabrication and 
placement of the marker.

Capitol Visitor Center

    The U.S. Capitol Visitor Center's (CVC) mission is to 
provide a welcoming and educational environment for visitors to 
learn about the House, the Senate, and the legislative process, 
as well as the history of the architecture and art of the U.S. 
Capitol. By law, overall responsibility for the CVC's 
operations and maintenance resides with the Architect of the 
Capitol, while the Committee on House Administration and the 
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration provide policy 
review and oversight of the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center.
    The Committee on House Administration provided significant 
guidance for the hiring of four senior level positions in the 
first quarter of the 112th Congress. The Chief Executive 
Officer for Visitor Services, the Deputy Chief Executive 
Officer for Visitor Services, the Director of Visitor Services, 
and the Assistant Director for Visitor Operations were all 
filled with highly qualified individuals. The new CEO for 
Visitor Services is the former Director of Visitor Services for 
the CVC and former Associate Director for Guest Services at 
Mount Vernon Estate and Gardens, with over 20 years of 
experience in the visitor services industry. The new Deputy CEO 
for Visitor Services comes from the U.S. Capitol Police as the 
Deputy Chief of Police, with 20 years of experience around the 
Capitol Complex. The new Director of Visitor Services is the 
former Assistant Director for Training with the U.S. Capitol 
Guide Service and the former Deputy Director of Visitor 
Services for the CVC. And, the new Assistant Director for 
Visitor Operations comes from the U.S. Coast Guard after 28 
years, serving as the Superintendent of the Coast Guard 
Academy.
    The Committee worked with the Visitor Services Division to 
include a Civil War tour and a special viewing of the Rotunda 
each day after the time when public tours end. These new 
opportunities for guests are expected to provide greater 
engagement with constituents visiting the Capitol, while 
further utilizing the expertise of the Visitor Guides.
    Finally, the Committee was instrumental in providing 
oversight of the new CVC Online Orientation Video. The video is 
seven minutes long and gives a snapshot of what guests should 
expect when they visit the CVC. Additionally, it will be a 
valuable resource for both classroom activities and individuals 
seeking greater knowledge about the Capitol Complex.

Library of Congress

    During the first six months of the 1st session of the 112th 
Congress, Committee oversight staff held fifteen oversight 
meetings with various Library of Congress (LOC) staff, 
including representatives from, and regarding issues related 
to, the Copyright Office (Acting Register of Copyrights Maria 
Pallante was appointed Register of Copyrights and Director of 
the Copyright Office on June 2, 2011), the Office of the 
Inspector General, the Budget Office (specifically regarding 
the FY11 Continuing Resolution and the Library of Congress's 
nominal and ``effective'' budget cuts), the Congressional 
Research Service (Director Dan Mulhollan stepped down April 2, 
2011), the Library's Surplus Books Program (the program is 
seeking to update its online capacities), how the potential 
government shutdown would have affected the Library, the Law 
Library, the Office of Congressional Information and 
Publishing, the Legislative Information Systems Office, and 
Human Resources. The oversight staff toured the Library's 
Packard Campus for Audio-
Visual Conservation in Culpeper, Virginia, led by Dr. Patrick 
Loughney, Chief of the Packard Campus. Finally, H.R. 1934, a 
bill regarding surplus and obsolete Library property, was 
considered at the Committee's May 25, 2011 markup and ordered 
reported favorably by the Committee. The House passed H.R. 1934 
on June 16, 2011.
    Earlier in the Congress, at the direction and oversight of 
the Committee, the Library's Congressional Research Service 
organized an Issues Seminar for New Members of Congress. The 
seminar covered issues ranging from federal spending to our 
policy in Afghanistan. Speakers included experts from CRS, 
leading academics and members of the Administration, including 
Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Joint Committee on the Library

    The Joint Committee on the Library (JCL) is a joint 
committee of the Congress devoted to the affairs and 
administration of the Library of Congress. There are five 
Members of each house on the Committee. Membership consists of 
the Chairman and four Members of the Senate Committee on Rules 
and Administration, the Chairman and three Members of the 
Committee on House Administration, and the Chairman of the 
Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch of the House Committee 
on Appropriations. The Joint Committee has oversight of the 
operations of the Library of Congress, as well as management of 
the congressional art collection (including the contributions 
of two statues from each state to the National Statuary Hall 
Collection) and the United States Botanic Garden.
    On June 22, 2011, the Joint Committee on the Library held 
its organizational meeting. As specified in H. Res. 197 and S. 
Res. 103, the Members of the Joint Committee on the Library for 
the 112th Congress are Rep. Harper, Rep. Lungren, Rep. Brady, 
Rep. Lofgren, Rep. Crenshaw, Sen. Schumer, Sen. Durbin, Sen. 
Leahy, Sen. Alexander, and Sen. Cochran. At the meeting, the 
Joint Committee elected Sen. Schumer as the Chairman and Rep. 
Harper as the Vice-Chairman for the 112th Congress. In 
addition, the Joint Committee adopted rules of procedure and 
took an official photograph during the organizational meeting.
    Typically, most of the Joint Committee's duties involve the 
approval of statue placement, statue replacement, and statue 
removals and approvals. On May 3, 2011, the unveiling of 
President Ford's bronze statue took place in the Rotunda, which 
the Joint Committee on the Library and the Committee had 
previously been instrumental in planning and finalizing. In 
addition, during the 112th Congress, as directed by law, the 
Joint Committee on the Library has begun consultations 
regarding a new Congressional Research Service Director.

House Fine Arts Board

    The House Fine Arts Board (FAB) was established in 1988 
under the original statute 40 U.S.C. 188 (c). The current 
statutes are 2 U.S.C. 2121-2122. The Fine Arts Board is 
comprised of the five House Members of the Joint Committee on 
the Library. The Fine Arts Board, in consultation with the 
House Office Building Commission (comprised of the Speaker, the 
Majority Leader and the Minority Leader), has authority over 
works of fine art and historical objects that are the property 
of Congress and are for display in the House wing of the 
Capitol or in the House Office Buildings. The Board also 
accepts gifts of fine art and historical objects on behalf of 
the House, and the Clerk's office maintains the collection.
    The Board approves all Committee Chairmen portraits in the 
House. In the first six months of the 112th Congress, the 
following two Committee Chairmen portraits were completed and 
added to the House collection: Rep. Collin Peterson 
(Agriculture, 110th and 111th Congresses), unveiled April 2011; 
and, Rep. Edolphus Towns (Oversight and Government Reform, 
111th Congress), unveiled May 2011. There are currently three 
Committee Chairmen portraits in process: Rep. Tom Lantos 
(Foreign Affairs, 110th Congress), approved April 2011 with the 
unveiling scheduled for July 2011; Rep. Ike Skelton (Armed 
Services, 110th and 111th Congresses), initial approval April 
2011; and Rep. Spencer Bachus (Financial Services, 112th 
Congress), initial approval May 2011. Finally, there are three 
Committee Chairmen portraits in process with the FAB, but no 
additional formal action has been taken: Rep. Chris Cox 
(Homeland Security, 109th Congress); Rep. Charles Rangel (Ways 
and Means, 110th and 111th Congresses); and Rep. Chris Smith 
(Veterans' Affairs, 107th and 108th Congresses).

Smithsonian Institution

    Founded in 1846 ``for the increase and diffusion of 
knowledge,'' the Smithsonian is composed of 19 museums, 
numerous research centers, and the National Zoo. Over 137 
million objects reside in the collections and the Institution 
received over 30 million visitors in 2010. Approximately two-
thirds of the Institution's funding is from direct federal 
appropriations. Trust funds, which include private donations 
and revenues from museum shops, restaurants and theaters, 
provide the remaining funding.
    Governance of the Smithsonian is vested in a 17-member 
Board of Regents, consisting of the Chief Justice, the Vice 
President, six Members of Congress, and nine citizen regents 
nominated by the Board and approved by joint resolution of 
Congress. Legislation nominating citizen regents is referred to 
the Committee. In March and April, Committee Members met with 
nominees for three citizen regent appointments to the 
Smithsonian Board of Regents and discussed Smithsonian 
governance, challenges and programmatic objectives. Following 
the meetings, the Committee supported S.J. Res. 8, a joint 
resolution providing for the appointment of Steve Case as a 
citizen regent of the Board of Regents. On April 12, 2011, the 
House adopted S.J. Res. 8 by unanimous consent. The Committee 
also met with citizen regent nominees Shirley Ann Jackson and 
Robert Kogod and discussed similar issues. On June 16, 2011, 
the House adopted S.J. Res. 7, a joint resolution providing for 
the reappointment of Shirley Ann Jackson as a citizen regent of 
the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, by 
unanimous consent. On the same day, the House adopted S.J. Res. 
9, a joint resolution providing for the reappointment of Robert 
P. Kogod as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the 
Smithsonian Institution, by unanimous consent.
    On May 5, 2011, the National Museum of the American Latino 
Commission submitted its final report to the President and 
Congress. The 23 member Commission, comprised of members 
appointed by Congress and the President, completed their report 
pursuant to the direction of P.L. 110-229. The Committee has 
been reviewing the Commission's findings.
    The Committee has been involved in oversight of the 
Smithsonian Institution. The Committee exercised appropriate 
oversight of the National Zoo, including a staff on-site visit 
and discussions regarding security, renovations, capital 
projects and animal care. Committee staff met with Smithsonian 
staff to discuss the possible impact of reduced federal 
appropriations on Smithsonian activities and the status of the 
Institution's facilities management program. Committee staff 
also met with the Inspector General to discuss inventory 
management issues, the FY 2010 financial audit and ongoing work 
of the office.

Joint Committee on Printing and U.S. Government Printing Office

    By law, the Government Printing Office (GPO) produces, 
protects, preserves, and distributes the official publications 
and information products of the Congress and Federal 
Government. By House rule, the Committee on House 
Administration has oversight of and legislative jurisdiction 
over the Government Printing Office.
    The Subcommittee on Oversight held an oversight hearing of 
the GPO on May 11, 2011, titled ``GPO--Issues and Challenges: 
How will GPO Transition to the Future?'' The hearing focused on 
GPO's business model and printing infrastructure and whether 
both entities are in a position to meet the future needs of 
Congress in the 2015-2020 timeframe. There were two panels with 
a total of four witnesses, one of whom was The Honorable 
William J. Boarman, the 26th Public Printer of the United 
States.
    The Committee worked closely with GPO and the Senate Rules 
and Administration Committee on the production of the 
Congressional Pictorial Directory for the 112th Congress. The 
Committee assisted with the compilation of pictures and 
background information as well as the formatting and styling. 
Rep. Lungren selected the front cover of the Directory which 
was specifically chosen to highlight the United States Capitol 
and the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial in recognition of the 150th 
anniversary of the start of the Civil War. The directories were 
printed and distributed in late May 2011.
    The Committee worked with the GPO to create a survey for 
Member offices to opt out of printed daily and permanent 
Congressional publications that are available online through 
GPO's Federal Digital System (FDsys). Member offices had the 
option to decline to receive the following publications: the 
Congressional Record, Congressional Record Index, Federal 
Register, Federal Register Index, and the Code of Federal 
Regulations. The total potential savings for the legislative 
branch, as a result of this survey, could be up to $1.3 
million.
    On June 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight held a 
hearing entitled ``Modernizing Information Delivery in the 
House.'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from Rep. Greg Walden 
of Oregon, Rep. Michael Honda of California, Mr. Thomas Bruce, 
Research Associate and Director at Legal Information Institute 
at Cornell Law School, Mr. Kent Cunningham, Chief Technology 
Advisor for the U.S. Public Sector at the Microsoft 
Corporation, and Mr. Morgan Reed, Executive Director of the 
Association for Competitive Technology.
    By law, the Chairman of the Committee on House 
Administration and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on 
Rules and Administration serve with four other Members of each 
committee on the Joint Committee on Printing (JCP). The seat of 
the chair for the Joint Committee on Printing rotates between 
the House and Senate at the start of each new Congress; for the 
112th Congress, the chairmanship resides in the House. The 
Chairman of the Committee on House Administration traditionally 
is seated as the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the JCP, 
depending on which legislative body is in control of the Joint 
Committee. However, for this Congress, Rep. Harper serves as 
the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Printing.
    On June 22, 2011, the Joint Committee on Printing held its 
organizational meeting. As specified in H. Res. 197, the JCP 
membership for the House in the 112th Congress is comprised of 
Rep. Lungren, Rep. Harper, Rep. Schock, Rep. Brady, and Rep. 
Gonzalez. As specified in S. Res. 103, the JCP membership for 
the Senate is comprised of Sen. Schumer, Sen. Murray, Sen. 
Udall, Sen. Alexander, and Sen. Chambliss. At the meeting, the 
Joint Committee designated Rep. Harper as Chairman and Sen. 
Schumer as Vice-Chairman. Additionally, the Joint Committee 
adopted its rules of procedure and took an official photograph.

