Was the last two pass all the bills as part of the Fiscal School year and i was almost 25 years ago and motels members have not seen a process that works the way its supposed to where they are there on time and the committee on appropriation process which i served along my colleague who was established by the bipartisan act of 2018 and was charged with making recommendations to significantly reform the budget process. A very active establishing committee was that the process wasnt working at all to be. Local one such a nine says that no money shall be gone from the treasury and the appropriations made by law and the color of the purse within the constitutional powers. Its a constitutionally mandated shut down an executive power. When Congress Fails to pass it builds on time. It seized power to the executive branch. They passed 117 resolutions since the beginning of the fiscal year in 1998 and last Year Congress passed nine see ours and this year the pass three but. Thats a lot of time spent whiting decisions but see how they would have to focus on other legislative duties and a bills or passed on time and how to allocate several programs is tough but it still does its job. The people deserve a functioning government and its congress is most important job. The joint committee did not pass a bill produced a lot of important work and provides a framework that it is today. The committee engaged in serious discussions about what it would take to fix the budget appropriations process and many of the ideas that came out of those discussions and thats our intent today. And i will talk about the problems with the process and the agreement that both parties and chambers can find some coming around and were working on the work of the joint committee and we wont limit ourselves to that committee and im looking forward to hearing the ideas for more Witnesses Today and im grateful to the appropriations chair when the former budget chair who tag team to lead that committee and i appreciate your leadership and with that all now invite my vice chair for some remarks. Mister chairman and i think Ranking Member womack for joining us today and its a great time to speak with you today. I met the committee and to fix our current funding process and i hope today that you know that this hearing is proof that it was not for not and it will work with you we continue they work from last year. This committee will and im glad youre here and i know that you all want to solve this and we can gather some ideas on how to tackle this complex issue. When it comes to the current funding process in congress i think we all know we can do better. The American People are constituents expects us to do better and or charged with the support but the taxpayer dollars and we move forward mister chairman and each chamber in this administration is the brick wall of this process and each time over the last couple of years and are Witnesses Today its illustrated we. Its been more than 20 years that the bills were passed by one the process work and for house members of 60 so we have a lot of appropriators and with myself as well and i know this problem his pushed onto each of us. And at the panel here the probe raiders are here as well and its been tough with other negotiations that are chewed up by the process thats tough to see discarded by the continuing resolution and tough to go after this year after year. We all have different backgrounds and different perspectives and philosophies and with a lot in common is uber trapped in his broken funding together and i think that todays hearing and bipartisan spirit will get to pick up on the efforts that we let us with last year and will get a chance to fix this and get out of this broken cycle rain so thank you mister chairman i look forward to hearing. Thank you hear the testimony of five witnesses on our first panel we have, the nita lowey chair of the House Committee and the representative steve womack and the member of the House Committee a budget. Both service cochairs in the committee for the appropriations project and Great Respect and admiration for both of your leadership so thank you for that. Particularly despite this being a very busy week representative lowey and womack are giving us or precious time. You are now recognized for five minutes. Will kill moore, i share the member of the committee and i am pleased to join you this morning to frankly speak with you and a room that is very familiar and have some familiar faces and to be here alongside Ranking Member womack. Serving me as the joints elected committee and the process of reform and the 115 concerns over the process of the Senate Consideration prevented that committee from reporting about recommendations and House Democrats have used the first nine months of a new majority to make important improvements to the budget and appropriations process. I am very pleased to say that one of the most important changes that i advocated for and the joint Selection Committee was raising an workable budget caps and received the bipartisan basis in july. Because of Speaker Pelosi strong leadership, the bipartisan budget act allows us to invest for the people and increased funding of education health, care and human services. In addition, the bipartisan budget act has the ceiling of removing the source of uncertainty with family, businesses and communities across the country. However, as i recommend the select committee process. I would prefer to go further and completely repeal that seal. It serves no useful purpose other than to create opportunities and threatens our nations credit and the health of our economy. In addition to the bipartisan budget act, we also made important changes to house rules. With our democratic majority took office in january, we adopted a meaningful pay as you go ruled that shuts the door on reckless policies like the gop tax can. As chairwoman of the committee, i have restored the long serving Standard Practice of adopting jail to be allegations before reporting appropriation bills an important step for transparency. To build on these successes and charting a more affective responsible cause for the American People there are two key legislative changes that i propose making. When i let the joint select committee that would help approve the budget and appropriations process. Moving from an annual to a live resolution. Requiring the resolution in the first year of each congress. Providing a appropriations allocation for both the first and second years of the biennial. Providing a mechanism to facilitate action on appropriations even if the budget raja lieu shun is not adopted. Ideally, by allowing for a concurrent resolution and dealing with three oh to a allocations only. Although, these are outside the scope of this committee, it is worth noting that i also have to changes for senate rules and a fiscal responsibility and both chambers. Restoring the combat role, senate rule with and prevented reconciliation legislation for increasing the deficit and the first years and a 60 vote point of order in the senate against reconciliation at a budget resolution and call for a net deficit increase. In addition, i support technical improvements to better handle kept judgment items. Change the process of the calculating baseline projections that emergency spending and expediting administrations provision a full year, predatory data for the cpp all. Even with these changes the, most important element of the successful buzz it and process of a political will. Im proud that our democratic majority has shown the political will and taken our responsibilities seriously. That is why our chamber is far ahead of the senate and in processing appropriation bills this year. Finally, i would like to discuss the elephant in the room and congressional plea directed spending. The select committee and modernization of strengthening this institution. Nothing could strengthen the Article One Branch of government more than restoring the congressionally directed spending. It is imperative that congress exercises its constitutional responsibility and determining how and where taxpayer dollars are appropriating our spend. The congressionally directed spending has led to diminished company in the house