POGO Appropriations Requests for the Legislative Branch Subcommittee

Dear Chair Reed, Ranking Member Fischer, Chairman Amodei, and Ranking Member Espaillat:

The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is a nonpartisan independent watchdog that investigates and exposes waste, corruption, abuse of power, and when the government fails to serve the public or silences those who report wrongdoing. POGO champions reforms to achieve a more effective, ethical, and accountable federal government that safeguards constitutional principles.

To further strengthen Congress’s efforts to promote government accountability and civil rights, we suggest several modest reforms, all of which could be addressed in either bill text or report language accompanying the legislative branch appropriations bill.

• Require a comprehensive review of the Capitol complex to determine accessibility challenges for individuals with disabilities.
• Permit one TS/SCI clearance per House personal office to support oversight.
• Close the racial pay gap on Capitol Hill.
• Add a bipartisan, fact-based oversight workshop to the Congressional Staff Academy and Congressional Leadership Academy.
• Support FOIA eDiscovery tools across the federal government.

POGO submits the enclosed requests for language to be included in the fiscal year 2024 legislative branch appropriations bill and report.

Thank you for your consideration of these proposals to strengthen government accountability and oversight. For more information, please have your staff contact me at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Joe Spielberger
Policy Counsel

Enclosure: 1

cc: Senate Committee on Appropriations Chair Patty Murray
House Committee on Appropriations Chairwoman Kay Granger
Senate Committee on Appropriations Vice Chair Susan Collins
House Committee on Appropriations Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro

POGO Recommendations to Strengthen Government Accountability and Oversight

In order to strengthen government accountability and oversight, the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) recommends the following reforms be incorporated into report language accompanying both the Senate and the House Legislative Branch appropriations bills for fiscal year 2024.

Require a Comprehensive Review of the Capitol Complex to Determine Accessibility Challenges for Individuals with Disabilities

Appropriations Committee: Legislative Branch
Agency: Independent Agencies
Account: General Provisions
Funding Level: “Adequate Funding”
Type of Request: Report Language

Background 
Prior to its dissolution, the bipartisan Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress issued a final report that included an implementation status for each of the recommendations it made in the 116th and 117th Congresses.¹ One area of the committee’s work that has yet to be fully implemented is related to making the House accessible to all. While we are encouraged to see that there have been efforts to increase the digital accessibility of legislative resources, we are concerned that physical accessibility of the Capitol Hill complex remains an issue.

The final report indicates that the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) has reported on present accessibility barriers, pursuant to the Congressional Accountability Act. However, it also notes that there needs to be more “forward-looking input from the Architect of the Capitol” regarding accessibility barriers and the cost of removing them. Such input should take into account a 2020 assessment conducted by the AOC, in coordination with the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights and the Sergeant at Arms, that found a total of 1,632 barriers to access throughout the Capitol complex.² Many of these barriers, the assessment noted, were not structural in nature but rather a result of misplaced furniture, congested hallways, and crowded interior routes. AOC input on this matter should also draw on the testimony provided at a May 27, 2021, hearing on making Congress more accessible to the disability community, which found that finding parking and drop off areas within the Capitol complex is difficult for individuals who use wheelchairs, among other challenges.³

Proposed Report Language
This Committee directs the Architect of the Capitol to issue a report on physical accessibility barriers in the Capitol Hill complex, including the cost of removing them. Pursuant to recommendation 29 of the House Modernization Committee’s final report, this report should contain “forward-looking input from the AOC” that seeks to make the Capitol Hill complex fully accessible to individuals with disabilities.⁴ This report should be issued no later than 80 days after the enactment of this act.

Permit One TS/SCI Clearance Per House Personal Office to Support Oversight

Appropriations Committee: Legislative Branch
Agency: House of Representatives
Account: Salaries, Officers and Employees: Office of the Sergeant at Arms
Type of Request: Report Language

Background
The House of Representatives should empower each of its members to designate one personal office staffer who shall be provided clearance at the Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) level, providing that the staffer passes the background check.

Each member of the House needs the support of a staffer who possesses sufficient security clearance to fully assist that member in their duties, and who is fully and solely responsive to that member. In November 2021, the Senate reportedly changed its practices to allow each senator to designate one personal office staffer as eligible to apply for a TS/SCI clearance.⁵ In the 117th Congress, Representative Sara Jacobs (D-CA) introduced a bipartisan amendment to H.R. 5314, the Protecting Our Democracy Act, that would permit one TS/SCI clearance per House personal office as well.⁶  

The FY 2020 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill requested a study and report on processing times for security clearances for House employees and whether such clearances are being finalized and adjudicated consistently with executive branch timelines.⁷ The FY 2021 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill asked for further clarification of this information, directing the Sergeant at Arms to include “the number of clearances disaggregated by security level as well as clearances pending.”⁸

Granting a clearance does not put a staffer “in access” to information, since that requires an additional determination of need-to-know. However, it does remove an important barrier so that staff can provide an appropriate level of responsive, unbiased, expert advice.  