Office of Compliance

    The Committee exercised its responsibility for matters 
requiring congressional action involving the Office of 
Compliance (OOC), the independent entity established by the 
Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) to administer and 
regulate the implementation of the Act. The Committee's 
oversight activities included review of proposed statutory 
changes approved by the OOC's Board of Directors and regular 
meetings with OOC's staff to discuss ongoing activities and 
initiatives and the implementation of regulations concerning 
statutes applied to the Legislative Branch by the CAA.

Elections

    During the first six months of the 112th Congress, the 
Committee on House Administration conducted vigorous oversight 
of Federal election policy. The Committee's oversight focused 
on matters including obstacles to military and overseas voters 
and streamlining election-related agencies to achieve more 
efficiency.
    A bill to reduce federal spending and the deficit by 
terminating taxpayer financing of presidential election 
campaigns and party conventions, H.R. 359, was referred to the 
Committee and passed by the House. The bill would realize 
significant savings for taxpayers by eliminating the 
Presidential Election Campaign Fund. The Presidential Election 
Campaign Fund has seen progressively declining support in the 
general population, demonstrated by fewer and fewer citizens 
agreeing to have a portion of their taxes used for the fund. 
Participation declined from a high of 28.7% in 1980 to only 
7.3% in 2010. Candidates, too, have rejected the fund. Major 
party candidates have begun declining primary election funding 
from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund in increasing 
numbers since 2000. In 2008, for the first time, a candidate 
declined general election funding from the fund. The 
Committee's majority Members supported H.R. 359.
    The Committee analyzed the impact of the Military and 
Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act in its hearing on 
``Military and Overseas Voting: Effectiveness of the MOVE Act 
in the 2010 Election.'' The Committee heard from Assistant 
Attorney General Thomas Perez on the Department of Justice 
(DOJ) Civil Rights Division's mixed results in ensuring 
compliance. The Committee also heard from West Virginia 
Secretary of State Natalie Tennant, Co-Director of Indiana 
Election Division J. Bradley King, and Escambia County, 
Florida, Director of Elections David Stafford for state and 
local election officials' perspectives on compliance with the 
MOVE Act. The Committee heard from Mr. Rick Jones and Mr. Eric 
Eversole on the impact of the DOJ's mixed record of MOVE Act 
enforcement on service members. The Committee explored the 
methods that the Department of Justice and state election 
officials used to determine MOVE Act compliance.
    The Subcommittee on Elections held a hearing on ``Election 
Assistance Commission Operations and 2012 Budget Request.'' The 
witnesses were the Commissioners of the Election Assistance 
Commission (EAC), Ms. Donetta Davidson and Ms. Gineen Bresso, 
the EAC's Executive Director, Mr. Thomas Wilkey, the EAC's 
Chief Operating Officer, Ms. Alice Miller and the EAC's Chief 
Financial Officer, Ms. Annette Lafferty. During the hearing, 
the Subcommittee explored the EAC's history of poor management 
practices, excess administrative overhead costs and lack of any 
clear direction for the agency in the future. The Subcommittee 
learned that over half of the EAC's budget was devoted solely 
to overhead. As a result, the EAC's proposed budget would have 
it spend approximately $5 million to operate approximately $3 
million worth of programs. The Subcommittee also learned of 
potential employment discrimination against a military member 
by the Election Assistance Commission in its most recent hiring 
process for a general counsel. Subsequently, Committee Members 
and staff corresponded with the Election Assistance Commission 
concerning its employment practices.
    The Subcommittee on Elections analyzed the results of the 
last election in its hearing on ``The 2010 Election: A Look 
Back at What Went Right and Wrong.'' During this hearing, the 
Subcommittee heard testimony from Colorado Secretary of State 
Scott Gessler concerning his research indicating that over 
5,000 non-citizens may have voted in 2010. Minnesota Secretary 
of State Mark Ritchie testified on how Minnesota has changed 
its laws to comply with the MOVE Act and how investment in 
digital technologies can improve the accuracy of voting lists 
through the use of the Social Security death registry and the 
National Change of Address database. Ms. Susan Gill, the 
Supervisor of Elections for Citrus County, Florida, cautioned 
about the looming costs facing local election officials in 
light of redistricting. She discussed the success of photo 
identification and its use in Florida elections. Mr. Ken 
Carbullido of Elections Systems and Software discussed his 
company's voting machine, the ES&S 200, and changes to its 
software to correct problems seen in the last election. A 
public interest advocate, Mr. Larry Norden, discussed possible 
changes to voter registration systems.
    The Subcommittee on Elections held a hearing on H.R. 672, a 
bill to terminate the Election Assistance Commission. H.R. 672, 
introduced by Rep. Harper, was designed to terminate the 
Election Assistance Commission while preserving a small number 
of its functions by transferring them to appropriate agencies. 
The bill would realize significant savings of taxpayer money 
while preserving the functions necessary to state and local 
election officials. At this hearing, the Subcommittee heard 
from Rep. Hoyer who traced the history of federal involvement 
in elections and the history of the Help America Vote Act. The 
Subcommittee also heard from New Hampshire Secretary of State 
Bill Gardner who discussed how little value many of the EAC's 
activities provide to state and local election officials. 
Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann discussed how 
the National Association of Secretaries of State twice voted to 
recommend abolishing the EAC. Secretary Hosemann also expressed 
frustration with how the EAC has shifted data formats for 
election surveys, resulting in difficulties complying with 
requested elections data. Florida Secretary of State Kurt 
Browning also expressed support for H.R. 672. He stated that 
the EAC had outlived its usefulness and detailed his 
frustrating inability to get answers from the EAC to relatively 
simple queries. Ms. Jill LaVine, the Registrar of Voters for 
Sacramento County, California, explained the useful 
clearinghouse function of the EAC. Mr. John Fortier advocated 
for the collection of election data that the EAC currently 
provides.
    At a meeting of the Committee, H.R. 672 was ordered 
reported favorably with an amendment. The amendment, based on 
feedback from state and local election officials, retained in 
consolidated form two of the boards that had previously advised 
the EAC on development of voluntary voting system guidelines, 
thereby retaining a role for state and local officials in the 
testing and certification of voting systems. The amendment also 
provided for testing and certification functions to be 
performed at the Federal Election Commission, rather than at 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology as was 
written in the original bill. As reported, H.R. 672 would 
terminate the EAC and transfer its testing and certification 
and clearinghouse functions to the Federal Election Commission. 
Taxpayers would see significant savings from the elimination of 
a federal agency that has outlived its usefulness.
    H.R. 672 was considered by the House under suspension of 
the Rules on July 22, 2011, and was not adopted by a vote of 
235 yeas to 187 nays.

Lapse in Appropriations

    The Committee, in its role as custodian of the accounts of 
the House, prepared and distributed guidance on House 
operations during a lapse in appropriations. The guidance 
informed Members of the relevant legal constraints, including 
appropriations law and the Constitution. The guidance also 
informed Members of the appropriate steps to take to ensure 
they could continue to receive the support necessary to perform 
their constitutional responsibilities. The guidance further 
explained the impact of a lapse in appropriations on employees' 
health benefits, student loan repayment programs, and transit 
benefits. The Committee advised Members on the appropriate 
decision-making processes for determining which of their 
employees are necessary to perform their constitutional 
responsibilities. The Committee advised Members of the 
appropriate rules, regulations and laws concerning employment 
practices and decisions made in the event of a lapse in 
appropriations.
    The Committee also worked with the Officers of the House to 
ensure that their operations took appropriate actions during a 
lapse in appropriations. The Committee designed plans with the 
Officers to maintain a secure Capitol Complex during a lapse in 
appropriations. The Committee further worked with the Officers 
to ensure that necessary legislative operations would continue 
during a lapse in appropriations.
    In addition, the Committee sent out Dear Colleague letters 
setting forth the appropriate steps to be taken in the event of 
a lapse in appropriations. The Committee further sent out 
letters describing the levels of service that would be provided 
to Members, staff and the public. The Committee also advised 
Members of methods to return their salary to the Treasury 
should they wish to do so in the event of a lapse in 
appropriations.

Activities of the Office of General Counsel

    The Committee, in its role as custodian of the accounts of 
the House, approved a contract on behalf of the Office of 
General Counsel. The contract was the result of a vote by the 
Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group recommending the Speaker to 
have the office of General Counsel engage outside counsel, if 
necessary, to defend the constitutionality of section 3 of the 
Defense of Marriage Act.

Continuing Resolution

    The Committee prepared analysis of the impacts of proposed 
amendments in H.R. 1 on legislative branch operations, 
including one amendment for a 10% across the board reduction in 
legislative branch spending. The Committee's analysis noted the 
number of Capitol Police officers who would have been laid off 
if the amendment were adopted.

Cutting Spending

    The Committee's Members supported H. Res. 22. H. Res. 22 
cut the authorization for Member's Representational Allowances, 
Leadership Offices and Committees by 5%. H. Res. 22 was passed 
by the House.

Reducing Printing Costs

    On January 18, 2011, the House passed H.R. 292, the Stop 
OverPrinting (STOP) Act by a vote of 399-0. The bill would 
require the Public Printer to stop printing unnecessary copies 
of bills and instead make them available online, and was 
referred to the Committee upon introduction.

Additional Oversight Activities of the Committee

Congressional Internship Program for Individuals with Intellectual 
        Disabilities

    This program was established by Rep. Harper in the spring 
of 2010, and it is administered by the Committee on House 
Administration. The internship program provides students with 
varying intellectual disabilities an opportunity to gain 
congressional work experience. The program, which includes 
spring, summer and fall sessions, pairs congressional offices 
with students from George Mason University's Mason LIFE 
Program--a postsecondary education program for young adults 
with intellectual disabilities. In 2010, the program started as 
a pilot with six House offices participating. By the third 
session (spring 2011), the program included nearly twenty 
congressional offices from both chambers.

