Vandalizing the First Branch
Will the Senate take a more measured approach to Legislative Branch Funding?
The funding and operations of the Legislative branch comes into focus this week. The full Senate Appropriations Committee will hold its markup of the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill Thursday morning at 9:30. This is important because the upper chamber will have its say on operations and funding for key legislative branch agencies that the House Appropriations Committee would devastate should the bill they favorably approved on June 26 be enacted.
Senate Appropriators are not holding a subcommittee mark-up – the House's mark-up was perfunctory – so they're playing with live ammo at this week's proceedings. Whatever language is included in the committee report becomes operational when it's reported out by the committee. The draft bill text and report language are not yet publicly available but they will be soon. We'll be watching and will publish a side-by-side comparing key funding levels as well as report language. ICYMI, a coalition of 30+ organizations released a letter on Monday calling on Senate Appropriators to protect GAO and strengthen Legislative branch funding.
The most concerning provisions in the House version hit the Government Accountability Office the hardest. House appropriators approved a 50% cut to GAO, which, as we explained before the July 4th recess, would cripple its capacity to respond to investigation requests from committee chair and ranking members. Roughly half of the reports GAO produced over the last half-dozen years were mandated by committees, mostly by Armed Services and Appropriations in both chambers. The cuts eliminate the bandwidth for requests not required by law because they will force GAO to fire more than two thousand employees. Without the full capacity of GAO’s watchdog function, the federal government likely will waste $40 billion this fiscal year the office otherwise would have saved.
In addition, the House version would prevent GAO from bringing civil lawsuits in circumstances where the Executive branch impounds funds appropriated by Congress. If Congress doesn't have control of the power of the purse – a key legislative prerogative going back to the 1689 English Bill of Rights – then it has lost a foundational power. Jason Pye has a great explainer out today on the importance of a strong and capable GAO. Don't miss the FAI's Dan Lips call for reforms, not evisceration, of the GAO.
GAO itself wrote to House Appropriators about the consequences of the House's proposed cuts, which includes:
A 63 percent reduction in staff levels (2,000 people).
The ending of all ongoing work requested by committees and redeployment of staff to work required by law. Currently 417 requests are from committees and 364 are mandates.
Ending all GAO details to committees.
Ending all technical assistance. There were 1,100 instances in 2024.
Curtailing investments in science and technology work.
Discontinue budget justification reviews for appropriators.
Inability to complete in a timely manner audits of seven federal agencies and audit the Consolidated Financial Statements of the U.S. Government.
Unable to timely resolve bid protests, which amount to 1,800-2,000 annually.
The Library of Congress, meanwhile, is on the hook for about a 10% reduction. The Congressional Research Service is facing almost a $3.5 million reduction in its staffing budget. The House Appropriations Committee provided no justification for these reductions in its report.
The fiscal throttling of GAO and the Library come on the heels of efforts by the executive branch to assert direct control over them. In May, President Trump fired Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden. The Administration also sent Department of Justice officials to the Copyright Office and attempted to install loyalists as Deputy Librarian and the Register of Copyrights. We think these moves are of dubious legality, to say the least. The Department of Government Efficiency, meanwhile, also sent staff to GAO and the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights in attempted takeovers. Although both offices rejected DOGE incursions, they were unprecedented power grab attempts by the Executive branch within Legislative branch offices.
House Republican appropriators abetted and acquiesced to this overreach in their Legislative branch appropriations bill, forbidding GAO to exercise its authority to sue the Administration for unlawful impoundments of federal funds without congressional approval and forbidding its monitoring of impoundment without direct order.
These proposals to cut the Library and GAO also come as heightened security concerns are taking up a larger slice of the overall legislative branch budget. The House version authorizes $136 million more in salary and expenses for the Capitol Police, which is nearing a budget of a billion dollars, nearly double what it was in Fiscal Year 2020. As we’ve argued, more money does not translate to more security as the organizational and managerial challenges within the force remain and poor department transparency limits congressional ability to reform it. With the threat of violence against elected officials of deep concern, the status quo for funding, overseeing, and structuring the Capitol Police is unsustainable.
I was in attendance at the House appropriations full committee markup and what I saw was disheartening. During the 8-hour proceedings, Republican members largely ignored the remarks made by and amendments offered by Democrats. Many speeches made by Democratic members likely came off as hectoring to the Republicans. There were only a few instances where there were signs of engagement. One was a discussion over Rep. Hoyer's failed amendment to provide members of congress a cost of living adjustment. During the debate, it was interesting to learn that Rahm Emanual was responsible for creating the political circumstances where Members of Congress are not willing to allow cost of living adjustments for their pay to be enacted into law. (If you remember this, reach out to me – I'd like to learn more.)
