Administrative Conference of the United States Reauthorization Act of 2011

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2480, ``The Administrative Conference of the United States Reauthorization Act of 2011,'' which authorizes $2.75 million in appropriations to the Administrative Conference of the United States for each of the fiscal years from 2012 through 2014. The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) is considered both an independent agency and a federal advisory committee, and is charged with providing guidance to Congress on matters of administrative law. The recommendations put forth by the ACUS have resulted in significant savings and increases the efficiency of federal agencies.

As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I have the privilege of having worked closely with the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) over the years and become familiarized with many of their initiatives. ACUS is a federal agency charged with making recommendations for the improvement of administrative agencies and their procedures, particularly with respect to efficiency and fairness.

The ACUS was established 50 years ago by President John F. Kennedy and became a permanent independent agency in less than 4 years. The purpose of the ACUS is to develop recommendations for improving procedures by which federal agencies administer regulatory, benefit, and other government programs; the ACUS has served as a private-public think tank that conducts basic research on how to improve the regulatory and legal process. It has broad jurisdiction over administrative procedure to study the efficiency, adequacy, and fairness of the administrative procedure used by administrative agencies in carrying out administrative programs, and make recommendations to administrative agencies, collectively or individually, and to the President, Congress, or the Judicial Conference of the United States.

Further, the ACUS facilitates the interchange among administrative agencies of information potentially useful in improving administrative procedure, collects information and statistics from administrative agencies and has published extensive reports evaluating and improving administrative procedure.

The members of the ACUS represent both the public and private sectors. Individuals from private sector members are generally attorneys and scholars selected to ensure broad representation of the views of private citizens and utilize diverse experience. Over the years its membership spans the ideological spectrum. For example, Justice Antonin Scalia, before his appointment to the bench, served as the chair of ACUS from 1972 to 1974. Justice Breyer was a member of ACUS and actively participated in its activities from 1981 to 1994. In the past, both Justices Breyer and Scalia testified in strong support of ACUS. According to Justice Breyer, ``The Administrative Conference is unique in that it develops its recommendations by bringing together at least four important groups of people: top-level agency administrators; professional agency staff; private (including ``public interest'') practitioners; and academicians. ACUS will typically commission a study by an academician . . . who often has the time to conduct the study. . . . The professor will spend time with agency staff. . . . The professor's draft will be reviewed . . . by private practitioners, who bring to it a critically important practical perspective. The upshot is likely to be a work-product that draws upon many different points of view, that is practically helpful and that commends general acceptance.'' (Letter from Justice Stephen Breyer to Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Chair, Subcomm. on Administrative Oversight and the Courts of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary (Aug. 21, 1995).

The ACUS has made many government wide recommendations; among its most influential recommendations have been ACUS's proposals facilitating judicial review of agency decisions and eliminating various technical impediments to such review. They recommended a model administrative civil penalty statute that has served as the basis for dozens of pieces of legislation. The ACUS has developed and promoted procedures implementing the Negotiated Rulemaking Act, which encourages consensual resolution in a process that takes into account the needs of various affected interests. In addition, ACUS is credited with playing a prominent role in improving the nation's legal system by issuing recommendations designed ``to eliminate excessive litigation costs and long delays.'' For example, Congress, in response to an ACUS recommendation, passed the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act in 1990, which established a framework for agencies to resolve administrative litigation through alternative dispute resolution. It has been noted that half of the budget of ACUS is devoted to trying to find ways to reduce, or eliminate government litigation within and by the Government. The ACUS saves tax payers dollars and in a time of economic crisis every penny counts.

The ACUS serves to focus attention on the need for the federal government to be made more efficient, less big, and more accountable. It was viewed as one of the leading federal proponents of practical ways to reduce administrative litigation. In this regard, ACUS actively promoted information-technology initiatives, such as developing methods by which the public could participate electronically in agency rulemaking proceedings to increase public access to government information and foster greater openness in government operations.

We have witnessed a number of successes under the ACUS. The ACUS is a vital tool in improving upon a process. There has been a lot of talk on the Hill of late about efficiency, streamlining process, and reducing costs. The fundamental purpose of the ACUS is to find out how to ensure that our government is operating in the most effective manner possible. The more efficiently we are able to operate the lower our cost. It has been estimated that ACUS saved the federal government and the private sector many multiples of its expenditure over the years it was in operation. Just one agency alone--the Social Security Administration-- estimated that ACUS's recommendation to change that agency's appeals process would result in approximately $85 million in savings. ACUS helped federal agencies

to implement the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990, which resulted in savings estimated to be many millions of dollars. The President of the American Arbitration Association asserted that ACUS's encouragement of ADR saved ``millions of dollars that would otherwise be frittered away in litigation costs.''

Accordingly, the elimination of ACUS in 1995 was described by several observers as being ``penny-wise, pound foolish.'' Even after its demise in 1995, Congress continued to assign ACUS various responsibilities apparently unaware of the Conference's termination. Finally, after a 15-year hiatus, ACUS was reauthorized and appropriated funding.

Currently, President Obama nominated Paul R. Verkuil to serve as chair of ACUS in November 2009 and he was confirmed by the Senate in March 2010. The ACUS formally resumed operations in April 2010.

Then since its recent Reauthorization the ACUS has started to do what it does best figuring out ways to decrease expenses and increase efficiency. Current cost-saving projects underway at ACUS include the following:

A study on the use of video hearings in administrative agencies and how they can generate ``significant savings;'' a study on rulemaking that focuses on the legal and logistical issues presented by transitioning from a paper-based system to an electronic system for handling rulemaking comments, an examination into how international regulatory cooperation could be improved and lead to trade harmonization.