House Technology Operations Team

    The House Technology Operations Team was established in 
March 2011 as part of the Speaker's initiative to identify and 
implement technological solutions to the House's communications 
and transparency roadblocks. Members of the Committee and its 
staff have participated in the House Technology Operations Team 
since its inception. The group's first accomplishment was to 
work with the office of the Chief Administrative Officer to 
complete the redesign of House.gov. Completed in May 2011, the 
redesigned site includes new user-friendly features designed to 
increase transparency and constituent access to Member sites 
and legislative information.

Parking Policy

    At its organizational meeting on January 25, 2011, the 
Committee adopted a parking policy for the 112th Congress 
appropriate to meet the needs of the House. Committee staff 
conducted regular oversight of House Parking Security to ensure 
compliance with the parking policy and to review the status of 
renovations of the East Underground Garage.

                 HEARINGS AND MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEE

    On January, 25, 2011, the full Committee met to organize 
for the 112th Congress. During the hearing, the Committee 
adopted four Committee resolutions: Committee Resolution 112-1: 
Rules of the Committee on House Administration, Committee 
Resolution 112-2, Election of Chairs and Members of 
Subcommittees, Committee Resolution 112-3, the Committee 
Oversight Plan, and Committee Resolution 112-4, the House 
Parking Policy for the 112th Congress.
    On February 15, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing, 
``Military and Overseas Voting: Effectiveness of the MOVE Act 
in the 2010 Election.'' The Committee heard testimony from The 
Honorable Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for Civil 
Rights, U.S. Department of Justice, Mr. Eric Eversole, 
Executive Director, Military Voter Protection Project, Mr. J. 
Bradley King, Co-Director, Election Division, Indiana Secretary 
of State, Mr. David Stafford, Supervisor of Elections, Escambia 
County, Florida, The Honorable Natalie Tennant, Secretary of 
State, West Virginia, and Mr. Rick Jones, Legislative Director, 
National Association for Uniformed Services
    On March 1, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing, 
``Committee Funding for the 112th Congress.'' The Committee 
heard testimony from each of the Chairs and Ranking Members of 
the standing and select committees regarding their committee 
budget requests for the 112th Congress.
    On March 2, 2011, the full Committee continued its hearing, 
``Committee Funding for the 112th Congress''. The Committee 
heard testimony from each of the Chairs and Ranking Members of 
the standing and select committees regarding their committee 
budget requests for the 112th Congress.
    On March 9, 2011, the full Committee met to mark up H. Res. 
147, the Committee funding resolution, and three Committee 
Resolutions: Committee Resolution 112-5, to approve franked 
mail allowances for Committees for the 112th Congress, 
Committee Resolution 112-6, to approve Committee views and 
estimates for fiscal year 2012, and Committee Resolution 112-7, 
to approve a Committee consulting contract.
    On March 17, 2011, the Subcommittee on Elections held a 
hearing, ``Election Assistance Commission Operations and 2012 
Budget Request.'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from The 
Honorable Donetta Davidson, Commissioner, U.S. Election 
Assistance Commission, The Honorable Gineen Bresso, 
Commissioner, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Mr. Thomas 
Wilkey, Executive Director, U.S. Election Assistance 
Commission, Ms. Alice Miller, Chief Operating Officer, U.S. 
Election Assistance Commission, and Ms. Annette Lafferty, Chief 
Financial Officer, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
    On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee on Elections held a 
hearing, ``The 2010 Election: A Look Back at What Went Right 
and Wrong.'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from The 
Honorable Scott Gessler, Colorado Secretary of State, The 
Honorable Mark Ritchie, Minnesota Secretary of State, Ms. Susan 
Gill, Supervisor of Elections, Citrus County, Florida, Mr. Ken 
Carbullido, Senior Vice-President of Voting Systems, Election 
Systems & Software, Inc., and Mr. Lawrence Norden, Deputy 
Director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice at New 
York University School of Law.
    On April 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Elections held a 
hearing, ``H.R. 672--To Terminate the Election Assistance 
Commission.'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from Rep. Steny 
Hoyer, The Honorable Bill Gardner, New Hampshire Secretary of 
State, The Honorable Delbert Hosemann, Mississippi Secretary of 
State, The Honorable Kurt Browning, Florida Secretary of State, 
Ms. Jill LaVine, Registrar of Voters, Sacramento County, 
California, and Mr. John Fortier, American Enterprise 
Institute.
    On May 11, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight held a 
hearing, ``GPO--Issues and Challenges: How will GPO Transition 
to 
the Future?'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from The 
Honorable William Boarman, Public Printer of the United States, 
Government Printing Office, Mr. James Hamilton, Group Director, 
InfoTrends, Mr. Eric D. Belcher, President and Chief Executive 
Officer, InnerWorkings, Inc., and Mr. Eric Petersen, Specialist 
in American National Government, Congressional Research 
Service.
    On May 25, 2011, the full Committee met to mark up H.R. 
672, to terminate the Election Assistance Commission, and H.R 
1934, to improve certain administrative operations of the 
Library of Congress. The Committee also approved Committee 
Resolution 112-8, changing the rank order of Democratic Members 
of the Subcommittee on Elections.
    On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight held a 
hearing, ``Inspector General Audit of the House's FY 2009 
Financial Statements.'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from 
the Honorable Theresa Grafenstine, Inspector General of the 
U.S. House of Representatives, and The Honorable Dan Strodel, 
Chief Administrative Officer of the U.S. House of 
Representatives.
    On June 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight held a 
hearing entitled ``Modernizing Information Delivery in the 
House.'' The Subcommittee heard testimony from Rep. Greg Walden 
of Oregon, Rep. Michael Honda of California, Mr. Thomas Bruce, 
Research Associate and Director at Legal Information Institute 
at Cornell Law School, Mr. Kent Cunningham, Chief Technology 
Advisor for the U.S. Public Sector at the Microsoft 
Corporation, and Mr. Morgan Reed, Executive Director of the 
Association for Competitive Technology.
    On June 22, 2011, the Joint Committee on the Library held 
its organizational meeting. As specified in H. Res. 197 and S. 
Res. 103, the Members of the Joint Committee on the Library for 
the 112th Congress are Rep. Harper, Rep. Lungren, Rep. Brady, 
Rep. Lofgren, Rep. Ander Crenshaw, Sen. Schumer, Sen. Durbin, 
Sen. Leahy, Sen. Alexander, and Sen. Cochran. At the meeting, 
the Joint Committee designated Sen. Schumer as the Chairman and 
Rep. Harper as the Vice-Chairman for the 112th Congress. In 
addition, the Joint Committee adopted rules of procedure and 
took an official photograph during the organizational meeting.
    On June 22, 2011, the Joint Committee on Printing held its 
organizational meeting. As specified in H. Res. 197, the JCP 
membership for the House in the 112th Congress is comprised of 
Rep. Lungren, Rep. Harper, Rep. Schock, Rep. Brady, and Rep. 
Gonzalez. As specified in S. Res. 103, the JCP membership for 
the Senate is comprised of Sen. Schumer, Sen. Murray, Sen. 
Udall, Sen. Alexander, and Sen. Chambliss. At the meeting, the 
Joint Committee designated Rep. Harper as Chairman and Sen. 
Schumer as Vice-Chairman. Additionally, the Joint Committee 
adopted its rules of procedure and took an official photograph.
                               Appendix A


             Rules of the Committee on House Administration


                      One Hundred Twelfth Congress


                       (Adopted January 25, 2011)


                               RULE NO. 1

General provisions

    (a) The Rules of the House are the rules of the Committee 
so far as applicable, except that a motion to recess from day 
to day is a privileged motion in the Committee. Each 
subcommittee of the committee is a part of the committee and is 
subject to the authority and direction of the chair and to its 
rules as far as applicable.
    (b) The Committee is authorized at any time to conduct such 
investigations and studies as it may consider necessary or 
appropriate in the exercise of its responsibilities under House 
Rule X and, subject to the adoption of expense resolutions as 
required by House Rule X, clause 6, to incur expenses 
(including travel expenses) in connection therewith.
    (c) The Committee is authorized to have printed and bound 
testimony and other data presented at hearings held by the 
Committee, and to make such information available to the 
public. All costs of stenographic services and transcripts in 
connection with any meeting or hearing of the Committee shall 
be paid from the appropriate House account.
    (d) The Committee shall submit to the House, not later than 
the 30th day after June 1 and December 1 of each year, a 
semiannual report on the activities of the committee under 
House Rules X and XI.
    (e) The Committee's rules shall be made publicly available 
in electronic form and published in the Congressional Record 
not later than 30 days after the Committee is elected in each 
odd-numbered year.

                               RULE NO. 2

Regular and special meetings

    (a) The regular meeting date of the Committee on House 
Administration shall be the second Wednesday of every month 
when the House is in session in accordance with Clause 2(b) of 
House Rule XI. Additional meetings may be called by the Chair 
of the Committee as she or he may deem necessary or at the 
request of a majority of the members of the Committee in 
accordance with Clause 2(c) of House Rule XI. The determination 
of the business to be considered at each meeting shall be made 
by the Chair subject to Clause 2(c) of House Rule XI. A 
regularly scheduled meeting may be dispensed with if, in the 
judgment of the Chair, there is no need for the meeting.
    (b) If the Chair is not present at any meeting of the 
Committee, or at the discretion of the Chair, the Vice Chair of 
the Committee shall preside at the meeting. If the Chair and 
Vice Chair of the Committee are not present at any meeting of 
the Committee, the ranking member of the majority party who is 
present shall preside at the meeting.
    (c) The Chair, in the case of meetings to be conducted by 
the Committee, and the appropriate subcommittee chair, in the 
case of meetings to be conducted by a subcommittee, shall make 
public announcement of the date, place, and subject matter of 
any meeting to be conducted on any measure or matter. Such 
meeting shall not commence earlier than the third day on which 
members have notice thereof. If the Chair, with the concurrence 
of the ranking minority member, determines that there is good 
cause to begin the meeting sooner, or if the Committee so 
determines by majority vote, a quorum being present, the Chair 
shall make the announcement at the earliest possible date. The 
announcement shall promptly be made publicly available in 
electronic form and published in the Daily Digest.
    (d) The Chair, in the case of meetings to be conducted by 
the Committee, and the appropriate subcommittee chair, in the 
case of meetings to be conducted by a subcommittee, shall make 
available on the Committee's web site the text of any 
legislation to be marked up at a meeting at least 24 hours 
before such meeting (or at the time of an announcement made 
within 24 hours of such meeting). This requirement shall also 
apply to any resolution or regulation to be considered at a 
meeting.

                               RULE NO. 3

Open meetings

    As required by Clause 2(g), of House Rule XI, each meeting 
for the transaction of business, including the markup of 
legislation of the Committee shall be open to the public except 
when the Committee in open session and with a quorum present 
determines by record vote that all or part of the remainder of 
the meeting on that day shall be closed to the public because 
disclosure of matters to be considered would endanger national 
security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement 
information, or would tend to defame, degrade or incriminate 
any person, or otherwise would violate any law or rule of the 
House: Provided, however, that no person other than members of 
the Committee, and such congressional staff and such other 
persons as the Committee may authorize, shall be present in any 
business or markup session which has been closed to the public. 
To the maximum extent practicable, the Chair shall cause to be 
provided audio and video coverage of each hearing or meeting 
that allows the public to easily listen to and view the 
proceedings and maintain the recordings of such coverage in a 
manner that is easily accessible to the public.

