Statutory reform of the U.S. Government Printing Office: A view from the GPO

Journal of Government Information

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 265-279

  Sherman, Andrew M ^a  

^a United States Government Printing Office   (United States)

Author keywords

Federal Depository Library Program; Government printing; Title 44, U.S. Code; U.S. Government Printing Office

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030138093     PISSN: 13520237     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/1352-0237(96)00010-X     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. 1. U.S. Government Printing Office, GPO Annual Report 1994 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1996).
2. 2. Public Printer Michael F. DiMario, prepared statement before the U.S. Joint Committee on Printing on a "General Review of GPO's Activities" (6 June 1995). (Available on request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office.)
3. 3. U.S. General Accounting Office, Information Dissemination: Federal CD-ROM Titles - What Are Available and How They Were Priced (GAO/IMTEC-93-34FS) (Washington, DC: GPO, 1993), 26-33.
4. 4. "Government Printing Office Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act of 1993" (PL103-40, 8 June 1993), 107 U.S. Statutes at Large, 112-14.
5. 5. GPO Access service utilization data were provided by the Electronic Information Dissemination Service, U.S. Government Printing Office. Access service utilization data are based on actual document downloads, as measured by GPO's Wide Area Information Server (WAIS). They are not comparable to system or file transactions, which are commonly employed to measure the utilization of World Wide Web systems, but which count far more than document downloads as transactions.
6. 6. Data found in U.S. Office of Management and Budget, FY 1996 President's Budget, Object Class Analysis (Washington, DC: OMB, 1995), 63, indicate that printing and reproduction (object class 2400) for the federal government totaled $1.894 billion in FY 1995. However, GPO estimates that this amount double-counts the value of GPO's printing procurement, first in the amounts budgeted by each agency, and second in the figure reported for reimbursable obligations. If the double-counting is subtracted from total obligations, the result is $1.377 billion. Of this amount, GPO handled an estimated $517 million in printing procurement, $90 million in congressional printing, and $100 million in other in-plant printing, yielding a total value of federal printing currently by-passing GPO of approximately $670 million. See Public Printer Michael F. DiMario, prepared statement before the U.S. House Oversight Committee on "Government Printing Reform" (1 August 1995). (Available from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office.)
7. 7. The data on workload reductions between FY 1991 and FY 1994 were provided by GPO's Comptroller.
8. 8. NTIS's organic statutes are contained in the United States Code, Title 15. Its legislative history establishes its traditional mission to serve as a means of transferring federal scientific and technical information to private industry. "The American Technology Preeminence Act" (PL 102-245, 14 February 1992), 106 U.S. Statutes at Large, 7-30, refers to NTIS's role as a clearinghouse of scientific and technical information. More recently, NTIS has issued regulations stating that scientific, technical, and engineering information also includes "information that bears on business and industry generally, such as economic information, market information, and related information," and that have created a system for the distribution, by NTIS, of government publications directly to depository libraries; GPO had no opportunity to comment on this system, see "Transfer by Federal Agencies of Scientific, Technical, and Engineering Information to the National Technical Information Service," 59 Federal Register 1 (3 January 1994), 6-12. NTIS subsequently requested funding for this distribution activity in its appropriations request for FY 1995. The conferees on the legislation turned it down, citing concerns over duplication of activities with GPO's FDLP, see "Conference Report (H. Rept. 103-708)" Congressional Record (Daily ed.) 140, no. 115 (16 August 1994), H8493. In the meantime, in response to the depository distribution plans announced by NTIS, GPO prepared and transmitted to NTIS a draft interagency agreement for depository distribution services to be conducted by NTIS on GPO's behalf, and which would be reimbursed by GPO. NTIS rebuffed the proposed agreement.