and transferred are authority to the executive branch. Returning to a strong set of rules and to ensure transparency and prevent to be used of a measurable benefit of this house and the American People and i hope that we can do so in the months ahead. Thank you for inviting me to testify and best of luck with the select committee. Thank you madam chair and thank you for your leadership. Mr. You womack are now recognized for farm five minutes. Thank you chairman derek kilmer and the rest of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today and ill show you some perspective on the joint committee and the process and there will be a cochair with the leader of the House Committee and i look forward to a productive discussion roy and they have been voiced frustration about the budget process and the current process in the 1970s and has been updated for a very minor revisions and it does not align with the dynamics however. Last year its like the select committee with legislation to reform the process of the equal number of republicans of the voting threshold and the super majority was five republicans and five democrats and ten out of 16 members. But the requirement of this party and to structure guaranteed in the consensus driven product. We ultimately produced a bipartisan package of reforms and some highlights of the bill are, moving to a budget of maintaining annual appropriations and reconciliation. Ensuring real estate headlines from congress to complete its budget and appropriations work. Requiring a Budget Committee hearing on the fiscal sea of the region. Why other we fail, we obtained bipartisan support for a number of proposals and the final vote was required and the super majority threshold. Some members voted no, some voted present. A number of those members had support for the underline bill but the presence of the unrelated disagreement among the senate leadership. However, the final proposal once developed was input from all members and cochair agreed to base text and elements were out in and markup in the super majority vote and some had a unanimous vote. Bipartisan ideas were found and could continue to be proportion but members. The budget and appropriation process was also pleasantly surprised that republicans and democrats in the house and senate, came into the deliberation to talk about the. Debt to be clear, our group did not try to identify policies to reduce the deficit by a certain amount. What we did discuss extensively was the fact that congress does not use its existing procedures to reduce the debt. We could use regular order or reconciliation and we simply dont. Members expressed interest and a third route and perhaps that is bipartisan. With the debt to gdp and target metric, senator Sheldon Whitehouse in particular was a leader in this area. So what should this committee do now . Since its football season, id encourage you to first get some first downs. Rather than try to for throw a hail mary likely do so often. The joint select committee represents a bipartisan and a step forward for incremental reform. Second, we should continue to focus on budget process and not budget outcomes. Outcomes are specific levels of fundings with proposals to reduce the deficit by a certain amount. Process is how congress determines how much to spend or how to determine what policies to act in this deficit. Id like to see us modernize a procedure that will hopefully have congress for success in the future and who happens to have a majority at any given time. My goal is to get something and acted and improves our process. To work both republicans and democrats in the house and senate and try to do so to acknowledge the importance of the senate with this puzzle and vein i congratulate for releasing a series of budget and reform ideas that are in the summer. Before i conclude, i should just anecdotally say this. The better poster child for the fall the congress of the United States of america than where we are happening to be today on funding with the government in the beginning of the fiscal year and is less in two weeks away. I challenge this committee and all willing participants of the congress to find solutions to put congress back on the track of arguably the most important work and i yield back. Thank you. I want to express my gratitude to both and you to the busiest people in these marvel buildings and the fact that you are giving us our time we are gray very grateful for so thank you. With that we will now move on to our second panel them our first witness says matthew owens, he is the second of Vice President of the universities. We provide strategic leadership of the associations priorities. Mr. Owens served in a Leadership Council and convergence a nonprofit means of individuals organizations but with to build trust with solutions and form issues. And his capacity, is served on the budget process project to address the often dysfunctional process. The project participants reached on five proposals and to prove the process that congress uses in the annual budget. William hogg wind is a senior Vice President at the Bipartisan Policy Center and it is compassesy they manage the Fiscal Health and Economic Policy and mr. Hogan serve 33 years for 25 years of the u. S. Senate staff. And thousand three to 2007, he served at the director of procreation with the senate below already leader and evaluating the fiscal impact and the budget policy and from 1982 the 2003, and a staff member and directed of the Senate Committee according to the u. S. Senate chairman and Ranking Member also participated in the budget in the 1995 budget deficit act and 1990s, the reconciliation act and historically in 1997 the balanced budget agreement. Megan lynch is part of the finance division and research service. Her work focuses on the budget process and joined see our as into our than seven as the cra has worked in maryland and the marilyn general assembly. Reminded that your oral testimony is limited to five minutes and without ejectments we may be part of the record mr. Owens you are now recognized for five minutes of the oral presentation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify in front of this panel. I encouraged the work and congress to improve the budget process and ive seen the consequences with my research over the past few decades. Student Financial Decisions are held up for important medical researches and they have made more complex and time consuming because they are not in the budget in a political manner to. This is highly inefficient and its time in institutional we sources that would otherwise be used for research and service missions. I chose to participate in the emergence building budget project for this reason. And the spirit of what researchers and universities have said, we seem to address these difficult problems facing our nation. The same reasons my Employer Association of the university supports the levels discussed. Understanding that you have the testimony i will hire the convergence of the project in the five consensus proposal we developed. The first proposal is the budget action plan. It synchronize is the budget process with the governing cycles and calls on each new congress of up to twoyear budget and the law by the president. The budget action plan as three required elements and one provision. First, Discretionary Spending up to two years. Second, it lifts the deadline for many shortfall in the legislation and third it authorizes a look at the impact of the impact of the budget of the long term fiscal outlook. Additionally, it allows congress the option to reconciliation noble per fiscal year. Her second proposal requires to have a fiscal state of the nation report. It would be an issue during the president ial election cycle and logging information about the finances and not limited to the debt, deficits, interest payments, revenues and spending and a breakdown of all Revenue Sources and any estimated shortfalls of long term spending programs. This report would be widely distributed and provide information in friendly ways to have washington insiders beyond have the budget. It would be a full picture of the finance and elevate discussions about the budget and make more informed choices. The third