                               RULE NO. 4

Records and rollcalls

    (a)(1) A record vote shall be held if requested by any 
member of the Committee.
    (2) The result of each record vote in any meeting of the 
Committee shall be made available for inspection by the public 
at reasonable times at the Committee offices, including a 
description of the amendment, motion, order or other 
proposition; the name of each member voting for and against; 
and the members present but not voting.
    (3) The Chairman shall make the record of the votes on any 
question on which a record vote is demanded available on the 
Committee's website not later than 48 hours after such vote is 
taken (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays). Such 
record shall include a description of the amendment, motion, 
order, or other proposition, the name of each member voting for 
and each member voting against such amendment, motion, order, 
or proposition, and the names of those members of the committee 
present but not voting.
    (4) The Chairman shall make available on the Committee's 
website not later than 24 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, 
and legal holidays) after the adoption of any amendment to a 
measure or matter the text of such amendment.
    (b)(1) Subject to subparagraph (2), the Chair may postpone 
further proceedings when a record vote is ordered on the 
question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an 
amendment. The Chair may resume proceedings on a postponed 
request at any time.
    (2) In exercising postponement authority under subparagraph 
(1), the Chair shall take all reasonable steps necessary to 
notify members on the resumption of proceedings on any 
postponed record vote.
    (3) When proceedings resume on a postponed question, 
notwithstanding any intervening order for the previous 
question, an underlying proposition shall remain subject to 
further debate or amendment to the same extent as when the 
question was postponed.
    (c) All Committee and subcommittee hearings, records, data, 
charts, and files shall be kept separate and distinct from the 
congressional office records of the member serving as Chair; 
and such records shall be the property of the House and all 
members of the House shall have access thereto.
    (d) House records of the Committee which are at the 
National Archives shall be made available pursuant to House 
Rule VII. The Chair shall notify the ranking minority member of 
any decision to withhold a record pursuant to the rule, and 
shall present the matter to the Committee upon written request 
of any Committee member.
    (e) To the maximum extent feasible, the Committee shall 
make its publications available in electronic form.

                               RULE NO. 5

Proxies

    No vote by any member in the Committee may be cast by 
proxy.

                               RULE NO. 6

Power to sit and act; subpoena power

    (a) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions 
and duties under House Rules X and XI, the Committee or any 
subcommittee thereof is authorized (subject to subparagraph 
(b)(1) of this paragraph)--
          (1) to sit and act at such times and places within 
        the United States, whether the House is in session, has 
        recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold such hearings; 
        and
          (2) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the 
        attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the 
        production of such books, records, correspondence, 
        memorandums, papers, documents and other materials as 
        it deems necessary, including materials in electronic 
        form. The Chair, or any member designated by the Chair, 
        may administer oaths to any witness.
    (b)(1) A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the 
Committee or subcommittee in the conduct of any investigation 
or series of investigations or activities, only when authorized 
by a majority of the members voting, a majority being present. 
The power to authorize and issue subpoenas under subparagraph 
(a)(2) may be delegated to the Chair pursuant to such rules and 
under such limitations as the Committee may prescribe. 
Authorized subpoenas shall be signed by the Chair or by any 
member designated by the Committee, and may be served by any 
person designated by the Chair or such member.
    (2) Compliance with any subpoena issued by the Committee or 
a subcommittee may be enforced only as authorized or directed 
by the House.

                               RULE NO. 7

Quorums

    No measure or recommendation shall be reported to the House 
unless a majority of the Committee is actually present. For the 
purposes of taking any action other than reporting any measure, 
issuance of a subpoena, closing meetings, promulgating 
Committee orders, or changing the rules of the Committee, one-
third of the members of the Committee shall constitute a 
quorum. For purposes of taking testimony and receiving 
evidence, two members shall constitute a quorum.

                               RULE NO. 8

Amendments

    Any amendment offered to any pending legislation before the 
Committee or a subcommittee must be made available in written 
form when requested by any member of the Committee. If such 
amendment is not available in written form when requested, the 
Chair will allow an appropriate period of time for the 
provision thereof.

                               RULE NO. 9

Hearing procedures

    (a) The Chair, in the case of hearings to be conducted by 
the Committee, and the appropriate subcommittee chair, in the 
case of hearings to be conducted by a subcommittee, shall make 
public announcement of the date, place, and subject matter of 
any hearing to be conducted on any measure or matter at least 
one (1) week before the commencement of that hearing. If the 
Chair, with the concurrence of the ranking minority member, 
determines that there is good cause to begin the hearing 
sooner, or if the Committee so determines by majority vote, a 
quorum being present, the Chair shall make the announcement at 
the earliest possible date. The clerk of the Committee shall 
promptly notify the Daily Digest Clerk of the Congressional 
Record as soon as possible after such public announcement is 
made.
    (b) Unless excused by the Chair, each witness who is to 
appear before the Committee or a subcommittee shall file with 
the clerk of the Committee, at least 48 hours in advance of his 
or her appearance, a written statement of his or her proposed 
testimony and shall limit his or her oral presentation to a 
summary of his or her statement.
    (c) When any hearing is conducted by the Committee upon any 
measure or matter, the minority party members on the Committee 
shall be entitled, upon request to the Chair by a majority of 
those minority members before the completion of such hearing, 
to call witnesses selected by the minority to testify with 
respect to that measure or matter during at least one day of 
hearings thereon.
    (d) Any member of the Committee may, if a subcommittee 
grants unanimous consent for a specific hearing, be permitted 
to sit during that hearing with a subcommittee on which he or 
she does not serve, but no member who has not been elected to a 
subcommittee shall count for a quorum, offer any measure, 
motion, or amendment, or vote on any matter before that 
subcommittee.
    (e) Committee or subcommittee members may question 
witnesses only when they have been recognized by the Chair for 
that purpose, and only for a 5-minute period until all members 
present have had an opportunity to question a witness. The 5-
minute period for questioning a witness by any one member can 
be extended as provided by House Rules. The questioning of a 
witness in Committee or subcommittee hearings shall be 
initiated by the Chair, followed by the ranking minority member 
and all other members alternating between the majority and 
minority. In recognizing members to question witnesses in this 
fashion, the Chair shall take into consideration the ratio of 
the majority to minority members present and shall establish 
the order of recognition for questioning in such a manner as 
not to disadvantage the members of the majority. The Chair may 
accomplish this by recognizing two majority members for each 
minority member recognized.
    (f) The following additional rules shall apply to hearings 
of the Committee or a subcommittee, as applicable:
          (1) The Chair at a hearing shall announce in an 
        opening statement the subject of the investigation.
          (2) A copy of the Committee rules and this clause 
        shall be made available to each witness as provided by 
        clause 2(k)(2) of rule XI.
          (3) Witnesses at hearings may be accompanied by their 
        own counsel for the purpose of advising them concerning 
        their constitutional rights.
          (4) The Chair may punish breaches of order and 
        decorum, and of professional ethics on the part of 
        counsel, by censure and exclusion from the hearings; 
        and the Committee may cite the offender to the House 
        for contempt.
          (5) If the Committee determines that evidence or 
        testimony at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or 
        incriminate any person, it shall--
                  (A) afford such person an opportunity 
                voluntarily to appear as a witness;
                  (B) receive such evidence or testimony in 
                executive session; and
                  (C) receive and dispose of requests from such 
                person to subpoena additional witnesses.
          (6) Except as provided in subparagraph (f)(5), the 
        Chair shall receive and the Committee shall dispose of 
        requests to subpoena additional witnesses.
          (7) No evidence or testimony taken in executive 
        session may be released or used in public sessions 
        without the consent of the Committee.
          (8) In the discretion of the Committee, witnesses may 
        submit brief and pertinent sworn statements in writing 
        for inclusion in the record. The Committee is the sole 
        judge of the pertinence of testimony and evidence 
        adduced at its hearing.
          (9) A witness may obtain a transcript copy of his 
        testimony given at a public session or, if given at an 
        executive session, when authorized by the Committee.

                              RULE NO. 10

Procedures for reporting measures or matters

    (a)(1) It shall be the duty of the Chair to report or cause 
to be reported promptly to the House any measure approved by 
the Committee and to take or cause to be taken necessary steps 
to bring the matter to a vote.
    (2) In any event, the report of the Committee on a measure 
which has been approved by the Committee shall be filed within 
7 calendar days (exclusive of days on which the House is not in 
session) after the day on which there has been filed with the 
clerk of the Committee a written request, signed by a majority 
of the members of the Committee, for the reporting of that 
measure. Upon the filing of any such request, the clerk of the 
Committee shall transmit immediately to the Chair notice of the 
filing of that request.
    (b)(1) No measure or recommendation shall be reported to 
the House unless a majority of the Committee is actually 
present.
    (2) With respect to each record vote on a motion to report 
any measure or matter of a public character, and on any 
amendment offered to the measure or matter, the total number of 
votes cast for and against, and the names of those members 
voting for and against, shall be included in the Committee 
report on the measure or matter.
    (c) The report of the Committee on a measure or matter 
which has been approved by the Committee shall include the 
matters required by Clause 3(c) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House.
    (d) If, at the time any measure or matter is ordered 
reported by the Committee, any member of the Committee gives 
notice of intention to file supplemental, minority, or 
additional views, that member shall be entitled to not less 
than two additional calendar days after the day of such notice, 
commencing on the day on which the measure or matter(s) was 
approved, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, in 
which to file such views, in writing and signed by that member, 
with the clerk of the Committee. All such views so filed by one 
or more members of the Committee shall be included within, and 
shall be a part of, the report filed by the Committee with 
respect to that measure or matter. The report of the Committee 
upon that measure or matter shall be printed in a single volume 
which--
          (1) shall include all supplemental, minority, or 
        additional views, in the form submitted, by the time of 
        the filing of the report, and
          (2) shall bear upon its cover a recital that any such 
        supplemental, minority, or additional views (and any 
        material submitted under subparagraph (c)) are included 
        as part of the report. This subparagraph does not 
        preclude--
                  (A) the immediate filing or printing of a 
                Committee report unless timely request for the 
                opportunity to file supplemental, minority, or 
                additional views has been made as provided by 
                paragraph (c); or
                  (B) the filing of any supplemental report 
                upon any measure or matter which may be 
                required for the correction of any technical 
                error in a previous report made by the 
                Committee upon that measure or matter.
          (3) shall, when appropriate, contain the documents 
        required by Clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
        the House.
    (e) The Chair, following consultation with the ranking 
minority member, is directed to offer a motion under clause 1 
of rule XXII of the Rules of the House, relating to going to 
conference with the Senate, whenever the Chair considers it 
appropriate.
    (f) If hearings have been held on any such measure or 
matter so reported, the Committee shall make every reasonable 
effort to have such hearings published and available to the 
members of the House prior to the consideration of such measure 
or matter in the House.
    (g) The Chair may designate any majority member of the 
Committee to act as ``floor manager'' of a bill or resolution 
during its consideration in the House.

                              RULE NO. 11

Committee oversight

    The Committee shall conduct oversight of matters within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee in accordance with House Rule X, 
clause 2 and clause 4. Not later than February 15 of the first 
session of a Congress, the Committee shall, in a meeting that 
is open to the public and with a quorum present, adopt its 
oversight plan for that Congress in accordance with House Rule 
X, clause 2(d).