9. 8. NTIS's organic statutes are contained in the United States Code, Title 15. Its legislative history establishes its traditional mission to serve as a means of transferring federal scientific and technical information to private industry. "The American Technology Preeminence Act" (PL 102-245, 14 February 1992), 106 U.S. Statutes at Large, 7-30, refers to NTIS's role as a clearinghouse of scientific and technical information. More recently, NTIS has issued regulations stating that scientific, technical, and engineering information also includes "information that bears on business and industry generally, such as economic information, market information, and related information," and that have created a system for the distribution, by NTIS, of government publications directly to depository libraries; GPO had no opportunity to comment on this system, see "Transfer by Federal Agencies of Scientific, Technical, and Engineering Information to the National Technical Information Service," 59 Federal Register 1 (3 January 1994), 6-12. NTIS subsequently requested funding for this distribution activity in its appropriations request for FY 1995. The conferees on the legislation turned it down, citing concerns over duplication of activities with GPO's FDLP, see "Conference Report (H. Rept. 103-708)" Congressional Record (Daily ed.) 140, no. 115 (16 August 1994), H8493. In the meantime, in response to the depository distribution plans announced by NTIS, GPO prepared and transmitted to NTIS a draft interagency agreement for depository distribution services to be conducted by NTIS on GPO's behalf, and which would be reimbursed by GPO. NTIS rebuffed the proposed agreement.
10. 8. NTIS's organic statutes are contained in the United States Code, Title 15. Its legislative history establishes its traditional mission to serve as a means of transferring federal scientific and technical information to private industry. "The American Technology Preeminence Act" (PL 102-245, 14 February 1992), 106 U.S. Statutes at Large, 7-30, refers to NTIS's role as a clearinghouse of scientific and technical information. More recently, NTIS has issued regulations stating that scientific, technical, and engineering information also includes "information that bears on business and industry generally, such as economic information, market information, and related information," and that have created a system for the distribution, by NTIS, of government publications directly to depository libraries; GPO had no opportunity to comment on this system, see "Transfer by Federal Agencies of Scientific, Technical, and Engineering Information to the National Technical Information Service," 59 Federal Register 1 (3 January 1994), 6-12. NTIS subsequently requested funding for this distribution activity in its appropriations request for FY 1995. The conferees on the legislation turned it down, citing concerns over duplication of activities with GPO's FDLP, see "Conference Report (H. Rept. 103-708)" Congressional Record (Daily ed.) 140, no. 115 (16 August 1994), H8493. In the meantime, in response to the depository distribution plans announced by NTIS, GPO prepared and transmitted to NTIS a draft interagency agreement for depository distribution services to be conducted by NTIS on GPO's behalf, and which would be reimbursed by GPO. NTIS rebuffed the proposed agreement.
11. 9. The potential for increased costs and decreased access to government publications resulting from a decentralized printing and distribution system are detailed in Public Printer Michael F. DiMario, prepared statement before the U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on "Various Government Printing Proposals" (3 February 1994). (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office.) For discussion of the problem of fugitive documents, see U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Government Information as a Public Asset: Hearing before the Joint Committee on Printing, 102nd Cong., 1st sess., 25 April 1991.
12. 10. U.S. Office of Management and Budget, "Management of Information Resources" (OMB Circular A-130) 58 Federal Register 126 (2 July 1993), 36068.
13. 11. A recent OMB memorandum to agencies on the implementation of the information dissemination provisions of the "Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995" (PL 104-13, 22 May 1995) failed to refer to GPO's Access service in a discussion of the services that can be provided by GPO and other information dissemination agencies, such as NTIS, to assist agencies in fulfilling their information dissemination responsibilities. The memorandum only mentioned GPO's CD-ROM services. See U.S. Office of Management and Budget, "Implementing the Information Dissemination Provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995," Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies (M-95-22) (29 September 1995).
14. 12. The U.S. House of Representatives approved H.R. 3400, as amended, November 22, 1993. Congressional Record (daily edition) 139, no. 166, (23 November 1993); H 10892-3. As introduced, Title XIV would have transferred all of GPO except the Superintendent of Documents to the executive branch; the Superintendent of Documents would have been transferred to the Library of Congress (LC). As amended by the House Administration Committee, GPO was retained in the legislative branch, although the Superintendent of Documents was still transferred to LC. As further amended in the House Rules Committee, the transfer of the Superintendent of Documents to LC was conditioned on the retention of wage-bargaining status by the transferred GPO employees. The Senate did not take up the bill.
15. 13. "Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1995." (PL 103-283, 22 July 1994), section 207.
16. 14. U.S. Office of Management and Budget, "Procurement of Printing and Duplicating through the Government Printing Office," Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies (M-94-30) (19 September 1994).
17. 15. "Requiring the appropriate committees of the House to report legislation to transfer certain functions of the Government Printing Office, and for other purposes," 104th Cong., 1st sess., H. Res. 24.