Proposed Report Language
Security Clearances: The Committee directs the House Security Division (HSD) of the Sergeant at Arms to amend the House of Representatives Security Policy Manual to establish a procedure, within 30 days of enactment of this Act, through which every House member may submit a maximum of one Top Secret-cleared employee per House personal office through HSD for adjudication of eligibility to access Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) by the Department of Defense Central Adjudication Facility. This shall not alter the established precedence of a “need-to-know” determination made by the entity in possession of the classified information or material sought.  

The Committee also requests the House Security Division ensure any staffer who receives a TS/SCI clearance is provided adequate training as to the responsibilities of that clearance, including counterintelligence training, and a further report from the House Security Division on what additional programming and resources should be implemented and costs incurred to provide all congressional staff appropriate counterintelligence training.

Close the Racial Pay Gap on Capitol Hill

Appropriations Committee: Legislative Branch
Agency: House of Representatives
Account: Office of the Chief Administrative Officer and Office of Diversity and Inclusion
Type of Request: Report Language

Background
The 118th Congress is the most racially diverse yet: One-quarter of voting members — 133 members — identify as Black, Hispanic, Asian American, American Indian, or Alaska Native.⁹ While this is a significant step toward making Congress more representative of the country, much more work is needed to increase diversity, particularly at the staff level. The vast majority of congressional staffers are white.¹⁰

One important impediment to racial equity on the Hill is compensation. While non-leadership Members of Congress all earn the same salary, there is a great disparity in wages among congressional staffers. According to an analysis by LegiStorm, a company that provides data about Capitol Hill, this disparity aligns with race: The projected salary of the median white Senate staffer ($63,507) is significantly higher than that of the average Black Senate staffer ($55,151).¹¹ This equates to a difference of 15.2 % (or $8,356). It’s worth noting that similar data is not available for House staffers. This demographic and salary analysis should be collected and published directly by Congress, rather than an outside organization.

In the 117th Congress, the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress approved Recommendation 100, encouraging the House to “create a searchable database of anonymized average staff compensation information, by position, using available information on staff salaries and payroll data.”¹² The committee also approved Recommendation 108, calling on the Chief Administration Officer to “work with the Office of Diversity and Inclusion to improve the collection of anonymized demographic data through an optional form provided to staff at onboarding.”¹³ These recommendations could easily be combined to get a better sense of the pay gap that exists on Capitol Hill. Harmonizing these two recommendations would mean congressional staffers and the public could have greater transparency about salary data — and Congress could take steps to close the racial pay gap on the Hill.

Proposed Report Language
The Committee encourages the Chief Administrative Officer and the Office of Diversity and Inclusion to fully implement the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress recommendations 100 and 108. In addition, the Chief Administrative Officer and the Office of Diversity and Inclusion should work to ensure that both databases are harmonized to ensure that pay information by salary includes demographic data.

Encourage the Use of Bipartisan Committee Websites

Appropriations Committee: Legislative Branch
Agency: House of Representatives
Account: Salaries and Expenses
Type of Request:Report Language

Background
The House now permits committees to create partisan websites that post information prepared exclusively by the majority or minority.¹⁴ This practice contributes to partisanship at the committee level, impedes bipartisan oversight, makes it more difficult for the public to follow committee activities, and increases taxpayer costs by requiring the upkeep of two websites instead of one. The use of partisan websites also risks losing online committee records after changes in the majority party or committee leadership. In the 117th Congress, the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress approved Recommendation 128 endorsing bipartisan committee websites.¹⁵ Senate committees already typically use bipartisan websites.

Proposed Report Language
The Committee encourages House committees to merge any existing, partisan websites into a single website for each committee. Newly combined websites should present nonpartisan information about the committee and its activities (including all oversight activities), identify all committee and subcommittee members, and include a section allowing the majority and minority to each post joint, majority, or minority committee-related news releases. The Committee believes that committee websites that combine information from the majority and minority will encourage bipartisan committee operations and oversight efforts, aid the public in following committee activities, better safeguard committee records, and reduce taxpayer costs by maintaining one website instead of two.