                              RULE NO. 12

Review of continuing programs; Budget Act provisions

    (a) The Committee shall, in its consideration of all bills 
and joint resolutions of a public character within its 
jurisdiction, ensure that appropriation for continuing programs 
and activities of the Federal Government will be made annually 
to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the nature, 
requirement, and objectives of the programs and activities 
involved. For the purposes of this paragraph a Government 
agency includes the organizational units of government listed 
in Clause 4(e) of Rule X of House Rules.
    (b) The Committee shall review, from time to time, each 
continuing program within its jurisdiction for which 
appropriations are not made annually in order to ascertain 
whether such program could be modified so that appropriations 
therefore would be made annually.
    (c) The Committee shall, on or before February 25 of each 
year, submit to the Committee on the Budget (1) its views and 
estimates with respect to all matters to be set forth in the 
concurrent resolution on the budget for the ensuing fiscal year 
which are within its jurisdiction or functions, and (2) an 
estimate of the total amounts of new budget authority, and 
budget outlays resulting there from, to be provided or 
authorized in all bills and resolutions within its jurisdiction 
which it intends to be effective during that fiscal year.
    (d) As soon as practicable after a concurrent resolution on 
the budget for any fiscal year is agreed to, the Committee 
(after consulting with the appropriate committee or committees 
of the Senate) shall subdivide any allocation made to it in the 
joint explanatory statement accompanying the conference report 
on such resolution, and promptly report such subdivisions to 
the House, in the manner provided by section 302 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    (e) Whenever the Committee is directed in a concurrent 
resolution on the budget to determine and recommend changes in 
laws, bills, or resolutions under the reconciliation process it 
shall promptly make such determination and recommendations, and 
report a reconciliation bill or resolution (or both) to the 
House or submit such recommendations to the Committee on the 
Budget, in accordance with the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.

                              RULE NO. 13

Broadcasting of committee hearings and meetings

    Whenever any hearing or meeting conducted by the Committee 
is open to the public, those proceedings shall be open to 
coverage by television, radio, and still photography, as 
provided in Clause 4 of House Rule XI, subject to the 
limitations therein. Operation and use of any Committee 
Internet broadcast system shall be fair and nonpartisan and in 
accordance with Clause 4(b) of rule XI and all other applicable 
rules of the Committee and the House.

                              RULE NO. 14

Committee and subcommittee staff

    The staff of the Committee on House Administration shall be 
appointed as follows:
    (a) The staff shall be appointed by the Chair except as 
provided in paragraph (b), and may be removed by the Chair, and 
shall work under the general supervision and direction of the 
Chair;
    (b) All staff provided to the minority party members of the 
Committee shall be appointed by the ranking minority member, 
and may be removed by the ranking minority member of the 
Committee, and shall work under the general supervision and 
direction of such member;
    (c) The appointment of all professional staff shall be 
subject to the approval of the Committee as provided by, and 
subject to the provisions of, clause 9 of rule X of the Rules 
of the House;
    (d) The Chair shall fix the compensation of all staff of 
the Committee, after consultation with the ranking minority 
member regarding any minority party staff, within the budget 
approved for such purposes for the Committee.

                              RULE NO. 15

Travel of members and staff

    (a) Consistent with the primary expense resolution and such 
additional expense resolutions as may have been approved, the 
provisions of this rule shall govern travel of Committee 
members and staff. Travel for any member or any staff member 
shall be paid only upon the prior authorization of the Chair or 
her or his designee. Travel may be authorized by the Chair for 
any member and any staff member in connection with the 
attendance at hearings conducted by the Committee and meetings, 
conferences, and investigations which involve activities or 
subject matter under the general jurisdiction of the Committee. 
Before such authorization is given there shall be submitted to 
the Chair in writing the following:
          (1) The purpose of the travel;
          (2) The dates during which the travel will occur;
          (3) The locations to be visited and the length of 
        time to be spent in each; and
          (4) The names of members and staff seeking 
        authorization.
    (b)(1) In the case of travel outside the United States of 
members and staff of the Committee for the purpose of 
conducting hearings, investigations, studies, or attending 
meetings and conferences involving activities or subject matter 
under the legislative assignment of the committee, prior 
authorization must be obtained from the Chair. Before such 
authorization is given, there shall be submitted to the Chair, 
in writing, a request for such authorization. Each request, 
which shall be filed in a manner that allows for a reasonable 
period of time for review before such travel is scheduled to 
begin, shall include the following:
          (A) the purpose of the travel;
          (B) the dates during which the travel will occur;
          (C) the names of the countries to be visited and the 
        length of time to be spent in each;
          (D) an agenda of anticipated activities for each 
        country for which travel is authorized together with a 
        description of the purpose to be served and the areas 
        of committee jurisdiction involved; and
          (E) the names of members and staff for whom 
        authorization is sought.
    (2) At the conclusion of any hearing, investigation, study, 
meeting or conference for which travel outside the United 
States has been authorized pursuant to this rule, members and 
staff attending meetings or conferences shall submit a written 
report to the Chair covering the activities and other pertinent 
observations or information gained as a result of such travel.
    (c) Members and staff of the Committee performing 
authorized travel on official business shall be governed by 
applicable laws, resolutions, or regulations of the House and 
of the Committee on House Administration pertaining to such 
travel.

                              RULE NO. 16

Number and jurisdiction of subcommittees

    (a) There shall be two standing subcommittees, with party 
ratios of members as indicated. Subcommittees shall have 
jurisdictions as stated by these rules, may conduct oversight 
over such subject matter, and may consider such legislation as 
may be referred to them by the Chair. The names and 
jurisdiction of the subcommittees shall be:
          (1) Subcommittee on Elections--(4/2). Matters 
        pertaining to the Federal Election Campaign Act, the 
        Federal Contested Elections Act, the Help America Vote 
        Act, the National Voter Registration Act, the Uniformed 
        and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, the Federal 
        Voting Assistance Program, the Bipartisan Campaign 
        Reform Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act 
        (accessibility for voters with disabilities), the 
        Federal Election Commission (FEC), the Election 
        Assistance Commission (EAC), and other election related 
        issues. Oversight of the Federal Election Commission 
        (FEC) and the Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
          (2) Subcommittee on Oversight--(4/2). Matters 
        pertaining to operations of the Library of Congress, 
        the Botanic Garden, the Smithsonian Institution, the 
        Architect of the Capitol, the Capitol Visitors Center; 
        the Chief Administrative Officer, House Information 
        Resources, the Clerk of the House, the House Inspector 
        General, the Congressional Research Service and the 
        Office of Compliance.
    (b) No subcommittee shall meet during any full Committee 
meeting or hearing.
    (c) The Chair may establish and appoint members to serve on 
task forces of the Committee, to perform specific functions for 
limited periods of time, as she or he deems appropriate.

                              RULE NO. 17

Referral of legislation to subcommittees

    The Chair may refer legislation or other matters to a 
subcommittee, or subcommittees, as she or he considers 
appropriate. The Chair may discharge any subcommittee of any 
matter referred to it.

                              RULE NO. 18

Other procedures and regulations

    The Chair may establish such other procedures and take such 
actions as may be necessary to carry out the foregoing rules or 
to facilitate the effective operation of the committee.

                              RULE NO. 19

Designation of clerk of the committee

    For the purposes of these rules and the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the staff director of the Committee shall 
act as the clerk of the Committee.
                               Appendix B


                   Committee on House Administration


                     112th Congress Oversight Plan


                       (Adopted January 25, 2011)


                            MEMBER SERVICES

    
 Oversee Members' allowance amounts, including 
structure and regulations.
    
 Provide guidance and outreach to congressional 
offices to ensure compliance with Committee regulations.
    
 Review, update and revise the Members' 
Congressional Handbook, a set of regulations governing the 
expenditure of Members' Representational Allowances.
    
 Review and revise the Guide to Outfitting and 
Maintaining an Office of the U.S. House of Representatives, a 
set of regulations governing the acquisition, transfer, and 
disposal of furnishings, equipment, software, and related 
services.
    
 Evaluate the formulas used to calculate the 
Members' Representational Allowances and ensure that all 
Members have adequate resources for representing their 
constituents.
    
 Oversee the processing of vouchers and direct 
payments, including those for payroll.

New member orientation

    
 Plan, implement, and oversee the New Member 
Orientation Program for newly-elected Members of Congress.
    
 Oversee the planning and implementation of the 
Congressional Research Service New Member Issues Seminar in 
Williamsburg.

Intern program

    
 In coordination with the Senate Committee on Rules 
and Administration, organize, administer, and oversee the 
Intern Lecture Series.
    
 Review and consider revising the Intern Handbook 
and other publications and communication materials used in 
support of the Intern Program.

                    COMMITTEE FUNDING AND OVERSIGHT

    
 Review Monthly Reports on committee activities and 
expenditures.
    
 Review the Committees' Congressional Handbook 
regulations governing expenditure of committee funds and update 
regulations as needed.
    
 Review Primary and any Secondary Expense 
Resolutions and approve authorization of committee-funding 
levels in committee and by House Resolution.
    
 Review Committees' Franking expenditures.

                CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1995

    
 Monitor application of the Congressional 
Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA) (PL 104-1).
    
 Review regulations adopted by the Office of 
Compliance.
    
 Evaluate resources available to the Office of 
Compliance and House employing offices to facilitate 
implementation of the Act.
    
 Conduct general oversight of the Office of 
Compliance.
    
 Monitor ongoing judicial proceedings to determine 
the impact on the CAA.

                          FRANKING COMMISSION

    
 Oversee the Members' use of the congressional 
frank by providing guidance, advice, and counsel through 
consultation or advisory opinion on the frankability of 
congressional mail
    
 Review proposals to reform mass mailing practices 
of Members, and regulations governing such mailings, and 
monitor current prohibition on mass mailings 90 days before a 
primary or general election.
    
 Review previously implemented rules to increase 
disclosure and improve the accounting of franked mail costs.
    
 Revise the Regulations on the Use of the 
Congressional Frank and Rules on Practice in Proceedings Before 
the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards. 

                  HOUSE OFFICERS AND HOUSE OPERATIONS

    
 Work with House officers to identify and reduce 
spending and create more cost effective and efficient 
operations within the House.
    
 Analyze management improvement proposals and other 
initiatives submitted by the House Officers, the Inspector 
General, the Capitol Police Board, the Architect of the 
Capitol, the Library of Congress, the Smithsonian Institute, 
and other legislative branch agencies.
    
 Coordinate with the Subcommittee on Legislative 
Appropriations on matters impacting operations of the House and 
joint entities.
    
 Provide policy guidance to the House Officers, 
Inspector General and the joint entities as appropriate.
    
 Oversee compliance with the House Employee 
Classification Act (2 U.S.C. 291 et seq.).
    
 Assure coordination among officers and joint 
entities on administrative and technology matters.
    
 Continue review of congressional continuity 
issues, including organizing sessions of Congress at alternate 
locations, technological support for Member communications and 
chamber operations and filling vacancies in the House.
    
 Provide policy guidance and conduct oversight of 
security and safety issues and congressional entities charged 
with such roles.

Chief Administrative Officer

    
 Review procedures for processing contracts with 
the House that exceed the threshold of $350,000.
    
 Continue to review the current financial 
management system and implementation of the Financial System 
Replacement project.
    
 Review the structure of House Information 
Resources and determine organizational direction of technology 
services in the House.
    
 Review and oversee information technology services 
provided, maintained or hosted by House Information Resources. 
Continue oversight of failsafe procedures to guarantee 
continuity of operations.
    
 Review new technology initiatives to better serve 
Members, committees, and the public.
    
 Continue the review of functions and 
administrative operations assigned to the Chief Administrative 
Officer.
    