18. 16. "To improve the dissemination of information and printing procedures of the Government," 104th Cong., 1st sess., H.R. 1024.
19. 17. "To improve the operations of the legislative branch of the Federal Government, and for other purposes," 104th Cong., 1st sess., H.R. 252.
20. 18. Public Printer Michael F. DiMario, prepared statement before the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration on "Certain Provisions of S. 1824, The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1994" (5 May 1994). (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office.)
21. 19. "To balance the budget of the United States Government by restructuring Government, reducing Federal spending, eliminating the deficit, limiting bureaucracy, and restoring federalism," 104th Cong., 1st sess., H.R. 1923.
22. 20. Public Printer Michael F. DiMario, "Government Printing Reform."
23. 21. See U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Downsizing Government and Setting Priorities of Federal Programs: Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 2 February 1995, 1207-10, 1236-41.
24. 22. Following the Supreme Court's decision in INS v. Chadha 469 U.S. 919 (1983), invalidating the legislative veto, the Justice Department issued an opinion that the U.S. Joint Committee on Printing approval requirement for agency printing plants in 44 U.S. Code 501 is an exercise of an unconstitutional legislative veto. See U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, Memorandum for William H. Taft IV, Deputy Secretary of Defense, Re: Effect of INS v. Chadha on 44 U.S.C. 501, "Public Printing and Documents" (2 March 1984). Since then, the executive branch has continued to cite this issue, which has never been litigated, in arguments against the JCP. The transfer of the section 501 approval power, as well as other administrative powers currently held by the JCP, to the Public Printer is considered by some as a remedy to this problem.
25. 23. See DiMario, "Various Government Printing Proposals."
26. 24. See, for example, the testimony of J. Timothy Sprehe in U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Downsizing Government and Setting Priorities of Federal Programs: Hearings Before the Subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 2 February 1995, 1199-1205.
27. 25. U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, The Government Information Dissemination and Printing Improvement Act of 1993: Analysis of its Possible Impact on the Library of Congress with Regard to the Transfer of the Specific Functions of the Superintendent of Documents (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, January 1994). (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office.) Later, the Director of the Legislative Affairs Office at LC reportedly told a group of librarians that GPO's Federal Depository Library Program "did not necessarily fit into the mission of the Library." "Otremba: Depository Library Program Not Part of Mission," Electronic Public Information Newsletter 5(21 April 1995):58.
28. 25. U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, The Government Information Dissemination and Printing Improvement Act of 1993: Analysis of its Possible Impact on the Library of Congress with Regard to the Transfer of the Specific Functions of the Superintendent of Documents (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, January 1994). (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office.) Later, the Director of the Legislative Affairs Office at LC reportedly told a group of librarians that GPO's Federal Depository Library Program "did not necessarily fit into the mission of the Library." "Otremba: Depository Library Program Not Part of Mission," Electronic Public Information Newsletter 5(21 April 1995):58.
29. 26. For details on the operation of the Library of Congress's National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, see U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriations for 1996: Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, Part 1, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995, 726.
30. 27. See U.S. Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, Government Reform and Savings Act of 1993, Pan 6, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., 1993, H. Rept. 366.
31. 28. GPO has repeatedly called for this measure. See, for example, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, "Review of Executive Branch Printing Requirements," Memorandum for Heads of Selected Departments and Agencies (26 January 1983);
32. U.S. Office of Management and Budget, "Government Printing Transferred to the Private Sector," Press Release (No. 83-33) (1 November 1983);
33. prepared statement of Joseph E. Jenifer, Acting Public Printer, in U.S. Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, Title 44 - Review: Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Printing, 101st Cong., 1st sess., 23 May 1989, 6-28;
34. U.S. Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, The Government Printing Office Improvement Act of 1990: Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Printing, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 7 March 1990.
35. See also DiMario, "Various Government Printing Proposals."
36. 29. "Index of documents: number and distribution," United States Code, Title 44 section 1710 requires heads of executive branch and independent agencies to furnish the Superintendent of Documents with "a copy of every document issued or published by the department, bureau, or office not confidential in character. " "Availability of Government Publications Through Superintendent of Documents; Lists of Publications Not Ordered from Government Printing Office," United States Code, Title 44, section 1902 and "Distribution of Publications to Depositories; Notice to Government Components; Cost of Printing and Binding," United States Code, Title 44, section 1903 require that agencies producing publications elsewhere than GPO are to make them available to depository libraries through the Superintendent of Documents, and that they are to bear the cost of those publications.
