d. Hearings. "Elevation of the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] to a Cabinet Level Department"; joint hearings of the Subcommittees on Legislation and National Security and Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources; March 29, 1993, and May 6, 1993. "EPA Cabinet Elevation-Environmental Equity Issues"; Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security; April 28, 1993.

HUMAN RESOURCES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

SUBCOMMITTEE

1. H.R 1448, the Federal Regulation of Check Cashing Outlets. a. Report number and date.-None.

b. Summary of measure.-Despite their convenient hours and wide array of services, check cashing outlets do not provide any form of consumer credit, such as personal loans, home mortgage loan, or credit cards. They do not offer checking or savings accounts, certificates of deposit, money market accounts, or any other service which contributes to the growth and economic development of a community.

Forty-two States do not regulate check cashing stores. Of the eight States which exercise some form of regulatory authority, seven impose fee ceilings, licensing requirements, and in some cases bonding or capitalization requirements. The regulatory experience has been a mixed bag. New York and Illinois have fostered close relationships with check cashing outlets, allowing them to dispense AFDC payments or food stamps. Additionally, Illinois allows check cashing outlets to handle automobile registrations and title transfers. However, New Jersey has not had a favorable relationship with check cashing stores. In a 1988 report, the New Jersey Commission of Investigations, found that the check cashing industry within the State had been heavily infiltrated by organized crime. Criminal activities alleged included money laundering, fraud, check kiting and cash flow schemes designed to loot existing legitimate businesses.

The "Check-Cashing Act of 1993,"_would provide Federal regulation of the check cashing industry. The Federal Trade Commission would be charged with the responsibility of granting licenses based on factors including character of the applicant, past experience in the financial industry, and capital adequacy of the business. The legislation imposes a fee ceiling on check cashing.

c. Legislative status.-H.R. 1448 was introduced by Mr. Fields and Mr. Wynn. The bill was referred jointly to the Committee on Government Operations and the Committee on Banking.

d. Hearings. The subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 1448 on June 29, 1993.

2. H.R. 2856, the Local Flexibility Act of 1993.

a. Report number and date.-None.

b. Summary of measure.-The purpose of H.R. 2856 is to give Federal agencies authority to grant selective waivers from regulations in Federal grant programs. The bill creates a Federal Interagency Review Council comprised of the heads of 10 Federal agencies. The Council will be authorized to grant to local governments and not-for-profit organizations temporary waivers from Federal

regulations (other than antidiscrimination requirements) of grant programs in six areas-education, employment training, health, housing nutrition, or other social services-if the Council approves a plan designed by a local government to improve services for its low income resident. Local governments and not-for-profit organizations also will receive priority in the review of their applications for Federal funds in these six areas if the Council has approved the local government's plan.

c. Legislative status.-H.R. 2856 was introduced by Chairman Conyers and Mr. Clinger on August 4, 1993, and it was referred solely to the Committee on Government Operations.

d. Hearings.-A hearing on the bill was held on October 13, 1993. Testimony was received from a local elected official, a representative from the National Association of Counties, and several not-for-profit organizations.

3. H.R. 1873, A Bill To Exclude Reparations Payments Paid Through Foreign Governments From Eligibility Determinations in Federally Supported Need-Based Programs.

a. Report number and date.-None

b. Summary of measure.-Reparations payments by foreign governments do not undergo any enacting or overview process in the United States. Therefore, the treatment of payments by foreign governments is left to the discretion of the agency or tribunal that decides the case. Disparate decisionmaking raises the possibility of disparate results affecting similarly situated individuals. Čurrently, the Social Security Administration and the Department of Housing and Urban Development have issued internal policy directives that exclude the payments from income eligibility determinations. However, this uniformity was achieved largely through internal administrative directives.

H.R. 1873, would require that payments made by foreign governments to victims of the Holocaust who reside in the United States would be excluded from the calculation of income for the purposes of eligibility determinations in all federally supported need-based programs. Therefore, under this legislation, government agencies that administer federally assisted programs such as Food Stamps, HUD-Assisted Housing, and Medicaid would not require reparations recipients to include the amount of reparations payments as a part of their income declaration during application or renewal of benefits.

c. Legislative status.-H.R. 1873 was introduced by Mr. Waxman and four cosponsors. The bill was referred solely to the Committee on Government Operation.

d. Hearings.-A hearing on H.R. 1873 was held on November 10,

1993.

INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION, AND AGRICULTURE

SUBCOMMITTEE

1. H.R. 2139, To amend title 44, United States Code, to authorize appropriations for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission.

a. Report number and date.-House Report No. 103–215, August 4, 1993.

b. Summary of measure.-H.R. 2139 reauthorizes appropriations for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission for fiscal years 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 at such amounts as may be necessary.

c. Legislative status.-H.R. 2139 passed the House on September 13, 1993.

d. Hearings.-"National Historical Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC] Reauthorization,” June 23, 1993.

