III. Demystifying the Committee Process: What they need and how you can help -

A. Standard Committee Hearing Prep -

B. How you can help. Offer to -

C. (At least) One Day Before the Hearing -

(NOTE - unless he/she is a member of the subcommittee, this will require unanimous consent)

D. Hearing Day -

E. Post-hearing follow-up -

IV. Governing Rules

A. Notice Rule XI, 2(g)(3)
B. Open Hearings Rules XI, 2(g)(2);and XI, 2(k)(5)
C. Quorums Rules XI, 2(h); and XI, 2(m)(1)
D. Witness Statements Rule XI, 2(g)(4)
E. Questioning Witnesses Rule XI, 2(j)(2)
F. The Minority Witness Rule Rule XI, 2(j)(1)
G. Hearing Adjournment Rule XI, 1(a)(1)
H. Subpoenas Rule XI, 2(m)(1)
I. The Penalty for Fouling up Rule XI, 2(g)5

Notice - The Chair must publicly announce the date, place and subject matter of a hearing at least one week in advance in the Daily Digest of the Congressional Record, unless:

• the Chair with the concurrence of the ranking minority member, or
• the committee by majority vote of a business transaction quorum determines there is good cause to begin the hearing sooner. In case of good cause waiver, the hearing announcement must be published as soon as possible.
  
  

• endanger national security
• compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or
• violate a rule of the House.

Whenever it is asserted that upcoming testimony would tend to defame, degrade or incriminate any person, the testimony must be taken in closed session if a majority of Members, with a testimony quorum present, determine the assertion has merit.

Testimony taken in executive session may only be released by a majority vote of the committee.

Hearing Quorum Requirements -

For taking testimony - as set by the committee's rules, but never less than two.

For waiving the hearing notice requirement - as set by the committee's rules, but never less than 1/3.

For authorizing a subpoena or closing a meeting or hearing - a majority of members of the committee.

Witness Requirements-To the greatest extent practicable, witnesses are required to file advance copies of:

• their written statements
• non-governmental witnesses should also file a resume and the amount and source of any federal grant or contract money received during the current or two preceding fiscal years

the deadline for advance filing is set by each committee's individual rules. No point of order lies against a witness'es failure to comply with this rule; however, there may be an objection to the

inclusion of the witness'es WRITTEN testimony in the hearing record.

Questioning Witnesses - As a general rule, each committee member is entitled to five minutes of questioning for each panel of witnesses. However, the Chair and ranking minority member may designate specific members or staff for extended questioning of up to 30 minutes per side prior to initiating the five-

minute rule.

The Minority Witness Rule - The minority is entitled to one additional day of related hearings at which to call their own witnesses if a majority of minority members make their demand before the committee's

hearing is gaveled closed.

Hearing Adjournment - It is NOT within the power of the Chair to unilaterally recess or adjourn a committee hearing or meeting. If objection is heard, a nondebatable motion to adjourn must be entertained and passed.

Subpoenas - Subpoenas may be authorized by a simple majority vote with a majority of committee members present. Committees may also delegate the power to authorize subpoenas to the full committee chairman only. Subpoenas may be signed by the Chair or by any member designated by the committee. Subpoenaed witnesses have the right to be accompanied by counsel.

The Price Of Fouling Up - (Rule XI, 2(g)5) - If a point of order is timely made in a hearing and the Chair improperly overrules or fails to properly consider the point of order, any committee member may make a point of order against the bill's consideration when the measure reaches the floor. I.e., if the Chairman fouls up, your bill may bumped from the floor and sent back to committee for the error to be corrected. IT'S IN YOUR BEST INTEREST TO ENSURE THAT THE COMMITTEE FOLLOWS ITS OWN AND HOUSE RULES.

SAMPLE LETTER REQUESTING COMMITTEE ACTION

The Honorable William F. Clinger
Chairman
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
2157 Rayburn HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Clinger:

I am writing to request that the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight schedule a hearing on H.R. 148, the Legislative Branch Drug Testing Act.

As you may know, this legislation would require the random drug testing of all Legislative Branch officials and their staffs. The public has the right to expect a high standard of conduct from its government. I strongly believe this legislation would help to restore their faith in the system.

I appreciate your assistance in this matter and should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or my legislative assistant, Veronica Rolocut, at x5-7985. I look forward to working with you on this important issue.

Sincerely,

Gerald B. Solomon
Member of Congress

GBS: evr
Encl. (1)

NOTE: BE SURE TO INCLUDE A COPY OF THE LEGISLATION

The committee will come to order.

The purpose of this morning's hearing is to take testimony on H.R. 1286, the Mandate and Community Assistance Reform Act, bipartisan legislation which I introduced with several members of this committee to help State and local governments struggling under the weight of existing mandates.

For years, State and local officials have been telling Washington that the federal penchant for mandating activities or services and requiring non-federal governments to foot the bill is cutting into their budgets for low-income community services. This problem was highlighted by local officials who testified before the House Committee on Government Operations during the last Congress. The bottom line is that they need relief from unfunded or underfunded federal mandates.

With this bill, relief has arrived. The Mandate and Community Assistance Reform Act establishes a commission to examine existing federal mandates and to make recommendations to Congress regarding the termination, temporary suspension, or consolidation of reporting requirements of existing mandates on State and local governments. The Commission is also charged with identifying mandates that should be carried out in whole or in part by the federal government instead of States and localities. Under the Act, the select recommendations of the Commission's final report will take effect automatically unless Congress disapproves them within 60 days.

Let me acknowledge the other mandate relief proposals pending before this Congress. They have been discussed at previous hearings, and I applaud my colleagues who take this issue seriously enough to author and cosponsor mandate relief legislation. However, the Mandate and Community Assistance Reform Act differs from the rest by providing for the roll back of existing mandates. Most other mandate bills apply solely to mandates imposed in the future -- not to current requirements that siphon a growing share of State and local budgets. H.R. 1286 addresses this important failing through the Commission review process.

H.R. 1286 also addresses the difficulties small governments and small businesses often face in complying with costly federal rules and regulations. In 1980, Congress passed and the President signed the Regulatory Flexibility Act, legislation designed to mitigate the impact of federal rules on small entities. However, the federal government has failed to implement the Regulatory Flexibility Act as Congress intended. H.R. 1286 contains a provision to modify the Act's procedures for judicial review of an agency's rulemaking record. Federal agencies need to be more sensitive to the effects of their rules on small governments with limited economic resources. I believe this modification will do the trick.

Finally, let me note that H.R. 1286 also addresses the need for innovative approaches toward the delivery of services to the public. There are myriad federal social service programs available to local governments to provide job training, nutrition, literacy and substance abuse services for low income citizens. Yet, in hearing after hearing we have heard the complaint that these programs are governed by different and sometimes inconsistent objectives and eligibility requirements. Few programs provide a comprehensive approach toward the needs of low income citizens.

Recognizing that municipal governments are in the best position to determine where needs are greatest, H.R. 1286 allows them to proceed by permitting local officials, together with low income citizens from the community, to design their own programs using some of the federal funds they already receive. By allowing communities some control in addressing their priorities we can encourage innovative approaches toward the problems of low income Americans without increasing the federal budget deficit.

I believe H.R. 1286 offers significant reforms to aid State and local governments and the communities and people which they serve. It is important legislation which benefits from strong bipartisan support, and it is the result of years of prior hearings, revisions and review. I look forward to discussing this legislation with our panels of witnesses today, and I look forward to resolving any issues of remaining controversy to allow us to move quickly forward in bringing the bill to the floor of the House and to the American people.