37. 29. "Index of documents: number and distribution," United States Code, Title 44 section 1710 requires heads of executive branch and independent agencies to furnish the Superintendent of Documents with "a copy of every document issued or published by the department, bureau, or office not confidential in character. " "Availability of Government Publications Through Superintendent of Documents; Lists of Publications Not Ordered from Government Printing Office," United States Code, Title 44, section 1902 and "Distribution of Publications to Depositories; Notice to Government Components; Cost of Printing and Binding," United States Code, Title 44, section 1903 require that agencies producing publications elsewhere than GPO are to make them available to depository libraries through the Superintendent of Documents, and that they are to bear the cost of those publications.
38. 29. "Index of documents: number and distribution," United States Code, Title 44 section 1710 requires heads of executive branch and independent agencies to furnish the Superintendent of Documents with "a copy of every document issued or published by the department, bureau, or office not confidential in character. " "Availability of Government Publications Through Superintendent of Documents; Lists of Publications Not Ordered from Government Printing Office," United States Code, Title 44, section 1902 and "Distribution of Publications to Depositories; Notice to Government Components; Cost of Printing and Binding," United States Code, Title 44, section 1903 require that agencies producing publications elsewhere than GPO are to make them available to depository libraries through the Superintendent of Documents, and that they are to bear the cost of those publications.
39. 30. "Printing to be Authorized by and Necessary to the Public Business. Not in Excess of Appropriation, and on Special Requisition Filed With the Public Printer," United States Code, Title 44, section 1102 requires agencies to certify that printing is authorized by law, necessary to the public business, and funded by available appropriations.
40. 31. See Title I of Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1996 (PL 104-53, 19 November 1995).
41. 32. U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriations Bill, 1996, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995, H. Rept. 141, 30-31.
42. 33. See U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriations, 1996, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995, S. Rept. 114, 48-49; U.S. House Committee on Appropriations, Appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 1996, and for Other Purposes, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995, H. Rept. 212, 14-15.
43. 33. See U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriations, 1996, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995, S. Rept. 114, 48-49; U.S. House Committee on Appropriations, Appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 1996, and for Other Purposes, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995, H. Rept. 212, 14-15.
44. 34. "Public Printer: appointment," United Slates Code, Title 44, section 301 lists the qualification requirements for Public Printer: "Prices for sales copies of publications; crediting of receipts; resales by dealers; sales agents," United States Code, Title 44, section 1708 specifies charging an additional 50 percent for sales publications; and specified distribution quantities are found throughout Title 44 of the U.S. Code.
45. 34. "Public Printer: appointment," United Slates Code, Title 44, section 301 lists the qualification requirements for Public Printer: "Prices for sales copies of publications; crediting of receipts; resales by dealers; sales agents," United States Code, Title 44, section 1708 specifies charging an additional 50 percent for sales publications; and specified distribution quantities are found throughout Title 44 of the U.S. Code.
46. 34. "Public Printer: appointment," United Slates Code, Title 44, section 301 lists the qualification requirements for Public Printer: "Prices for sales copies of publications; crediting of receipts; resales by dealers; sales agents," United States Code, Title 44, section 1708 specifies charging an additional 50 percent for sales publications; and specified distribution quantities are found throughout Title 44 of the U.S. Code.
47. 35. Letter to the Honorable Michael F. DiMario, Public Printer, from Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House, and Bob Dole, Senate Majority Leader, dated November 13, 1995. (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office.)
48. 36. See DiMario, "Various Government Printing Proposals;" and DiMario, "Government Printing Reform," See also. Superintendent of Documents Wayne F. Kelley, prepared statement before the U.S. House Oversight Committee on "Government Printing Reform" (1 August 1995) (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office); and Robert J. Samuelson, "Out of Print," Washington Post (6 September 1995), op-ed.
49. 36. See DiMario, "Various Government Printing Proposals;" and DiMario, "Government Printing Reform," See also. Superintendent of Documents Wayne F. Kelley, prepared statement before the U.S. House Oversight Committee on "Government Printing Reform" (1 August 1995) (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office); and Robert J. Samuelson, "Out of Print," Washington Post (6 September 1995), op-ed.