proposal seems to reinforce the long term effects and every four years the geo reviews the portfolios that are both long term they will review programs and National Security and our fourth proposal is to strengthen the Budget Committee. We agree that the stats needs to be restored to lead the process. We propose that the chair and Ranking Members of key fiscal and authorize committee, serve on the verge and serve on the Budget Committee. It would help ensure that those that are responsible for carrying at the budget, invest in the process to develop it. Our last proposal, calls on congress to give cbo and geo and other policies the recess adversary of independent information. Proposes include new responsibilities for these agencies so its important that they have adequate resources. Now, these five proposals will not yield a perfect budget process. However, we think that they could contain practical and achievable measures that can be developed further in the process of facilitated inform unbiased and sound decisionmaking. We believe our proposals were strong starting points for the committee which incorporates elements such as budgeting and the Budget Committee. In closing, i will offer shared a view among others and no single budget process reform or package reforms came by itself and prevailing dysfunction. The process reform alone cannot breach budget deals. Will is needed, the process matters and a small or large changes through ownership for new expectations and norms were budgeting. Right now, expectations are low and its broken. As noted earlier, its been 20 years since all appropriations ive passed prior to the start of the fiscal year and tear my colleague taylor had said 15 of all current members of congress have seen the process worked. We believe our proposals have remedied this. On behalf of the project participants for we wish you success, its important to our nations government and hope that we will help implement this move to congress and the federal process, thank you. Thank you for your testimony and youre well wishes. We are now recognize you for five minutes. Is it on now . I apologize for that. They bipartisan policy congratulates the committee for the regulations that you have today and as its been stated, the budget process and our current procedure rules concepts and process is complex or members of the staff find hard it understand let alone the american taxpayer. Over the last 12 years, congress has failed to adopt two thirds of the budget resolution blueprint in it the most recently fiscal year that it ends just in 11 days. My testimony there focuses on the impossible solution to getting her work them on time that are long debated and never agreed to by the corporation reform propose something that you mister chairman and representative had to deal with in certain era committees last year. At the outset, i must note also mister chairman that representative as new house brooks and that those states washington indiana, and wisconsin are functioning with their wages. As i look back at the history of the current budget act its really 1987. Bipartisan agreement with congress which was reached to have taps on Discretionary Spending. This was a similar bipartisan agreement in 1990 in 1997. Budget act of 2011 of course is appropriation a caps for ten years through 2021. Those were adjusted in two years with the bipartisan budget of 2013 2015, 2018 and of course most recently 2019. In other words, two years seems to have come the opposite of time period for congress to abide and the limits of Discretionary Spending. Therefore, institutionalizing what is become Standard Practice and a recommendation that has a consensus around. Over the years, my thinking on this as of all for not supporting the split and you will budget process. They joined select committee of last year recommends the adoption and can curb budget resolution by may 15, the first session of the congress. Resolution was adopted and established by the budget for setting in place the top inaudible in the past two years. The House Committee was charged with reporting annual appropriation bills each station of the by any im. I believe if congress could adopt budget by may 15th and he first session of congress, it would still be difficult for Appropriation Committee with the house and senate to have complete action on 12 bills before beginning of the next fiscal year. That is why, i would prefer iffy cooperation with speed split into half. You consider it in the first year and six in the second year. I must note, the Committee Proposal in the concurrent resolution during would allow for an annual appropriation bill to be triggered for each fiscal year. Were expressing my own ignorance of the committees thinking but i am not clear how one we generate to reconciliation bills with one budget resolution. But benefits of the budgeting process are real and our longterm planning and its developed predictability and increased opportunity for oversight and authorization. It brighter flexibility to realign the resources and increase time of the Program Evaluations and a couple of final comments and the budget process. But its important for congress for this work. The committee is a various incentives of privately pro him living chair where children to travel with a budget resolution which those words considered. However, no commitments were productive. I must acknowledge mister chairman, that you did vote for the commitments in that committee. For the select committee they did not include the incentives other than the promise of pro creations overtime. Once the budget appropriation was reached, senate rules could be adopted to the motion to consider the operation and finally, the occurring criticisms has been that they are making accurate projections that its difficult. Nothing in the budget process precludes funding or preparation for unanticipated and unplanned emergencies. One off here of power is better from my perspective 10 12 appropriation bills each year. Let me conclude with whats already been stated and there is this process change and a decision any easier. The budget needs governing and it is challenging. I do believe if you want to find consensus on reasonable reforms to the budget and procreation that it should be given serious consideration. Thank you mister hoagland. German kilmer and tom graves, my name is megan lynch and i am a specialist. I am a specialist on congress and the process at the research service. As requested, my testimony this morning will touch on two subjects. The work of the 2018 committee and the congressional rules in earmarks. The committee on budget appropriations process reform was created in february of last year and was charged with developing them with the appropriations process. As mentioned earlier, the committees membership with beep required for bipartisan. After about nine months of debating consideration, we would use this in a cochairs mark and the committee al they markup. During which additional recommendation was acted as bipartisan amendments. The cultures mark as amended include recommendations that pertain solely to deposit resolution any committees. And the budget resolution and the budget resolution and the ability to reconciliation and include an optional path for the budget resolution and the budget in the senate. It included a provides timetable that would provide more time for the development in this evolution. It goes to the Budget Committee and the House Committee proposed eliminating term limits for house Budget Committee members and incorporated earlier this year into house rules. And he said it, a proposed expanding the senate Budget Committee to include the chair and Ranking Members and the Senate Committee on finance. And the joint hearing on the fiscal state of the nation. On the final recommendations the committee will considered many budget process proposals and be earmark majority him. Here marks are adjoined with any tax provision that would benefit a specific entity and are included in legislations with the term earmark its also referred to as congressional. And in the early 2000s, earmarks began to perceive more scrutiny with growing concern in the 2007 house and Senate New Chamber roles that stated