Copyright 2000 Federal News Service, Inc.
Federal News Service
September 13, 2000, Wednesday
SECTION: PREPARED TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1054 words
HEADLINE:
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN TOM TANCREDO (R-CO)
BEFORE THE
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON RULES
SUBJECT - HEARING TO
RECEIVE MEMBER TESTIMONY ON PROPOSED CHANGES IN HOUSE RULES
BODY:
Mr. Chairman,
I want to take this
opportunity to thank you for holding this "Open Day Hearing" today so Members
such as myself will have an opportunity to present a few ideas that should be
incorporated into the House rules package, as it is prepared for the 107th
Congress.
I come before my colleagues of the House Rules Committee to
request two Important changes in the rules of the House of Representatives --
the first being a change to prohibit the consideration of legislation naming
federal government structures after sitting Members of Congress, and the second
being an expansion of the reporting requirements for unauthorized programs.
Naming of Federal Structures As my colleagues may know, last year, I
introduced House Resolution 343 to prohibit the federal government from naming
federal structures such as post offices, federal buildings, highways, etc. after
sitting Members of the House of Representatives or the Senate.
The
legislation was in response to two amendments that the Senate unanimously passed
on October 7, 1999, to their version of the Departments of Labor/Health and
Human Services/Education Appropriations Act, to rename the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Library of Medicine Building after
sitting Senators who control their budgets. Though both amendments were removed
from the Conference Agreement, I believe that we need to change the rules of the
House to prohibit the consideration of legislation that names federal structures
after sitting members of Congress. This simple change will prevent this
situation from occurring in the House or from being included in any Conference
Report.
Currently, Congress is primarily responsible for the naming of
federal structures. Even though the Administrator of the General Services
Administration (GSA) has the power to name federal structures, the Administrator
does not use the power, instead leaving the decision solely up to Congress.
I feel that it is necessary and important to thank our public leaders
for their commitment to serve our nation, just as we do any group that works for
the common good. It is absolutely appropriate for Members who have retired or
passed on to be remembered by having their names attached to federal property,
just as we have done for two hundred years.
Individuals who have had an
impact on America will forever be remembered, and should be remembered, and
waiting for the full impact of their public service to be realized is not too
much to ask. By waiting a few years to reflect on their accomplishments, we are
doing them, and the integrity of this Congress, a great service.
Federal
structures all across the nation, including within my Congressional district are
named after former Members of Congress. Members who have seen their names placed
on post offices, federal buildings and highways are undoubtedly great men and
women who served their nation. However, we need to draw a great distinction
between honoring our retired leaders, and placing current leaders on an almost
god-like level.
We are all given a great honor to serve within our
nations Congress. We impact the lives of millions of Americans on a daily basis,
and many of us will inspire our constituents to levels of achievement that are
beyond anyones expectations, and they will do likewise for us. Yet we must
remember that we are serving them for the good of the whole, the good of the
people and we should be thankful for the opportunity.
Unauthorized
Programs
I would also like to ask my colleagues to expand the reporting
requirements for unauthorized programs, which appear in the back of House
appropriations reports. During consideration of H.R. 853, the Comprehensive
Budget Process Reform Act, I offered an amendment to expand the reporting
requirements for unauthorized programs, which passed by voice vote.
As
you know, current House rules require a list of all unauthorized programs to
appear in the back of appropriations reports. While the current rule is very
helpful in ensuring that Congress is aware of programs that are unauthorized, I
believe that much more needs to be done to increase awareness.
The
change that I am proposing would simply expand on current rules to include (1)
the last year for which the expenditures were authorized, (2) the level of
expenditures authorized that year, (3) the actual level of expenditures for that
year and (4) the level of expenditures contained in the bill.
Since
coming to Congress, I have spent a considerable amount of my time trying to
highlight the problems of unauthorized spending. For Fiscal Year 2000, according
to an annual report released by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), there
were 247 programs funded in 137 laws totaling over $120 billion
whose authorization has expired.
Some examples and the last year
authorized include:
Legal Services Corporation -- 1979
Department of Justice -- 1980
EPA Research and Development --
1980
Federal Elections Commission -- 1981
EPA Toxic Substance
Program --- 1983
Energy Supply Programs -- 1984
Power Marketing
Administrations -- 1984
Family Planning Programs -- 1985
EPA
Solid Waste Disposal -- 1988
EPA Water Pollution Programs -- 1990
National Waste Policy Act programs -- 1990
Federal Communications
Commission -- 1991
National Endowment for the Arts -- 1993
Community Development Block Grants -- 1994
National Ocean
Service -- 1993
Corporation for Public Broadcasting -- 1996
Last
year alone, there were 198 programs funded in 118 laws totaling over
$101 billion.
I believe that this continuing practice
has led to the deterioration of the power of the Authorizing Committees, and
thus the loss of aggressive congressional oversight and fiscal responsibility.
It has also lead to the shift of power away from the legislative branch toward
the Administration and federal bureaucrats.
It is time that we shine the
light on this egregious problem.
I have attached for review a copy of
the changes to Rule XXI and Rule XIII and urge my colleagues on the Rules
Committee to incorporate both of these changes into the comprehensive rules
package being prepared for the 107th Congress.
I am prepared to answer
any questions that you may have and, once again, thank you for giving me this
opportunity to express my views.
END
LOAD-DATE:
September 14, 2000 
