To direct the Librarian of Congress to promote the more cost-effective, efficient, and expanded availability of the Annotated Constitution and pocket-part supplements by replacing the hardbound versions with digital versions.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1234) to direct the Librarian of Congress to promote the more cost-effective, efficient, and expanded availability of the Annotated Constitution and pocket-part supplements by replacing the hardbound versions with digital versions.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is the Constitution Annotated, or CONAN, as it is better known today, weighing 8 pounds, 14 ounces.

Its origins date back to 1797 when Congress passed legislation requiring every Member of Congress to be provided with a copy of the Constitution. These copies were eventually expanded to include Supreme Court case citations so that Members could see which clauses of the Constitution the Court used in deciding cases.

However, as the number of citations grew by hundreds, the copies became less useful to Members because most had no idea what the cases were about and what questions were before the Court.

So, in 1921, Congress began requiring reprints of the Constitution to include explanatory language that would make sense of the case citations throughout. This format is still used today.

Initially, CONAN was printed every 10 years or so, but by 1970, Members began to complain that it was outdated almost as soon as it was printed. They addressed this by requiring that paperbound supplements to CONAN be printed every 2 years. Since 1972, that is what we have done: print a hardbound version of CONAN every 10 years and a paperbound supplement every 2 years.

CONAN obviously has a rich history, dating back over two centuries. Nothing about H.R. 1234 erases or changes this history.

The Constitution provides the framework for our government, and understanding that framework and how the Supreme Court has applied it to its decisions over the years is as essential today as it was 200 years ago.

What has changed, however, is the way people get their information. Today, most of us rely on digital sources for the most up-to-date information, whether it is news, airfares, the weather, or Supreme Court case citations.

According to the GPO, the number of print copies of CONAN requested in 2012 by the House, Senate, and the Joint Committee on Printing was just over 1,000. Ten years later, in 2022, the number of requested copies dropped to just 659.

It is no coincidence that this drop in requests coincides with the 2019 launch of a digital version of CONAN. Over the past 5 years, the CONAN website has become an invaluable resource to individual citizens, schools, libraries, and, of course, Congress.

It has received more than 28 million visits since it was created and features hundreds of pages of constitutional analysis and content. The site is publicly accessible, easy to search, provides links to Supreme Court decisions, and, perhaps most importantly, is updated in real time by the CRS.

All of this raises the question of why are we wasting taxpayer dollars printing this giant, hardcover version of CONAN, along with the paperbound supplements, when a superior, digital version already exists?

According to the CBO, replacing this version of CONAN with a digital version would reduce the Library of Congress' operating costs by $4 million over the next 4 years.

Eliminating the print requirement will also eliminate inefficient use of CRS staff time. Requiring CRS staff to spend countless hours formatting and paginating the print version of CONAN does not support the work of Congress, nor does it benefit our constituents.

Mr. Speaker, replacing the CONAN print requirement with a digital requirement is a no-brainer. The digital version provides Members and other users with the most up-to-date information and constitutional analysis available at a significant cost savings to taxpayers.

History shows that Congress has consistently taken steps to ensure that CONAN meets the evolving needs of Members and other users. Passing H.R. 1234 is a logical next step in maintaining CONAN's relevancy and usefulness, both to Congress and to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1234. I urge quick action in the Senate, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I thank the ranking member, Mr. Morelle, for his support and bipartisanship in coauthoring this legislation with me.

This is an easy win for taxpayers, saving taxpayers $4 million using a digital versus the current printed version.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support from my colleagues, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1234. This bill, as has been indicated, modernizes Congress and improves efficiency by eliminating the requirement that the Congressional Research Service print hardbound versions of its Annotated Constitution.

This measure, which I am proud to co-lead, passed by voice vote last Congress, and I am hopeful it will again today. I will take a moment to thank my dear friend, the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice), who chairs the Committee of House Administration's Subcommittee on Modernization and Innovation. I thank her for all of her hard work. It is always a delight to work with her.

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, I didn't bring a physical copy of the Annotated Constitution. I am not sure I could lift it, and I think Mrs. Bice is stronger than I am.

This mandate to print the Annotated Constitution does come with significant and unnecessary personnel cost for the Congressional Research Service. As Mrs. Bice indicated, eliminating it would save us an estimated $4 million over the next 4 years.

At the Committee on House Administration where I have the privilege of serving as the ranking member, we spent a significant amount of time talking about the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo.

That case ended four decades of precedent known as the Chevron deference, which required courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes.

While we may not all agree on the merits of this decision, there is bipartisan consensus that unless we want the courts deciding every single open policy question, then we, Congress, have to draft laws that are far more technical in specificity than we do now. That cannot be done without major assistance from subject matter experts such as those at the Congressional Research Service.

To that end, it is my hope that the millions we save from passing this bill will be promptly reinvested in CRS to enhance its capacity, an absolutely essential step as Congress continues to work to maintain our Article I authorities and prerogatives.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this practical, forward- thinking legislation. Again, I thank my colleague, Mrs. Bice, for her leadership, her partnership, and her friendship.

Mr. Speaker, I consider this a model of bipartisanship. What a great way to start off the week.

I again say, in the interests of modernization, saving important taxpayer dollars, and making sure that we are more responsive to the American people, I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation. I thank Mrs. Bice again for her bipartisanship, and I yield back the balance of my time.