intention of being more transparent to the process. Those rules which are still in place require three things. First, they require that earmarks and legislation will be disclosed, they could require the committees remark requests. Last, they remember any mark that they have no financial interest in earmark. In addition to these rules, the committee adopted practices that among other things are to limit the recipient of the remarks. Ultimately, in 2011, the house and senate began what was referred to as an earmark moratorium are earmark ban. They moratorium is not in law in the house of senate rules and is insist protected by the leadership through their agenda powers. Some members have proposed to reexamination of the moratorium. Daca whose remarks and thank you for having me and looking forward to answer any questions you might have. Thank you very much and appreciate your testimony and that you didnt look down, that was impressive. I now recognize myself for five minutes of questions. I wanted to start with mr. Hoagland. Budgeting has been a perennial perennial issue. It comes up over and over again and with the annual process. Why our previous attempts of annual budgeting so hard . First of all, with all due respect i was a Senate Staffer for many years. And he sent it, budgeting were really starting to look forward and senators have six years to two years. There was very early on that we were here in the house and the difficulty of you having an office only for two years before running for reelection and im a budget here and its the theory at the unwanted applied at the apple and we wanted to frankly in terms of the recommendation of the joint committee which reflects the flag act that you are fact reflected every year and felt that if youre going to do this, you have a two years of budget and i think its the clash of the panels. They are clearly a lot of problems with the budget and we talked about a bunch of them today. Does a biennial budgeting alleviating any of those problems with those that are political in nature . No. inaudible is your sense though that if we had a biennial process it seems at least in recent history that there is a agreement it speeds the ability and sets a number of appropriators to appropriate it seems like the process gets clogged down as weve seen this year with the overall top flight numbers. Yes, i think that getting the three or two early is the reason in my testimony that. The reason im concerned as that you have to adopt a biennial budget and i respect the fact that this committee moved this adoption date to the 1st of may and not april the 15th but even if you are able to get a concurrent resolution and a current resolution on the top line of the house and senate by may 15th, it gives the appropriators really short time to get the ruling done and not only reporting as weve seen but when you take the three or two eight and break them down into the 3 02 beast thats worth starts to slow down the process. Thats all people. News final question i have you know get your sense of this and the concerns are going to raise or without regard to who is in the white house and which party is in the majority or the minority on this. Its clear that weve seen a real erosion of Congressional Authority and power them under the constitution of congress which is the power of the person and those powers of been eroded. Weve seen more decisions regarding of the administration and the ability to spend substantial amounts of money and towards congress that appropriated which has been in the news quite a bit lately. Decisions being made by elected foods and the executive branch with being made by legislators. What is Congress Giving up . I like to get your sense on what is Congress Giving up and is it a problem what congress is giving up . Its it a problem for the American People . What would you do about it . Go ahead. Im happy to start. Thinking about the convergence and i think that it is a problem. Congress has given up some of its Institutional Authority and all of this. For many other reasons you just said under question. At the end of the day, we do have called to responsibility and funding the government. Digging deeper and just in my career of over 20 plus years, ive seen that erosion time after time and used to be called in with the Committee Staff about whats going on in these programs for financial aid. Those conversations dont happen as often as they used to and the appropriators especially was too busy fighting about what is going to be the next adaptation or procreation and that was the sentiment among my colleagues with a better budget process. Anyone else wanna take a crack at that . Mister chairman i, would suggest that the congressional budget control act of 1974 career out of another crisis at that time and in pounding money in the instance of that act was the power that was taken away from congress by his ability. I think that congressional budget brought power back to the legislative brands and worked overtime in the last 12 years, you had three quarters who havent done what the law says you should be doing which is adopting the issue. New adopt that process in the sense of not following through about what powers you have any consideration of significantly shifted the decisionmaking to the executive branch and i think that is a real failure and the process today. Im overtime. We may come back for some more questions in a second round. We will now go to mr. Tom graves. Bank you teach for your thoughts. Just a couple of questions from me. We had the cochairs of the select committee on before us. Harder standing is, there was a recommendation package and couldnt get the votes necessary to pass it out. Is it safe to say that that package of recommendation is a foundation of this committee to work off the injections that you have seen them that will be seen from the package . I think its a wonderful package to be working from. When i share that sentiment. I have not heard criticisms of that package. We havent either. Only can you have certain people agree on this and it is amazing. But its a Great Foundation to work with. I didnt really hear any discussion about a mandatory versus discretionary. Can we talk about that just for a second. Is there a need for congress to vote on mandatory spending as well to get that ownership and understanding of that responsibility . Mr. Hoagland. Yes congressman, i feel strongly that the problem with having established caps over the last ten years has only focused on the discretionary potion of the budget. By not having a budget resolution which is not only mandatory but shifted the focus which the appropriation distinction as. Thats why i think its important for not only a budget resolution that sets the framework and therefore can address the issues of mandatory spending as well as revenue. Youre not doing that when youre always focusing on staying within the caps. Thats a good point. From the convergence we have had that discussion and one of the principles of the budget reform was that it should be comprehensive. I think we would agree on behalf of those participants, we envision this plan as we call it and making third that we are just the revenues and the discretionarys. I agree, ive seen the budget resolutions and other parties presented in the past generally are a visionary type document and not a governing document. Its a Mission Statement versus reality of what might occur or not occur. I would like to see it be more reality in the thinking of taking ownership of understanding of the fiscal nature of doing it out of the country. I would consider that as well as we look forward. Maybe as we think about committees, would it be nice and it is nice to hear the testimony about the Budget Committee compilation and how it would be comprised with the numbers. What if it was truly Bipartisan Committee and equally divided amongst both parties and the only way to pass it would be bipartisan. Im just opining on that. I would like to give you the opportunity in the conversation that you brought up something that a lot of people dont want to talk about and thats directed spending or the mark ward. Help us understand is, there any thought into what the reform might look like and responsible