2. Amendment to H.R. 2401 National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1994 (§ 1023), requirement to establish procedures for State and local governments to buy law enforcement equipment suitable for counter-drug activities through the Department of Defense.

a. Report number and date.-House Report No. 103–200, November 10, 1993 (conference report for H.R. 2401).

b. Summary of measure.—The subcommittee's oversight work on Federal assistance to State and local law enforcement identified a need for these agencies to acquire state of the art equipment for counter-drug activities and their participation in federally funded multijurisdictional task forces. However, the cost of procuring this equipment is prohibitive for financially strapped police departments. The amendment adopted in the Defense authorization allows State and local law enforcement entities to procure equipment from the Department of Defense if the DOD commonly purchases that item. Examples include: Small arms, surveillance equipment, ammunition, body armor, communications equipment, and some types of laboratory equipment. The amendment, adopted by voice vote during House consideration of H.R. 2401, creates a system by which the General Services Administration will make available a list of equipment eligible for procurement by local law enforcement. This legislation will enhance cooperation between the Federal and local levels of law enforcement and save local tax dollars because of access to lower cost equipment.

c. Legislative status.-H.R. 2401 passed the House November 15, 1993, and passed the Senate November 17, 1993. Public Law 103160.

d. Hearings.-None were held.

B. REVIEW OF LAWS WITHIN COMMITTEE'S JURISDICTION

LEGISLATION AND NATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE

1. Government Corporation Control Act, Public Law 248, 79th Congress, December 6, 1945, 59 Stat. 597.

This law provides basic accountability requirements for many government corporations. This subcommittee has a continuing interest in the scope and implementation of this act and consequently monitors it closely.

2. The Administrative Expenses Act of 1946, Public Law 600, 79th Congress, August 2, 1946, 60 Stat. 806.

The subcommittee continues its oversight of this act, and special interest results from several investigations relating to the handling of administrative expenses.

3. The Prompt Payment Act, Public Law 97-177, 96 Stat. 85 (31 U.S.C. §83901, et seq.).

The Prompt Payment Act requires every Federal agency to pay an interest penalty on amounts owed to business concerns for the acquisition of property or services when the agency does not pay on time. The subcommittee remains vigilant to problems with the implementation of this act.

4. Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act, Public Law 97-255, September 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 814 (31 U.S.C. § 3512).

The Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act requires agency heads to conduct ongoing evaluations and to report on the adequacy of their respective agency's systems of internal accounting and administrative controls. Further, it requires the Comptroller General to prescribe the standards for such controls, as well as standards to ensure the prompt resolution of all audit findings; and it requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to establish guidelines for agency use in evaluating whether the systems comply with the standards. Agency heads are required to prepare for the President and the Congress an annual statement either that their agency controls are in compliance or outlining material weaknesses in their agency's internal controls and including planned action to correct such weaknesses, and a schedule for achieving corrections.

The Legislation and National Security Subcommittee has been monitoring implementation of this act, which became effective September 8, 1982.

5. Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978 (Federal Emergency Management Agency).

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978 established the Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] and transferred to the Director functions relating to fire prevention and control, the national flood program, and the Emergency Broadcast System. The subcommittee continues specially targeted oversight activities relating to FEMA.

6. Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended June 30, 1949, 63 Stat. 377 (40 U.S.C. §§ 471, et seq.; Public Law 152, 81st Cong.).

This law provides the Government with an economic and efficient system for the procurement and supply of personal property and nonpersonal services, including related functions-contracting, inspection, storage, etc.; the utilization of available property; the disposal of surplus property, and records management. The subcommittee continued closely monitoring implementation of this act. a. Further Federal Utilization and Disposal of Personal Property (titles I, II, and IV).—The subcommittee conducts a major continuing review of Federal programs for:

(1) Further Federal agency utilization of excess personal property and,

(2) Distribution of both excess and surplus personal property to State and local entities for special purposes of a public nature. When the owning Federal agency no longer has need for the property, it formally determines it to be "excess." It is then screened by GSA for other Federal agency use. If all Federal agencies are without need for the property, GSA formally determines it to be "surplus" to the needs of the Government. It may then be donated to local organizations for selected public purposes or, if not donated, sold immediately.

Public Law 94-519, which originated in the committee, brought about a major reorganization in Federal personal property distribution. It consolidated management of numerous previously separate Federal agency activities and functions for distributing excess and surplus property to local organizations. In doing so, it brought most of these into the long-established distribution arrangement known as the "surplus personal property donation program" (section 203(j) of the Federal Property Act). GSA has the central responsibility for the donation program but works in partnership with each State's surplus property agency to effect distribution and control. The reporting provisions of Public Law 94-519 have been modified by Public Law 100-612 (Federal Property Management Improvement Act of 1988), which also added a linkage between the "exchangesale" provision of the Federal Property Act (section 201(c)) and the donation program.

Excess and surplus personal property represents an important national asset. Measured in terms of the Government's original acquisition cost [OAC], property costing as much as $11.7 billion is declared excess by the heads of Federal agencies controlling that property. OAC is used because it represents a convenient, already documented basis for measurement and comparison of property transaction volume. Actually, current market value of such excess varies according to the nature of the commodity. Historically, when such items are sold as surplus, the overall average of the dollar returns is on the order of 5 percent of OAC.

Once an agency head determines property to be excess, other Federal agencies have a statutory priority to take such property for further Federal utilization, since Congress laid down the policy that excess property is the first source of supply to minimize expenditures for property. In 1993, such utilization of excess property totaled $1.1 billion. Congress has sanctioned the action of an agen