 Review semi-annual financial and operational 
status reports; oversee implementation of changes in operations 
to improve services and increase efficiencies.
    
 Review the operations of the House gift shop and 
its management.
    
 Continue review of House restaurant operations; 
furniture policy, inventory and selection; and alternatives to 
the current mail delivery process in order to strengthen the 
services and tools available to Members and staff.
    
 Continue review of Greening the Capitol operations 
by both the Chief Administrative Officer and the Architect of 
the Capitol and consider proposals to improve efficiency and 
cost savings.
    
 Review the printing needs of the Chief 
Administrative Officer's operation to identify the potential 
for eliminating duplication.
    
 Examine Chief Administrative Officer's role in 
assuring accessibility to the House wing of the Capitol, the 
House Office Buildings and other House facilities consistent 
with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
    
 Review staff benefits offered by the House and 
proposals to modify benefits.

Clerk of the House

    
 Review the administration of audio transmission on 
the House floor.
    
 Review and approve contracts and requests for 
proposals by the Clerk that exceed the $350,000 spending 
threshold.
    
 Oversee the Document Management System.
    
 Review standard for the electronic exchange of 
legislative information among the Houses of Congress and 
legislative-branch agencies.
    
 Coordinate on matters under the jurisdiction of 
the House Fine Arts Board.
    
 Continue review of functions and administrative 
operations assigned to the Clerk.
    
 Review of semi-annual financial and operational 
status reports; recommend changes in operations to improve 
services and increase efficiencies.
    
 Review the printing needs of the Clerk to evaluate 
the potential for eliminating duplication.
    
 Oversee preparation of congressionally-authorized 
publications.

Sergeant at Arms

    
 Review and oversee security operations in the 
House, including the House chamber, the galleries, the Capitol, 
House Office Buildings, Capitol Grounds, and District offices.
    
 Review and oversee initiatives designed to 
increase security and security awareness for Members and staff 
in district offices.
    
 Review semi-annual financial and operational 
status reports; recommend changes in operations to improve 
services and increase efficiencies.
    
 Review impact of electronic access to controlled 
spaces.
    
 Continue review of functions and administrative 
operations assigned to the Sergeant at Arms.
    
 Review the security operation of House parking 
facilities, regulations, and allocation of parking spaces.
    
 Consult with the Sergeant at Arms on policies 
adopted by the Capitol Police Board.
    
 Review the policies and procedures for visitor 
access to the Capitol.
    
 Review the printing needs of the Sergeant at Arms 
and the Capitol Police Board to identify the potential for 
eliminating duplication.
    
 Examine Sergeant at Arms' role in assuring 
accessibility to the House wing of the Capitol, the House 
Office Buildings, and other House facilities consistent with 
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
    
 Review the use of technology generally in the 
protection of the House of Representatives.
    
 Oversee the Office of Emergency Management, 
including the implementation of coordinated plans for emergency 
evacuation and response.

House Inspector General

    
 Review proposed audit plan and audit reports.
    
 Review comprehensive financial and operational 
audits of the House, investigate any irregularities uncovered, 
and monitor necessary improvements.
    
 Monitor progress of House audits.
    
 Continue review of functions and administrative 
operations assigned to the Inspector General.
    
 Direct Inspector General to conduct management 
advisories to improve implementation and operation of key House 
functions.

           OVERSIGHT OF LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND OTHER ENTITIES

Information and Technology Coordination

    
 Oversee, in conjunction with the Senate, forums 
for the sharing of technology plans and capabilities among the 
legislative branch agencies.
    
 Oversee, in conjunction with the Senate, the 
Legislative Branch Telecommunications group.
    
 Oversee continuing improvements to the Legislative 
Information System.
    
 Oversee work of the Legislative Branch Financial 
Managers' Council.

Library of Congress

    
 Conduct a review of the progress that the Library 
has made in providing public access to government information, 
especially in electronic form.
    
 Continue oversight of Library of Congress 
operations, including inventory and cataloguing systems.
    
 Continue oversight of Law Library operations.
    
 Continue oversight of Congressional Research 
Service operations, and consider any need to modify management 
of the Service.
    
 Review implementation of the Library of Congress 
Fiscal Operations Improvement Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-481), 
the Veterans' Oral History Project Act (Public Law 106-380), 
the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000 (Public Law 
106-474), and the History of the House Awareness and 
Preservation Act (Public Law 106-99).
    
 Consider human-resources legislation proposed by 
the Library.
    
 Review the use of technology generally in Library 
of Congress operations.
    
 Review printing policies of the Library of 
Congress to assure compliance with Title 44 of the U.S. Code.
    
 Review reports by Library of Congress Inspector 
General and implementation of audit recommendations. Examine 
options to improve operation and structure of the Library of 
Congress Inspector General's office.

United States Capitol Police

    
 Monitor administrative operations of the agency, 
including budgetary management, civilian component, attrition 
rates, recruitment efforts and incentive programs for officers 
and civilian employees.
    
 Review proposals for additional USCP facilities 
and equipment.
    
 Review analysis of uniformed officer post/duty 
assignments to determine and authorize force levels to meet the 
agency's security requirements within the Capitol complex to 
include the Capitol Visitor Center, the Library of Congress and 
U.S. Botanic Garden.
    
 Review and consider proposals to improve USCP 
training program for new recruits, and in-service training.
    
 Authorize and oversee the installation and 
maintenance of new security systems and devices proposed by the 
Police Board.
    
 Review and authorize regulations prescribed by the 
Police Board for use of law enforcement authority by the 
Capitol Police.
    
 Examine Capitol Police role in assuring 
accessibility to the House wing of the Capitol, House Office 
Buildings and other facilities consistent with the Americans 
with Disabilities Act.
    
 Monitor the ongoing implementation of the Radio 
Modernization Project.
    
 Review reports by USCP Inspector General and 
implementation of audit recommendations. Examine options to 
improve operation and structure of the USCP Inspector General's 
office.
    
 Evaluate costs and benefits of merging GPO police 
force with USCP.

Government Printing Office

    
 Oversee operations of the Government Printing 
Office, including the Superintendent of Documents.
    
 Review and adopt legislative proposals to reform 
government printing by eliminating redundancies and unnecessary 
printing, increasing efficiency, and enhancing public access to 
government publications.
    
 Examine options to improve operation and structure 
of the GPO Inspector General's office. Monitor implementation 
of remedial actions taken to address audit issues identified by 
the GPO Inspector General.
    
 Review the printing needs of the House of 
Representatives to identify the potential for eliminating 
duplication.
    
 Examine current GPO printing and binding 
regulations to determine advisability of change.
    
 Oversee Superintendent of Documents' Sales and 
Depository Library Programs.
    
 Review GPO labor practices and labor agreements.
    
 Review use of GPO facilities and other assets to 
identify possible alternatives enhancing value to the Congress 
and the public.
    
 Evaluate costs and benefits of merging GPO police 
force with Capitol Police.

Architect of the Capitol

    
 Review the operations of the office of the 
Architect.
    
 Review the electronic and procured services 
provided by the Architect.
    
 Oversee Architect of the Capitol's maintenance of 
House buildings and the House side of the Capitol, and review 
any plans for rehabilitation of House buildings.
    
 Continue oversight of life safety measures, 
accessibility measures, and improved evacuation mechanisms in 
House buildings.
    
 Continue oversight of implementation of utility 
tunnel rehabilitation settlement.
    
 Oversee operations of the Capitol Visitors Center, 
in conjunction with the Senate Committee on Rules and 
Administration.
    
 Review reports by Architect of the Capitol 
Inspector General and implementation of audit recommendations. 
Examine options to improve operation and structure of the 
Architect of the Capitol Inspector General's office.

Office of Congressional Accessibility Services

    
 Oversee management and operations of Office of 
Congressional Accessibility Services, such as the 
implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), in 
conjunction with Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.

Smithsonian Institution

    
 Review the Smithsonian Inspector General's reports 
on the status of the Smithsonian.
    
 Oversee general museum and research facility 
operations of the Smithsonian Institution.
    
 Review and evaluate the Smithsonian Institution's 
use of authorized public funds.
    
 Review proposed appointments of Citizen Regents to 
the Smithsonian Institution's Board of Regents.
    
 Review proposals for authorization of new 
Smithsonian facilities. Review Smithsonian policies regarding 
initiation of planning, design and construction of projects.
    
 Review operations of the National Zoo.
    
 Conduct additional oversight of Smithsonian 
Networks.
    
 Review the use of technology generally in 
Smithsonian operations.
    
 Review Smithsonian policies regarding compliance 
with the Freedom of Information Act.
    
 Review any proposals to charge fees for admission 
to any Smithsonian exhibits.

                      TECHNOLOGY USE BY THE HOUSE

    
 Continue oversight of House Information Resources 
and other technology functions of the House to improve 
electronic information dissemination.
    
 Oversee implementation of House Rule XI 2(e)(4) 
requiring committee documentation to be made available 
electronically, to the maximum extent feasible.
    
 Review computer security measures.
    
 Oversee implementation of Committee hearing room 
upgrade program.
    
 Oversee and continue to implement an enterprise 
House Disaster Recovery Program for house offices, committees 
and member offices.
    
 Oversee and coordinate the House strategic 
technology plan.
    
 Oversee continuation of House technology 
assessment in new media.

            OVERSIGHT OF FEDERAL ELECTION LAW AND PROCEDURES

    
 Recommend disposition of House election contests 
pending before the Committee; monitor any disputed election 
counts.
    
 Review operations of the Federal Election 
Commission (FEC) and evaluate possible changes to improve 
efficiency, improve enforcement of the Federal Election 
Campaign Act, and improve procedures for the disclosure of 
contributions and expenditures. Consider authorization issues 
and make recommendations on the FEC's budget.
    
 Review federal campaign-finance laws and 
regulations, including Presidential public financing, and 
consider potential reforms.
    
 Examine the role and impact of political 
organizations on federal elections.
    
 Review operations of the Election Assistance 
Commission (EAC) and evaluate possible changes to improve 
efficiency and improve implementation of the Help America Vote 
Act (HAVA). Consider authorization issues and make 
recommendations on the EAC's budget.
    
 Examine the impact of amendments made by HAVA and 
the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE Act) to 
the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act 
(UOCAVA), and consider proposals to improve voting methods for 
those serving and living abroad.
    
 Review state and federal activities under the 
National Voter Registration Act to identify potential for 
improvement to voter registration and education programs and 
reducing costs of compliance for state and local government.
    