reform . We all know why more is in place and was abused in a very negative perception and limited cases which was being abused. I dont think that abuse has been removed but it has been shifted to another area. So, how would this committee consider reform and protections in place that gain the trust of the American People . Thanks for that question. Some people and thinking about the email earmark moratorium would think about some of those would be reinstitute it in the formalizing practices in the house. They would observe the mid to late 2000s, some of those were members required to post the ear mark on their personal website and say why it was a good use of taxpayer money. There are proposals for having a one stop location, like a database and accessible to the public where the earmarks were requested. The proposals to have gee a oh and it democratic republic. Thats why on that side you are limiting the recipient of those remarks and the earmarks with the no pass through earmarks and the projects that are named after members of congress. Sometimes its limiting the spending level for earmarks which is 1 of Discretionary Spending or any earmark. Previously, before the moratorium, directed spending could go by the entity and not just the government . Thats right. Were both appropriators and i dont think they have and it might be the only person thats been in congress. Thank you. You thank you mister chairman and we have a meeting one with sitting down with a bunch of folks about directed spending with your marks. I had raised the issue of the air mark for a bridge to nowhere and that was the staff person who wrote that at the time. It didnt go over so well but other pages for addressing this because it seems like since ive been here now we had a remarkably hard time and it should be the most of our job and if we had some skin in the game rather than in washington you are more likely to be support of any other changes. When the group discussed this we had 14 types and i came up in the first meeting and several meetings in between. Many of the participants of had the crease to help move along this legislation and i think they did a great job of the same things that weve heard in our discussion and we didnt reach for the senate and that was the threshold and what we found was there was a lot of interest that if you remarks were going to come back he will be totally transparent. Limiting it to certain process that a lot of people shared and that way there will be less opportunity for people to be abusive with the concerns in the past. Its just a flavor of the conversation. I dont know if i have a recommendation but you go back to the chairman about the congress given. What always struck me as that we had a chairman for many years and its always bothered me is that these news came up to the Appropriation Committee, they were earmarking and you are excluded from doing that and its a balance of responsibility. Also asked a question and is totally brought up in the same question and it seems like when i explain it back home that we appropriate the money and we have written a check and we drop in the mailbox and can you address that issue. I dealt with a number of these issues and they correlate of the statutory detriment and thats where the recommendations were in relatively recently about the annual budget and youre going to have to raise and kick out at the same time kick out an automatic increase with the limit consistently with that budget. Youre dealing with it once and consistent with what you adopted overall by the union budget them. Thats absolutely the consensus view and use your analogy and making a commitment and whats held in check and whatever it is and making that commitment. Would you like to shed light on that . Let me ask one thats outside the purview of the committee. I used to be on the committee so i was going to trash the Budget Committee but i dont know if i understood the purpose and i was on a four two sessions in the korean areas and there is a way to streamline the process where you are all saying we still need to have a Budget Committee . Our group was very tempted to recommend the Budget Committee and for some reason and like you are articulating were deeper into our discussion and for them to be strengthened and restructure in ways that creates that buy in and the chairs and Ranking Members with the authorizes which as the responsibility that we talked about earlier. In the document comprehensive but the ownership there and allow that with a Budget Committee to do that. Mister poll can, i was the director of the senate Budget Committee for many years and obviously unbiased and it worked. In the early years it, worked largely because of what was just said. The makeup of that committee was the chairman and the procreation committee and the chairman of the finance committee and those major committees, would modify of major authorization with the agriculture bill and it would make that Committee Really a fiscal guidance and the jurisdiction. And i will speak to the senate and not be commenting on the house Budget Committee and in the senate, that will be for political purposes changed over time with the last affective long term restructuring of the committee in the fiscal ways involved and we still need to have a big program and not just a discretionary but the mandatory spending and the fixture of your budget. I would add that for most of the history the house and senate patch committees are the purpose which is that other committees which have certain programs is a community that is looking at the budget at the hole and the Budget Committee was creating the enforcers of the budget revolution and gutturals. Thank you very much i, would overtime i, appreciate it. Thank you. Next up mr. Will. Im thinking about the timelines and it seems like we have a twoyear budget in 2018. Which gave us full seven months before the fiscal year and the most Successful Congress in the last 72 years and we saw that done and we were on the select committee and was trying to move those timelines around. Tell me why, particularly from the convergence regulation where we get at this right at the gate. Weve just been elected and making all sorts of promises from the very first vote in the congress which is a twoyear issue that they dont yet understand and raise the debt limit and promises not to do and on and on. Why is the first year of the two Year Congress that we are all focused on passing the budget resolutions and a one year or twoyear resolution. If youre doing a twoyear, wise at the second year of the congressman folks have their feet wet and can get us through the sticky election years or politics come in even more than normal . Mr. Owens . Thanks for that question. We wrestle exactly that question. A couple of thoughts come to mind from that discussion. We thought about winding the next congress and that has summit headed edged hesitations. All of our proposals is proposals that is meant to complement each other. This is where the fifth state of the nation is really important and our theory was, if we have a better budget process and a fiscal state report has the projection cycles and our president ial candidates which is really running and already thinking about restructuring the leadership and in various committees which is all informed. They could start a new congress and when the fiscal nation is in four years and you have these long term overviews and there is a constant flow of information at this time of the decisionmaking. We thought that would help move this along in the end of the new congress. I support the committee and thats what we had and 74. We used budgeting and governing and that was the challenge. We had reconciliation every september to say that if you didnt get a rate right in the First Six Months we would get the hammer and of course were already binding futures which was biding by september 30th all the way to the next september 30th if you dont change it. You work the staff director on the committee with the eight years or no budgets were passed over the senate side. I often wonder what has in the place were Institutional Knowledge that i would argue passion resides, the budget process as failed even more regularly. When