Add a Bipartisan, Fact-Based Oversight Workshop to the Congressional Staff Academy and Congressional Leadership Academy

Appropriations Committee: Legislative Branch
Agency: House of Representatives
Account: Office of the Chief Administrative Officer
Type of Request: Report Language

Background
To deter Members of Congress, their staffs, and committee staff from treating oversight investigations as a partisan exercise, and to demonstrate how oversight inquiries can bridge political divides and provide effective reviews of government programs and private sector activities, more oversight training and workshops are needed.¹⁶ Currently, the Congressional Staff Academy offers no training on using fact-based, bipartisan oversight to strengthen rather than weaken committee and member relationships, civility, and collaboration. In addition, limited or no consideration has been given to providing a bipartisan, fact-based oversight workshop for members in the upcoming Congressional Leadership Academy.

Since 2006, POGO’s Congressional Oversight Initiative has worked to help Congress perform one of its most important constitutional responsibilities: overseeing the executive branch. Over the past 16 years we have trained thousands of congressional staff — Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate, and from nearly every committee office and many personal offices — on best investigative and oversight practices through our monthly oversight trainings. Additionally, since 2015, POGO, the Levin Center, and the Lugar Center have held twice-yearly, bipartisan training sessions for congressional staff, called “Oversight Boot Camps,” to hone the skills needed to conduct fact-based, bipartisan, high-quality inquiries.¹⁷ Our two-day boot camps combine staff from the House and Senate, and from both parties, in investigative exercises that, to date, have trained over 300 staffers. In recent years, we’ve received over 100 applications for the 30 spots available in each boot camp, demonstrating the strong demand for civil, effective, bipartisan oversight training. Boot camp participants are put into bipartisan groups, often with their committee counterparts on the other side of the aisle or on the other side of the Capitol, helping to create invaluable working relationships.

In the 116th Congress, the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress issued Recommendations 32 and 63 calling for an increase in “bipartisan learning opportunities for staff” and “staff certifications” in congressional skills.¹⁸ In the 117th Congress, the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress approved Recommendation 143, calling for “the House [to] offer and support optional programs for members and staff to learn best-practices for conducting bipartisan, fact-based oversight.”¹⁹ To maximize resources, the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives could work with outside groups that have the expertise to offer these trainings to congressional staff.

Proposed Report Language
The Committee encourages the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to ask the Congressional Staff Academy and the Congressional Leadership Academy to work with outside organizations that provide effective oversight workshops to offer educational and professional development opportunities on conducting high-quality, fact-based, bipartisan oversight investigations. The Committee also encourages the CAO to prioritize offering a staff certification for Oversight Investigators through the Congressional Staff Academy.

Support FOIA eDiscovery Tools Across the Federal Government

Appropriations Committee: Legislative Branch
Agency:Government Accountability Office (GAO)
Type of Request: Bill Text

Background​
To comply with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), agencies must respond to most FOIA requests within 20 business days — a deadline they regularly fail to meet. But many agencies have reported great success with eDiscovery or electronic records management software and similar tools in improving FOIA workflows.²⁰ While some of these tools require steep upfront investments and can be initially cost-prohibitive, they could prove cost neutral in the long term.²¹

Appropriators should investigate the approximate costs needed for agencies to commit to using these tools. According to an Environmental Protection Agency 2021 budget report, the agency requested “an additional $4.0 million … to continue progress towards upgrading the Agency’s enterprise-wide records management system and enhancing the digitization of paper records.”²²

Given that the EPA’s $4 million request reflects system upgrades and not the full upfront investment into digitization systems, other agencies would require additional funding. For example, the Technology Committee of the Chief FOIA Officers found that more advanced search tools may exist at agencies but could require “FOIA offices … to leverage existing agency resources and licenses.”²³ The following bill text would be in line with the FOIA Advisory Committee’s recommendation to provide more guidance on the use of e-discovery tools to assist agencies in meeting their obligations to conduct an adequate search of electronic records.²⁴

Proposed Bill Text
There shall be a funding allocation in the amount of $40,000,000 for the Comptroller General for which agencies can expand use of “eDiscovery” or similar tools. The Comptroller General shall select 10 agencies of varying sizes and distribute an investment for new or expanded eDiscovery program to be completed before FY2023. Within 365 days, an initial report shall be issued to the Appropriations Committee and to the Congressional Budget Office to determine the impact of a government-wide deployment. Additionally, GAO shall evaluate the deployment of eDiscovery tools and further report back to the Committee.