 Review all aspects of registration and voting 
practices in federal elections. Monitor allegations of fraud 
and misconduct during all phases of federal elections and 
evaluate measures to improve the integrity of the electoral 
process.
                               Appendix C


              Committee Resolutions for the 112th Congress


             ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE RULES FOR 112TH CONGRESS

                      (Committee Resolution 112-1)


                        Adopted January 25, 2011


              ELECTION OF SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRS AND MEMBERS

                      (Committee Resolution 112-2)


                        Adopted January 25, 2011


           ADOPTION OF OVERSIGHT PLAN FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS

                      (Committee Resolution 112-3)


                        Adopted January 25, 2011


                    ADOPTION OF HOUSE PARKING POLICY

                      (Committee Resolution 112-4)


                        Adopted January 25, 2011


 PROVIDING OFFICIAL MAIL ALLOWANCE TO COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE FOR THE 
                             112TH CONGRESS

                      (Committee Resolution 112-5)


                         Adopted March 9, 2011


               ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE VIEWS AND ESTIMATES

                      (Committee Resolution 112-6)


                         Adopted March 9, 2011


                    APPROVING A CONSULTING CONTRACT

                      (Committee Resolution 112-7)


                         Adopted March 9, 2011


                 RESOLUTION ON SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

                      (Committee Resolution 112-8)


                          Adopted May 25, 2011

                               Appendix D

                                      United States
                          Government Accountability Office,
                                      Washington, DC, July 6, 2011.
Subject: Contract for legal services.
Hon. Ander Crenshaw,
Chairman, Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch,
Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives.
    This responds to your letter dated June 21, 2011, 
requesting our views with respect to a contract entered into by 
the House Office of General Counsel for the services of outside 
counsel to represent the House Bipartisan Legal Advisory 
Group\1\ in certain matters. Letter from Chairman, House 
Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch to 
General Counsel, GAO (June 21, 2011) (Request Letter). 
Specifically, your letter asked that we address two questions: 
(1) What obligation did the House Office of General Counsel 
incur when the General Counsel entered into the contract, and 
did the House General Counsel violate the Antideficiency Act 
when he signed the contract? (2) To the extent that the 
obligation for the contract may implicate the availability of 
funds for other activities and expenses of the House Office of 
General Counsel, may the House exercise its transfer 
authorities under title 2 of the U.S. Code to transfer to the 
Office of General Counsel appropriations adequate to cover its 
expenses to avoid any potential Antideficiency Act violation?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group is a five-member panel of 
House Leadership consisting of the Speaker of the House, Majority 
Leader, Majority Whip, Minority Leader, and Minority Whip. See Rule II, 
cl. 8, Rules of the House of Representatives at 3, 112th Cong. (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For the reasons stated below, based on the information 
provided, we conclude that when the House General Counsel 
entered into the contract on April 25, 2011, the House Office 
of General Counsel incurred an obligation of $500,000 against 
its appropriation for salaries and expenses. The House Chief 
Administrative Officer has advised us that there was an 
adequate unobligated balance to satisfy the obligation. We 
conclude, therefore, that the House General Counsel did not 
violate the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. Sec. 1341(a). In 
addition, because of the statutory authorities to transfer 
appropriations of the House of Representatives, the House may 
transfer amounts to the Office of General Counsel's 
appropriation, as needed, in order to avoid Antideficiency Act 
violations.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Our practice when issuing decisions and opinions is to develop a 
factual record on the subject matter of the request. GAO, Procedures 
and Practices For Legal Decisions and Opinions, GAO-06-1064SP 
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2006), available at www.gao.gov/
legallresources.html. The record in this case consists of the Request 
Letter and the contract at issue. Because of your need for an expedited 
opinion, we obtained additional information via teleconferences with 
the House General Counsel and Chief Administrative Officer on June 24 
and June 28, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               BACKGROUND

    On February 23, 2011, the Attorney General advised the 
Speaker of the House of Representatives that the President had 
determined that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act 
(DOMA), codified at 1 U.S.C. Sec. 7, violates the Equal 
Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 
Constitution. Letter from the Attorney General to the Speaker, 
Re: Defense of Marriage Act (Feb. 23, 2011). The Attorney 
General stated that, as a result, the Department of Justice 
(DOJ) would no longer defend the constitutionality of section 3 
of DOMA. Id. at 6. However, the Attorney General noted that DOJ 
would notify the relevant courts of DOJ's interest in providing 
Congress a full and fair opportunity to participate in the 
litigation of pending cases. Id.
    In response, and with the authorization of the Bipartisan 
Legal Advisory Group, the Speaker directed the House General 
Counsel to take appropriate steps to defend the 
constitutionality of DOMA, including retaining outside counsel 
to represent the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group in ongoing 
litigation. Request Letter at 1. Accordingly, on April 25, 
2011, the House General Counsel signed a contract with the law 
firm of Bancroft PLLC to represent the Bipartisan Legal 
Advisory Group as a party or an amicus in civil actions 
litigating the constitutionality of section 3 of DOMA.\3\ See 
Contract for Legal Services between General Counsel, U.S. House 
of Representatives, and Bancroft PLLC, April 25, 2011 
(Contract).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\We note that the acquisition procedures prescribed for executive 
agencies by the Federal Acquisition Regulation do not apply to the 
House of Representatives. See 41 U.S.C. Sec. 133 and Sec. 1121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the Contract, the House General Counsel agreed to pay 
Bancroft PLLC ``a sum not to exceed $500,000.''\4\ Contract, 
para.2. The Contract will terminate the earlier of the 
completion of the litigation of civil actions involving the 
constitutionality of section 3 of DOMA or on January 3, 2013, 
unless sooner terminated by the House General Counsel.\5\ 
Contract para.para.1, 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\The contract also includes a provision allowing the cap to be 
raised by written agreement of the parties. Contract, para.2.
    \5\The House of Representatives has authority to enter into 
multiyear contracts. 41 U.S.C. Sec. 3904(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For fiscal year 2011, Congress appropriated a lump sum for 
``Salaries and Expenses'' of the House of Representatives. See 
Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, Pub. L. No. 112-
10, div. B, Sec. 1101(a)(5), 125 Stat. 38, 102-103 (Apr. 15, 
2011); Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2010, Pub. L. No. 
111-68, 123 Stat. 2023, 2027 (Oct. 1, 2009). Under the heading 
``Salaries, Officers and Employees,'' the appropriations act 
specifies particular amounts from the lump sum to the various 
offices and activities of the House of Representatives, 
including an amount ``for salaries and expenses of the Office 
of General Counsel.'' Pub. L. No. 111-68, 123 Stat. at 2028.

                               DISCUSSION

Obligational Event and Antideficiency Act

    The first question has two parts: (a) what obligation did 
the Office of General Counsel incur when the House General 
Counsel signed the contract, and (b) did the House General 
Counsel violate the Antideficiency Act at that time?
    A general definition of an obligation is a definite 
commitment that creates a legal liability of the government for 
the payment of goods and services ordered or received, or a 
legal duty on the part of the United States that could mature 
into a legal liability by virtue of actions on the part of the 
other party beyond the control of the United States. See 
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. United States, 37 Fed. Cl. 295, 301 
(1997); B-300480, Apr. 9, 2003; 42 Comp. Gen. 733, 734 (1963); 
B-116795, June 18, 1954; see also GAO, A Glossary of Terms Used 
in the Federal Budget Process, GAO-05-734SP (Washington, D.C.: 
September 2005), at 70. When it signs a contract, the 
government incurs a legal liability--that is, a claim that may 
be legally enforced against the government. B-308969, May 31, 
2007; B-300480.2, June 6, 2003; see also Glossary; at 63. The 
amount of the government's obligation is ascertained from an 
analysis of the terms and conditions agreed to by the 
government and the party with whom it has contracted. See 42 
Comp. Gen. at 734.
    Here, the House General Counsel signed a contract with 
Bancroft PLLC on April 25, 2011, acquiring specified legal 
services from Bancroft PLLC for the Bipartisan Legal Advisory 
Group up to an amount of $500,000: ``The General Counsel agrees 
to pay the Contractor for all contractual services rendered a 
sum not to exceed $500,000.00.'' Contract, para.2. The Contract 
does not envision task orders from the General Counsel to the 
contractor. The quantum of contractual services to be rendered 
is limited by the $500,000 cap on payment to the contractor and 
by the Contract's definition of the legal services to be 
provided, and is not contingent upon the issuance of task 
orders.
    We addressed a situation similar to this in a 2003 opinion 
analyzing the obligational consequences of grant agreements of 
the Corporation for National and Community Service 
(Corporation). B-300480, Apr. 9, 2003; see also B-300480.2, 
June 6, 2003. In that case, the Corporation entered into 
binding agreements with its grantees authorizing the grantee to 
enroll up to a specified number of new participants in the 
AmeriCorps program. At the time of agreement, the Corporation 
was legally committed to fund education benefits for all 
participants up to the number of participants specified in the 
agreement. We found that the Corporation had incurred a legal 
duty when it authorized the grantee to enroll a specified 
number of participants, thereby ceding control to the grantee 
with respect to the government's fiscal exposure.
    Similarly, in this case, the Contract stated that the 
government would pay up to a particular amount ``for all 
contractual services rendered.'' Here, as in the case of the 
Corporation, the contractor, not the government, controls the 
government's fiscal exposure, up to $500,000. Therefore, we 
conclude that at the time the contract was signed, the House 
General Counsel incurred an obligation for $500,000, which was 
its maximum potential liability under the contract.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\We note that the Contract provides for the possibility of 
raising the $500,000 cap by written agreement of the parties and 
approval of the Committee on House Administration of the House of 
Representatives. Contract para.2. The amount of the obligation will not 
increase beyond $500,000, unless and until the General Counsel and 
Bancroft PLLC enter into an agreement to increase the cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Antideficiency Act prohibits an officer or employee of 
the United States Government from making an obligation in 
excess of available appropriations. 31 U.S.C. Sec. 1341(a)(1). 
In our view, the contract is an obligation of the 
appropriations for the Office of General Counsel found under 
the heading ``Salaries, Officers and Employees.'' That amount 
is made available ``for salaries and expenses'' of the Office 
of General Counsel. Id. The House General Counsel signed the 
Contract to obtain legal services from Bancroft PLLC. The Rules 
of the House of Representatives establish the Office of General 
Counsel ``for the purpose of providing legal assistance and 
representation to the House.'' Rules of the House of 
Representatives, 112th Cong., rule II, cl. 8 (2011). The rule 
specifies that the Office of General Counsel ``shall function 
pursuant to the direction of the Speaker.'' Id Consequently, 
the $500,000 obligation for the Contract is chargeable against 
the appropriation for the salaries and expenses of the Office 
of General Counsel.
    The House Chief Administrative Officer has certified to us 
that there was an adequate unobligated balance in that account 
to satisfy this obligation. Thus, the House General Counsel did 
not violate the Antideficiency Act when he signed the Contract.

                               TRANSFERS

    The second question addresses the possibility that the 
$500,000 obligation might implicate the availability of funds 
for other activities and expenses of the Office of General 
Counsel. You ask if the House, as necessary, may exercise its 
title 2 authorities to provide the Office of General Counsel 
with adequate funds to cover other salaries and expenses to 
avoid any Antideficiency Act problems.
    Title 2 of the U.S. Code authorizes the House of 
Representatives to transfer amounts among the various 
appropriations under the heading, ``Salaries, Officers and 
Employees,'' as follows:

          ``Amounts appropriated for any fiscal year for the 
        House of Representatives under the heading `SALARIES, 
        OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES' may be transferred among and 
        merged with the various offices and activities under 
        such heading. . . .''


2 U.S.C. Sec. 95b(b). The House Office of General Counsel is 
one of the offices funded under this heading.
    In addition, amounts appropriated for any fiscal year for 
the House of Representatives under the following headings may 
be transferred among and merged with each other: ``House 
Leadership Offices,'' ``Members' Representational Allowances,'' 
``Committee Employees,'' ``Salaries, Officers and Employees,'' 
and ``Allowances and Expenses.'' 2 U.S.C. Sec. 95b(c) (emphasis 
added). These headings are found in the appropriations act 
under the caption, ``Salaries and Expenses.'' In each case, the 
House Committee on Appropriations must receive advance notice 
of transfer. 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 95b(b), (c).
    Accordingly, should the Office of General Counsel require 
additional funds to carry out its responsibilities during the 
remainder of fiscal year 2011, the House, under 2 U.S.C. 
Sec. 95b, may provide the Office of General Counsel with 
additional amounts from other headings to avoid Antideficiency 
Act violations.