we think about strengthening the process, i can strengthen it with the hope of six year terms and long institutional memories. How is that going to stick long term . I dont know if i have a good answer. The senate is evolve to it and change dramatically. I will say the, first time i was involved with not getting a budget resolution was after a major shutdown and the 1995, 1996 midterms and the crisis back then and came back together and adopted a balanced budget in 1997. With all due respect to my friend and former chairman of the house mr. Kasich, he was running for president and so we had no desire to put forth a budget resolution and the first time we were unable to. There comes back to politics at that point and unfortunately i dont know that it would change the system here and i wouldnt assure it but it wasnt working back in those days with leadership. The leadership of the committees and pro creations of the budget will find ways and i think thats what you need here. You need that buy in from the leadership if this is going to work. Thinking about efforts to try to achieve some of those goals. It seems a little odd to me the of strengthening the Budget Committee which in the time consuming breath that you would often do less work. But if its serious work and it has a lasting effect, as we think about reforms and Congress Debt story. Do you see that regularly going to strengthen and do less as opposed to are going to try to do more . I would say that some proposals will speak to this contradiction and the ideas that are going to have a Budget Committee that is altered membership and proposed having leadership committees were there on the committees of the Budget Committee could not have the support of the chamber. As a nineyear member law i will remind my colleagues that it means the committee from the appropriations we have dissolved that Ranking Member of the enthusiastic refreshment up to serve. I yield back. Thanks very much. Thank you mister chairman. Thank you for being here. Miss lynch mentioned that we should think about i also think she said her almost everything you said lofty practice when the marshal was discontinued and you had to sign an affidavit quote not going to your cousin and it had to go to a corporation and all the sentiments we have in place. The delegation every one of us, all a love us rather im going to say publicly that we support earmarks or whatever you want to call it. But heres where the confluence between politics and constitution. What happens is, first of all, in the media, senator stevens is trying to build a bridge to nowhere. It is not true, hes trying to build a bridge to a small island. The only had i think 55 people or Something Like that. Most people think that there is no destination and was just building a bridge is, not true. The argument could have been, were spending too much money for the size Public Relation and its a legitimate argument. Or on that island them and the ferry in the winter and you make it to the mainland to go to the hospital which is the issue. The public doesnt know anything and you go to any town and i think there was a bridge to nowhere. I cant remember the name of the little island. Thats where it started and we started doing it for political reasons. The thing is i dont know if i mean, if were going to be able right now the constitution experiencing stress test and it didnt start with the current president it started with long before. We havent declared war since 1945 and we five 119,000 americans killed in a war since then. Congress sits on its hands and we let it take place. What happens is, they partisanship aunts and president obamas job at his third or fourth state of the union. Signed no bills that have earmarks in them and publicly criticize him and doesnt have that power. So democrats can be used and we know is wrong but we cant credit him. Whats happened is, the party thats in power the white house will go along with the distraction of the constitutional leave and in power of the house and nobody wants to criticize the president if they are one of them. So it is eroded and were not going to sign any deals but they should have stood up everybody and said that this is strong and you cant do it. Now we assume that were not supposed to do it and so, you got politics, youve got the press, you got this political stuff that we dont criticize in our own party. So, can we actually deal with this issue in terms of some kind of legislation and its an issue of the heart in the mind that we have to deal with on what is right and wrong and right now, where in this position because every president for the last 55 years, has taken just a little and we are going to wake up one morning and we have two branches of the government and where we are right now and when it took off. Im furious about this stuff because, we have given away in realtime and we have a kate in kansas city. I was mayor and i was pushing name this kid bond and i talked to him last friday. The senator never asked anyone to do it and so, because we need it desperately i thought that im running this town and we had a george bread or when after the quarterback glen dotson anyway, thank you. I invite any of you to respond. You got hit the button again. One quick observation is that there is legislation which i do not know if its in the house with the article one legislation of emergency that they use recently in the shifting of that money and i think it was introduced in the senate of senator cruz from texas and i would suggest that you start looking at that kind of legislation with the maximum power that should not be giving up at all. Thank you mister timmins. Thank you all for taking the time where this committee and its really been a rewarding process. One thing that im going to ask miss lynch. Was this included in any of the joint Committee Recommendations . That was something that committee debated on the idea that you would have some targets and that was a great deal the conversation. The decision was made to make it more about budget process reform and that being said, the optional passed for a bipartisan budget resolution in the senate did include the resolution with establish the ratio in that path. Thank you. Mister hoagland, earlier i think you were asked if a twoyear budget would be more manageable to when youre budgets and what was your answer to that . I think its difficult and the oneyear budget is not working obviously. So, i think its worth an effort to try to buy in and budget. Where i think im having some differences of opinion with the joint select Committee Recommendation is that i feel like you have a budget for two years and appropriate for two years. You have it every single year after you buy into it and thats my only critique of the select Committee Recommendation. Now, the argument always comes back with affects changing and yes they are changing but at least the budget and pro period for two years and you have the supplemental in the second session but. If youre going to go budgeting you should build by any appropriations elsewhere. The appropriators here will disagree. I would agree with you but im also a pragmatist so the question becomes, is our Current System better or worse than the budget appropriations . Would you prefer to continue to do the way we are or to have a twoyear budget . Instead of nothing. It is a better than nothing . No, i think i dont like the Current System i dont think its performed and i dont think its been the way it should operate. Obviously, the one youre budget and one near appropriation is not working and i would go to a twoyear process i, really would. Last year, 237 people are in the house to get that passed. But it is never considered largely because of the challenge with the committee and what they wanted to do in appropriations every year. I guess one of the things that we talk about in this committee a lot is not having a fight over whatever is left. If we can all agree and if there is no opposition to a twoyear budget or a oneyear appropriations schedule, i am set on lets start somewhere i now understand your question. This is a start, this is a twoyear budget and if you have to have the appropriations go ahead that i hope eventually you would move to