There was clearly real engagement that happened behind the scenes, which is why both parties agreed to a manager's amendment without any debate. It's also likely why the major fights were over items whose jurisdiction is shared with the Senate. In other words, the House knew and intended that their language would not be the final say. The provisions of the bill that relate only to the House of Representatives were much more reasonable than the provisions relating to GAO and the Library.
Only one amendment, from Rep. Aguilar, was adopted 32-29, which would allow Members of the House to employ individuals granted employment authorization under DACA. However, Speaker Johnson was quoted as saying he would use the Rules Committee process to remove that language. This perhaps reveals who was behind the inflammatory language and unreasonable cuts in the House bill, as it would not be what one would expect from an appropriator.
Senate appropriators have a lot on their plate Thursday. Historically, the committee has been the better steward of the legislative branch during funding reduction frenzies. They also do a better job of keeping national politics out of operational matters. We will monitor and share the results.
Odds and Ends
The House Modernization Subcommittee was the focus of a Roll Call article on incremental steps taken in the 119th Congress to make the Legislative branch a better place. Yesterday, the ModSub announced the roll out of LegiDex, a long-awaited online staff directory. This was recommendation #22, endorsed by the Modernization Committee in 2022, with the vision of "a web portal with staff contact information that is managed and updated by the House, Senate, congressional support offices, and support agencies to enhance the exchange of information and policymaking process." LegiDex is not finished – the underlying vision is to include contact information for the Senate and for support agencies, but so far only House and (we think) CRS data is available on the congressional intranet.
Progress on LegiDex was discussed at the June 10th Congressional Data Task Force meeting, which we've recapped on the Congressional Data Coalition website. We also summarized progress on CaseCompass and several other projects. The quarterly task force meetings provide both insight and opportunities to engage on technology modernization in the Legislative branch. We’ve also published our summary of the March 11 meeting, which covers a new way to access CRS reports. You can find summaries of all the meetings going back more than a decade – and much more – on the Congressional Data Coalition's website.
The Office of the Whistleblower Ombuds has launched House-approved communications tools for the public to share information with Congress, including secure intake webforms for Member offices and committees, and an account on Signal.
The US Capitol Police Inspector General released several overdue reports this May:
A 2016 report: Violation Citation Process Collateral Funds, which discusses USCP deploying a new – but redacted – process to handle mass arrests.
A 2008 report: Audit of USCP workforce diversity, done at request of Congress.
Another 2008 report: review of specialty assignments and proficiency pay programs, which found that the department did not have an adequate and official accounting of each specialty assignment and proficiency pay program.
A 2007 report: USCP physical inventory count
Another 2007 report: review of student loan repayment program which found lax oversight and deficient controls.
"Republicans Nuked the Filibuster, Stealthily," writes Sarah Binder on her substack Good Authority as one of the big takeaways from the enactment of the BBB. "By undermining the authority of the chamber’s neutral, non-partisan parliamentarian, the move made it far easier for the current Senate, as well as future majorities, to avoid compliance with the 'Byrd Rule.'" What's the consequence of this change? "The party that controls Congress and the White House can now set fiscal policy without worrying about a filibuster. That will increase the temptation to spend more and collect less revenue. It could also exacerbate the trend practiced by both parties of converting annual appropriations into new spending…."
With congressional leaders still refusing to comply with a law requiring the installation of a plaque honoring the Capitol Police officers who defended the Capitol on January 6, 2021, two force veterans have filed a federal lawsuit to force it. This also was the subject of repeated focus at the House Appropriations Committee hearing.
Only 13% of House member offices employed at least one Black staffer in a leadership position as of the end of March, according to a new report by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Overall, people of color are only roughly a fifth of top House staff, even though they are 43% of the U.S. population.
Even though she pledged support for unionization in 2022, Rep. Dina Titus stymied an attempt to form a staff union within her own personal office the following year, according to former staff.
A new collected volume on the findings of the Church Committee Report is coming this January, with a dope cover.
The Congressional Transparency Caucus hosted a panel discussion on strengthening government accountability. We have the recap and video.
The Senate Ethics Committee told senators that Senate Rule 43 prohibits a senator from categorically refusing access to the Member's office based on an actual or perceived relationship with a presidential administration. Can you imagine that? Refusing to meet with constituents or advocates based on alignment with the White House? My experience has been that offices will generally meet with anyone. How far we've fallen that this guidance needed to be issued.