                               CONCLUSION

    Because there was an adequate amount in the appropriation 
for the Office of General Counsel to cover the $500,000 
obligation for the Contract, the House General Counsel did not 
violate the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. Sec. 134l(a), when he 
signed the contract. In addition, the House has statutory 
transfer authority that the House may utilize to increase the 
Office General Counsel's fiscal year 2011 appropriation for 
salaries and expenses in order to avoid Antideficiency Act 
violations.
    If you have any questions, please contact Thomas H. 
Armstrong, Acting Managing Associate General Counsel, at (202) 
512-8257.
            Sincerely yours,
                                             Lynn R Gibson,
                                                   General Counsel.

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                               Elections

                                H.R. 672

    The Majority has noted that they ``conducted vigorous 
oversight of Federal election policy''. What oversight we have 
seen has been singularly focused on dismantling the key 
election administration and campaign finance reforms of the 
past several decades.
    The history of voting in the United States is not one of 
free and fair elections. Poll taxes, literacy tests, voter 
intimidation, and outright, de jure denial of the franchise to 
U.S. citizens of this most fundamental of American rights has 
been commonplace throughout our history. While the most 
egregious and obvious methods of denying the basic principle of 
``one man, one vote'' have been eradicated, problems still 
persist in ensuring that every eligible voter has access to our 
voting system.
    The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is an imperfect 
but important agency created with bipartisan support in the 
shadow of the 2000 presidential election and tasked with 
helping states to avoid a repeat of that catastrophic failure. 
Since its inception, the EAC has provided state and local 
election officials with resources to support efforts by the 
states to improve their voting systems. Through its national 
database for voters, poll workers, and states to create a more 
perfect voting system, it has provided guidance on best 
practices, technical certifications, and other means to ensure 
the integrity of elections in every jurisdiction in the Union.
Terminating the EAC would not save money
    While the Majority insists that the termination of the EAC 
would yield cost savings by moving the functions of the EAC to 
the Federal Election Commission (FEC), FEC Chair Cynthia 
Bauerly has made it clear that the FEC would require additional 
resources to assume the functions currently administered by the 
EAC, while also fulfilling its primary mission--regulating 
campaign finances.
    In response to a request from the Ranking Democratic 
Member, Chair Bauerly writes:

          ``Should Congress enact this bill and provide an 
        appropriation that adequately reflects this change we 
        believe that the FEC could absorb the added functions 
        and responsibilities while continuing to fulfill our 
        current mission successfully.'' (emphasis added)

    It is important to note that during the mark-up of H.R. 
672, Representative Gonzalez offered a perfecting amendment 
requiring a GAO study to determine if the FEC could assume the 
additional responsibilities of the EAC and if any cost savings 
to the federal government would be realized without 
disfranchising voters. Such a common sense amendment could only 
buttress the claims of the Majority as they contend that there 
would be no negative consequence to voters or to the FEC with 
the termination of the EAC. Instead of a bi-partisan embrace, 
this amendment was rejected on a party line vote.
EAC integral in improving accessibility for Military and Overseas 
        Voters
    The Committee held two hearings on military and overseas 
voting during the 2010 election; ``Military and Overseas 
Voting: Effectiveness of the MOVE Act in the 2010 Election'', 
and ``The 2010 Election: A Look Back at What Went Right and 
Wrong.'' A focus of both hearings was the accessibility of our 
voting systems to military and overseas voters. The EAC 
maintains and compiles data that make up the most comprehensive 
repository of information on military and overseas voters. The 
information EAC has gathered provides state and local election 
officials with a blueprint to ensure that military personnel 
stationed overseas can exercise their most basic of rights.
    EAC is currently working with the Department of Defense on 
a pilot program to develop a full set of testable standards for 
overseas voters. During FY 2010, the EAC provided grants to 
research the implementation of new technologies that will 
improve accessibility for injured military personnel. 
Elimination of the EAC could jeopardize the improvements 
already made and negatively impact projects underway that are 
designed to improve accessibility for overseas military and 
citizens.
    The Majority's plan to eliminate the EAC, H.R. 672, does 
not include provisions for transferring these initiatives to 
the FEC. This inherent deficiency in the legislation could 
result in the disfranchisement of military voters and Americans 
living overseas.
EAC integral in improving accessibility for persons with disabilities
    Since the creation of the EAC and its emphasis on assuring 
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, there has 
been a decrease in the number of polling places cited for 
insufficient access for voters with physical disabilities. 
Additionally, EAC efforts have contributed to the increase of 
the number of disabled voters who have been able to vote 
privately and independent of assistance. The EAC guidance can 
point out to election officials barriers the disabled face of 
which they were not even aware, as well as provide proven 
solutions to those problems and ways to make polling places 
more accessible for voters with disabilities.
    The management guide for disabled and elderly voters in 
long term care facilities that EAC developed and published 
provides state and local election officials with new tools to 
reach out to mobility-challenged voters of all ages. The agency 
has also established a grant program to advance technology that 
allows people with disabilities to vote privately and 
independently.
    The National Disability Rights Network, an advocacy group 
representing [tens of] millions of individuals with 
disabilities, may say it best: ``[a]bolishing the EAC at this 
point in time would be a step back for people with disabilities 
and the goal of full accessibility to the voting process, and 
prevent people with disabilities from partaking of this most 
fundamental civil right.''

Committee Majority has missed opportunity to strengthen voting 
        protections

    During the markup of H.R. 672, the Majority had the 
opportunity to strengthen voting accessibility. Representative 
Gonzalez offered a substitute that would have made polling 
places more accessible by ensuring compliance with the 
Americans with Disabilities Act. It would also have increased 
efficiency and cost savings by having EAC conduct a 
comprehensive study of how federal, state, and local 
governments could reduce the costs of election administration. 
The substitute would have also increased transparency by 
overhauling the system of payments for and disclosure of 
testing and certification of voting equipment. These are all 
commonsense steps that would strengthen voter accessibility, 
improve elections' efficiency, and produce cost savings while 
still protecting the rights of eligible voters. Unfortunately, 
this attempt to ``amend it rather than end it'' was defeated on 
a party line vote.

Major Civil Rights organizations oppose H.R. 672

    H.R. 672 is opposed by a broad spectrum of civil rights 
organizations such as the NAACP, League of Women Voters, 
National Association of Latino Appointed and Elected Officials, 
National Disability Rights Network, and Public Citizen.

                                H.R. 359

    Congress created the Presidential Election Campaign Fund to 
empower the public to reclaim the power of funding Presidential 
elections from large corporations and monied interests. Over 
the last five years, an average of 33 million taxpayers 
voluntarily chose to donate $3 of their income tax money to the 
fund each year. When a taxpayer chooses to donate $3, the 
entire sum is put towards the Presidential Election Campaign 
Fund. Costs associated with the administration of the program 
are paid out of the FEC's annual appropriations.
    The fund currently collects approximately $42 million 
annually. Campaigns that receive funding from the PECF must 
return any unspent funds. Approximately $8.7 million in unspent 
funds has been returned since 1976.
    One of the most notable candidates to receive public 
funding is former President Ronald Reagan. During his 1976 
presidential primary, Reagan's opponent, Gerald Ford, had 
fifteen times more cash on hand. Reagan's acceptance of public 
funds allowed him to shape that debate by remaining a viable 
candidate. Reagan used the public financing system to such an 
extent that he holds the record as the only candidate to reach 
the public funding primary campaign maximum. In addition to 
President Reagan, several other qualified candidates owe their 
campaign viability to public funds: Jimmy Carter in 1976, 
George H. W. Bush in 1980, Gary Hart in 1984, Jesse Jackson in 
1988, Paul Tsongas in 1992, Pat Buchanan in 1996 and John 
McCain in 2000. Public funds allow all qualified candidates to 
compete, even against well-funded incumbents.
    The use of public campaign funds for qualified presidential 
candidates is regulated and monitored by the FEC. In addition, 
the FEC audits campaigns that receive public funds at the end 
of every Presidential election to ensure good stewardship. This 
emphasis on disclosure and transparency and what Justice Scalia 
has called ``civic courage, without which democracy is doomed'' 
(Doe v. Reed, __ U.S. __, 130 S. Ct. 2811, 2817-18 (2010)) 
stands in sharp contrast to the growth of electioneering funded 
by unlimited, anonymous donations, from corporations as well as 
individuals after the recent Citizens United decision.
    In the opening days of the 112th Congress, the House 
considered H.R. 359 without any Committee consideration of this 
legislation. The failure to convene a single hearing, call a 
single witness, or hold a mark-up where amendments would be 
considered is a highly unflattering reflection on the Majority 
Leadership's priorities and the respect granted to such 
important matters, and this Committee, in the 112th Congress. 
Had H.R. 359 followed regular order, the Majority might never 
have propounded such a misguided bill.

            Activities of the Office of the General Counsel

    The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was enacted in 1996 to 
legally prohibit federal recognition of same-sex marriages. On 
February 23, 2011, the Obama Administration made a decision no 
longer to defend, even while they continue to enforce, a 
section of the law after concluding that it is unconstitutional 
under the Equal Protection clause.

Deal done behind closed doors--Committee Minority excluded

    At the direction of the Speaker, Majority Leader, and 
Majority Whip, the Majority approved a contract with the firm 
of King & Spalding, LLP, on behalf of the Office of the General 
Counsel, to defend DOMA-related cases in court. They released 
no information on how those arrangements were arrived at, 
explanation for the rates to be paid, nor explanation of whence 
those funds would come. When this arrangement was made public, 
Minority Leader Pelosi and Minority Members of the Committee 
expressed concerns about the process and result of that 
contract. After King & Spalding withdrew from the case, the 
Committee approved an identical contract with the law firm 
Bancroft PLLC. Once again, and in spite of the aforementioned 
and prior complaints, the Minority members were neither 
consulted nor given the opportunity to review any parts of this 
contract nor even informed of it before its completion. We are 
unaware of even an attempt to address the concerns which had 
been expressed by the Minority. As a result, the Committee may 
have repeated and, thus, compounded errors that may cost the 
federal government significantly. If the Minority had been 
included in this process, we would have scrutinized the 
$500,000 fee, including how that figure was arrived at and 
whether it accurately reflected the reasonably expected costs 
of the contract's fulfillment, and insisted on a thorough 
review by the Ethics Committee for compliance with applicable 
rules and regulations of the House.

Lack of transparency--Democratic requests for answers ignored

    In letters dated April 26, 2011 and May 18, 2011, the 
Democratic Members of the Committee asked Speaker Boehner for 
more information regarding the process, fees, and scope of 
these contracts (see attachments). To this day, the Speaker has 
failed to provide any response.

Irresponsible use of funds

    By forcing the Committee to enter a $500,000 contract to 
defend discrimination, the Republican leadership may have 
jeopardized the Office of General Counsel's ability to perform 
its core mission. By failing to disclose, if they even 
determined, the source of these funds, the Republican 
leadership has not been forthright with the Minority or the 
public on the details or ramifications of this contract. The 
extent of its impact and any potential overruns or funding 
shortfalls on House operations remains wholly unclear. This is 
not only irresponsible but creates a troubling atmosphere of 
uncertainty that could surround all House operations until 
these questions are resolved.

                                   Robert A. Brady.
                                   Zoe Lofgren.
                                   Charles A. Gonzalez.
                                   <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>