these budgets and these appropriations but it is a start. Miss lynch. Can you discuss the last time this has remained to the budget process . Historically . Every congress has rules adapted in some house rules package that have some effect on the budget process and the last significant one would be the control after 2011 that had the joint committee on deficit reduction. Thank you. The ratio this is something that you would all be in favor of what the conversation and making it part of the process or is that something that i think is a step in the right direction . Our group meddled with that and for us, it was all more about process and that information that has been brought in due process as part of the process to achieve a specific outcome where we couldnt achieve consensus we had differing views. With Economic Conditions and it was part of the discussion and not part of the process. Mandating will be part of a process of discussion and part of the report as delivered to the committees . I would say that we were mandated and it will happen naturally with better information among the crisis and so that you can all make the best decision you can. That will have that effect because it has to be part of the process and that can be a distraction and it might break a norm. In terms of a norm that you dont want and a true disagreement about how to have that metric of its high, low or how would you interpreted to make policy. Today, the gdp ratio is about 7 78. 78. Historically its averaged around 40 . Ive gone through a number of exercises were bringing that down and the demographics what weve already locked in spending Going Forward and i tell you it is very difficult to hold at 70 with the decisions you would have to make. Going back to the issue of recognizing that if you set that percentage they would be prepared for some very difficult decisions which both on the spending side and on revenue side. Thank you mister chairman, i yield back. Thank you. Mr. Dan newhouse. Thank you for being here and contributing to this important discussion. Some of us and many of us are in the state and i dont know if every state does but most states use annual budgeting. And most states two but it seems like federal government is a larger and more complex to get a matter of months versus a couple years which is realist unrealistic in my view. So i appreciate your contribution to this which is important and this discussion on how we can make this process. Im in my third term and i can tell you that everybody in congress understands for the most part the significance of the debt that we face and how unsustainable this is. One of the biggest things that i have heard ever since i got here is that we cant do a whole lot about it and there is a mandatory versus Discretionary Spending which is one that has been a really difficult obstacle and important for us to get our Fiscal Health in order. I guess i would like all of you if you had some thoughts about how we can crack that not and how we could move forward things in this discussion where we have better control and of our spending in a revenue and politically of it being a minefield and i know its a difficult thing but it seems to be like were ever going to have our arms around this are going to have to address it and so, in a short amount of time that we have i know mr. Hogan in your testimony we are unable to listen to firsthand but reading an effort of the report that mentions it so lets just start with you. Thank you congressman. Yes, they had ten major recommendations with appropriating but also to do the total budget as you say and not focus on what we talked about and timmins was talking about setting some goal of having congress agree to a goal and not necessarily the goal of producing that that move to its first number. If you were to do that and make that law and the consequences of not getting those numbers, Something Like it wouldnt work out the way we thought it would be and there are serious consequences of those goals and making the process stronger is to do exactly what mrs. Lynch was possessing. To set the goal in five to ten years out and willing to hit that target and will force not just to look at Discretionary Spending but will look at total budget. I dad from the convergence perspective that that leans towards an outcome but you have what we do and that is the whole point. Its full in the process so the process actually works so you have that discussion. Year after year so if not, having a discussion year after year in a way that leads to a policy outcome youre punting there, punting every time. That was our perspective. Youre talking about groups here that are very right leaning and some are in the middle. If we can fix the process you have to start taking on a big major issue such as that and regardless of your respective. Miss lynch. I think its a great point that most people think of the process as being an annual process and the reality is about 70 is actually fixed. I think that it could be helpful to look at the 80s and 90s and the idea that you would lose the Discretionary Spending but the mandatory spending and you look at that as a whole and you look at what would be an appropriate amount for a deficit. Congress would use the budget resolution and the reconciliation process and use the budget to make changes to mandatory spending and revenue in a way that would be projected to reduce the deficit. So, those tools are Still Available to congress and i think the eighties and nineties are good example because we had the chambers controlled by the different parties and he branches control of different parties and were still utilizing those tools. Can i add to that . Thats exactly no surprise coming from the bipartisan policy senator that this means both sides giving up something and i would lose my credentials at a republican staffer but revenues have to be on the table. I dont think you can do this all on the spending side and the discretionary side and they were close to releasing that gdp earlier. Again i, appreciate your input on this. Thank you mister chairman. I wanna pull on a couple of other threads and it is difficult to explain with constituents when the process goes on the rails and going to a Coast Guard Base that was accepting donations of food and identify weeks where they want to shut down which is sick. It is striking to me that when the process goes off the rails and the pain is felt by our constituents. In which the tattoo that each of us has on our arms now is fix this so that Congress Works better for the American People. I find myself wondering how you get out of this box. Some of it is through process reform and i want to ask mr. Hoagland, about looking at some of the incentives and disincentives. technical Problem Congress usually finds a way out of every mouse trap so, things like no budget, no pay, no budget, no recess even though, some bipartisan support would offer those ideas. He mentioned the incentive path which was an expedited path and incited by any what are we not thinking of . Are there other threats that we should pulling on there in the incentive and disincentive so that it is striking because its just about congress doing its job and its meaningful though even after our about forcing function to get congress to do its job. Again, thank you mister chairman. What are the proposals that ive warmed up two over the years isnt if you cant get your work done by those constituents and those calls guards the constituents are out there and they are upon a failure to reach that point and its automatically continual on to the law and you dont have to pass another see our. The incentive and criticism that that what a hold down spending. But i would then make it such that over a certain period of time the cr starts to produce and you keep government funding to avoid the issues that you have with the government shutdown. As the corrupt wrestled with this its a very significant part of our discussion and i would say at least half of us were talking about incentives and heritage sticks and the fashion reform. The conversation about earmarks is a provincial incentive. And you bring those back and ultimately, i think the thing that came out is that there are so many things