Over the course of its existence, ACUS has promulgated approximately 200 recommendations to improve the administrative process, many of which were implemented, which, in turn, helped save taxpayers many millions of dollars. ACUS is an invaluable instrument established by us that has resulted in significant improvements to federal administrative law.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

It's been a pleasure working with Chairman Smith, who yields the time, never as much as I may consume, but yields the time, which I'm always appreciative of, and we've worked in a bipartisan manner on this, and I appreciate his working with me on that.

The Federal administrative law and rulemaking processes are among the most important ways by which our Nation implements public policy. Each year, agencies issue regulations to ensure that the food we eat, the air we breathe, and the cars we drive are safe. Although regulations play a critical role in virtually every aspect of our daily lives, there is only one independent, nonpartisan Federal entity that Congress can rely on to ensure that these regulations work as intended. The Administrative Conference of the United States, known as ACUS, is that critical entity.

First established by President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the Conference is a nonpartisan, public-private resource that provides invaluable guidance to Congress about how to improve the administrative and regulatory processes. ACUS is charged with making recommendations for the improvement of administrative agencies and their procedures, particularly with respect to efficiency and fairness. Over the years, the Conference has helped agencies implement many cost-saving procedures and made numerous recommendations to eliminate excessive litigation costs and long delays.

Just one agency alone, the Social Security Administration, estimates that the Conference's recommendations to change that agency's appeals process yielded approximately $85 million in savings. Another recommendation by the Conference, namely, that agencies use alternative dispute resolution methods to avoid costly and time-consuming litigation, resulted in more than $100 million in savings government- wide. Several other ACUS recommendations have greatly increased the efficiency of other administrative procedures by eliminating duplicative hearings and streamlining appeals from agency action, thereby also resulting in cost savings in the millions of dollars.

In what is truly a rare and historic example of agreement, Supreme Court Justices Stephen Breyer and Antonin Scalia have jointly testified before our committee in strong support of the Conference, not once but on two occasions, and I must say I enjoyed both of

their comments and their friendship. Justice Breyer extolled the ``huge'' savings to the public resulting from the Conference's recommendations, while Justice Scalia likewise agreed that ACUS is ``an enormous bargain.'' Perhaps most importantly, ACUS can play a major role in helping agencies become even more efficient and effective, especially given the present budgetary constraints.

As reported by the Judiciary Committee, H.R. 2480, the Administrative Conference of the United States Reauthorization Act of 2011, authorizes $2.9 million to be appropriated to the Conference for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2014. With this modest reauthorization, we will ensure that the Conference will continue to return to American taxpayers many multiples of that investment in the form of recommendations that will make Federal agencies more effective.

H.R. 2480 reflects a long history of bipartisan support for ACUS. Once again, I thank the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Lamar Smith, a gentleman and a scholar, and the Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law Subcommittee Chairman Howard Coble, a gentleman and a scholar as well, for working with me on this legislation, and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to secure final passage of H.R. 2480 by the other body. Accordingly, I urge all of my colleagues to support the legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2480) to amend title 5, United States Code, to authorize appropriations for the Administrative Conference of the United States for fiscal years 2012, 2013, and 2014, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 2480, as amended.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I offer this bill on behalf of myself, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

Lately, the need to reform Federal administrative law has become urgent. Every day the long promised economic recovery seems more like a mirage. Our top priority should be to create jobs. Protecting job creators from overregulation will help create jobs. According to the Small Business Administration, regulations impose a $1.75 trillion burden annually on the American economy. Reducing this burden will hasten our economic recovery.

The Administrative Conference of the United States is a small but important institution. It is a narrowly focused, nonpartisan body that offers an outstanding forum to reform Federal administrative law. Regulatory agencies must be efficient, effective, and accountable. This is the heart of the Conference's historical mission. Over the years, its recommendations have saved taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. For example, the Social Security Administration saved $85 million by adopting a recommendation to eliminate an unnecessary step in its appeals process. The Conference's budget was $1.8 million at the time. And the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation saved more than $9 million in the first 18 months of a pilot program implementing an ACUS recommendation to make greater use of alternative dispute resolution. ACUS currently is urging agencies to expand their use of video hearings. The Social Security Administration already has saved $59 million by doing more hearings by video conference. This ACUS recommendation has the potential to save millions more across the Federal Government.

Due to a lack of funding, the Conference went dormant in 1996. It was revived in the 111th Congress, and I am glad that once again it is able to contribute to administrative law reform. The Conference is uniquely positioned to generate much savings for very little cost. Recommendations from the Conference save taxpayer dollars by helping agencies work more effectively. The Conference also helps agencies adopt better and less burdensome regulations to reduce that $1.75 trillion regulatory burden on the economy. Additionally, the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law's December 2006 interim report on regulatory reform contains numerous suggested reforms that ACUS could examine and help agencies implement.

During these difficult economic times, everyone has to tighten their belts, including Federal agencies. If American families have to make tough economic choices, so should Congress. The amount authorized by this bill, $2.9 million annually for the next three fiscal years, was a bipartisan compromise. It reduces the Conference's authorization level by almost 10 percent while enabling the Conference to perform its most critical work. The Conference's past successes raise the prospect for a high return on the taxpayers' investment. It is a reasonable authorization level in light of the current need to reduce Federal spending, and I recommend it to my colleagues.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.