that you could do and we talked about no budget, no front raising and you kept coming back and that is the ultimate incentive that all of you have. So, the pain is going to be there and you have to face the music. If you want to get the budget back you will face praise and time is up in the way we had this information in doing this on the constitution which is therefore it. If you understand them better about what consensus to get our work done or will punish us in a way that will create so much pain and what is left in our plans. Is there anything on the menu that we havent talked about . Id say that the different budget process with proposals that are in broad and in thinking about this, i know youre thinking about this as what is the problem and whats driving this problem with the perform proposals. And what we believe. You mention the nation and i wanted to speak more to that and thats something that in a bias way the joint select committee with the best recommendation can you speak to that and what values you see in that specific reform. Thank you this generated a lot of discussion and again the principal being the budget and great information can exactly the right time of the process which really helped and was the seminal value which was receiving medicare in Social Security report and it all gets packaged in place and that constituents can see all these policy makers yet to see it and the way we envision the nfl really had that strength and simplicity to convey the information, thats something that we needed to pick up and we anticipated every year. In the town Hall Meetings with, the election debates and the president ial debates the. Questions are going to be asked, whats your plan for the fiscal state of the nation and time and time again people will be on the hook and have to respond to that in a way. We were encouraged by the committee in terms of thinking about the sentinel moment of getting that information all in one place and raise the american consciousness and we think that it will be a net positive for the process. Mr. Rob woodall. With our institutionalist on the panel mr. And the responsibility. There is a difference to me between producing all of that information even where i can find all that information as i sit here today we can see were in front of the Budget Committee but we are introduced by our colleagues to have this come to congress and present it and i put that in the same color category estates and supposed to be doing my job and having an elected persist a loop in the House Chamber and i dont know how that advances the process. From an institutional perspective, is there is their merit and having the unelected come and make that pitch or would it target this elsewhere. Good having good information is always helpful and the information is out there and you know what the issues are and youve heard it you know what the issues are so with all due respect, i am fine with more information and i dont think that will change things that much. I think you need something thats harder than just the information thats chastise and i dont think that is going to change anything out there fundamentally in terms of your decision where you had much more harder sticks and you see that its not getting your work done and will be on you. You mentioned having a discussion about our bosses as aggressively as we were reporting in our house and i appreciate the conclusion that we are supposed to throw them out every two years if youre not doing their job. If we are not getting the right information out to the folks in november, perhaps there are ways we can do a better job of that as well. We thought about the in the committee there is some discussion about one of those where the opinion changed more thought about it. Again, there is unintended consequences to matter what direction you go and potential unintended consequences with the odyssey are and that may serve the interest of some who have never passed a budget or a operations bill. That would serve the purpose of others to never pass an appropriations bill. I think it is tricky. Miss suzan delbene. Thank you mister chairman and thank you for being here and im joining a little late i just came from another hearing. I know ive talked about this a little bit before, we were definitely found it as a country on the idea of making sure we have a separation of powers on our three branches of government. Over the years, they have provided too much discretion to the executive branch and carrying out a loss. It is been a convenient tool with the administration which allows folks not to have to work with congress and the power can be misused in their agenda. So according to the center of justice there are hundred 23 statutes that i had areas which made through long process any National Emergency for example. I feel its imperative that the priority of our committee to figure out how we take a back congress is legitimate power and the branches power which is one of those primary checks and balances and the executive branch so miss lynch i, want to ask you, what do you think about the options to make sure that we restore that power as. What youre mike. What i can say about that is that many people have argued that the budget process have been implemented in the past few decades so the idea that, the control act as limited the ability but some would argue that it gave them the executive permission to withhold that money for a while. Which has pointed to more power to the executive with the budgetary decisions and the earmarks have instead with the administration and you look at some of those issues which is how to reform them. If we look more broadly and the specifics if anyone else as he back to. There are those specific issues that is operational efforts and weve talked about these a little bit already that we need to doucette that we are also making sure things are moving and making the decisions we need to make any timely fashion. Yes mr. Hoagland. When you are out, i suggested that there is a legislation called article one which would restore the National Security and power you to have a suggestion or you might want to think about them that you make the law specific that no resistance can be submitted to congress in 60 days prior to the end of the fiscal year. We have a situation where recently there was a possibility where there is a way in which the president could have decisions that you would not have the opportunity to act on. I would change the law to make sure that they could not be submitted within 60 days of the expiration date. Miss lynch, on a slightly different note, what do you think this committee is the biggest takeaway should be from the joint committees work . So, as representatives from we cr dont make policy recommendations. The policy for myself and the committee is that you really did see some on the bed fellows in terms of the relationships and bipartisan relationships and it seems to ultimately lead to recommendations that were included in the amendments. Anyone else have opinions on that too . The biggest takeaway of the by annual budgeting with both chambers and both partisans i think there was a recognition where we could do better with respect to informing policy makers and the other elements and no other changes could be made to strengthen its hand and relieve the process. Thank you. Im just about out of time so thank you mister chairman, i yield back. Did you have another question . Its called the rivera Island Bridge and catchy can, thank you. With that clarification, id like to thank our witnesses for their testimony today. Id like to acknowledge and give gratitude to the Committee Staff for the hard work they do by putting together these hearings and as well to the Appropriations Committee for letting us use their glorious room. Without objection, all members will have the days of which to submit written questions for the witnesses and be forwarded to the response i asked that we please respond as promptly as you are able, without objection all members will be submitting the materials the record and with that again, i gave gratitude for all of you participating and for showing up on with that this series is adjourned. Thanks everybody. The house will be in order