50. 36. See DiMario, "Various Government Printing Proposals;" and DiMario, "Government Printing Reform," See also. Superintendent of Documents Wayne F. Kelley, prepared statement before the U.S. House Oversight Committee on "Government Printing Reform" (1 August 1995) (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office); and Robert J. Samuelson, "Out of Print," Washington Post (6 September 1995), op-ed.
51. 36. See DiMario, "Various Government Printing Proposals;" and DiMario, "Government Printing Reform," See also. Superintendent of Documents Wayne F. Kelley, prepared statement before the U.S. House Oversight Committee on "Government Printing Reform" (1 August 1995) (Available upon request from the Office of Congressional, Legislative, and Public Affairs, U.S. Government Printing Office); and Robert J. Samuelson, "Out of Print," Washington Post (6 September 1995), op-ed.
52. 37. See, for example, remarks of Rep. William M. Thomas in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriations for 1996: Hearings Before a Subcommittee on the Committee on Appropriations, Part 2, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 22 February 1995, 416. In 1988, however, the Office of Technology Assessment concluded that GPO's composition equipment is "strongly competitive" with private industry. U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, Informing the Nation: Federal Information Dissemination in an Electronic Age (Washington, DC: GPO, October 1988), 103.
53. 37. See, for example, remarks of Rep. William M. Thomas in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriations for 1996: Hearings Before a Subcommittee on the Committee on Appropriations, Part 2, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 22 February 1995, 416. In 1988, however, the Office of Technology Assessment concluded that GPO's composition equipment is "strongly competitive" with private industry. U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, Informing the Nation: Federal Information Dissemination in an Electronic Age (Washington, DC: GPO, October 1988), 103.
54. 38. Comparative cost data were supplied by GPO's budget office and discounted for inflation, using discount factors contained in U.S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1993 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1993), 481.
55. 39. Although J. Timothy Sprehe believes "The only progress made on electronic dissemination at GPO has come about because Congress passed a law requiring the certain tasks be accomplished," there is evidence to the contrary (U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Downsizing Government and Setting Priorities of Federal Programs: Hearings before Subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations, February 2, 1995, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995,1200). In 1984, GPO requested $800,000 to support the construction of a Federal Documents Database and online dissemination of that information and was told "GPO should not go beyond existing legislative authority in devising operational require" ments," see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriation Bill, 1985, Report Accompanying H.R. 5753, 98th Cong., 2nd sess., 1986, H. Rept. 811, 30. In 1989, acting Public Printer Joseph E. Jenifer strongly argued for GPO's authority to perform online dissemination, see U.S. Congress House Committee on House Administration, Subcommittee on Printing and Procurement, Title 44 U.S.C. - Review, Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Print-ing, 101st Cong., 1st sess., 23 May, 1989, 4-79. Subsequently, GPO supported a bill, H.R. 3849, which would have provided explicit statutory authority to offer online services, see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, The Government Printing Office Improvement Act of 1990: Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Printing, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 7 March 1990. 9-41.
56. 39. Although J. Timothy Sprehe believes "The only progress made on electronic dissemination at GPO has come about because Congress passed a law requiring the certain tasks be accomplished," there is evidence to the contrary (U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Downsizing Government and Setting Priorities of Federal Programs: Hearings before Subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations, February 2, 1995, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995,1200). In 1984, GPO requested $800,000 to support the construction of a Federal Documents Database and online dissemination of that information and was told "GPO should not go beyond existing legislative authority in devising operational require" ments," see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriation Bill, 1985, Report Accompanying H.R. 5753, 98th Cong., 2nd sess., 1986, H. Rept. 811, 30. In 1989, acting Public Printer Joseph E. Jenifer strongly argued for GPO's authority to perform online dissemination, see U.S. Congress House Committee on House Administration, Subcommittee on Printing and Procurement, Title 44 U.S.C. - Review, Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Print-ing, 101st Cong., 1st sess., 23 May, 1989, 4-79. Subsequently, GPO supported a bill, H.R. 3849, which would have provided explicit statutory authority to offer online services, see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, The Government Printing Office Improvement Act of 1990: Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Printing, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 7 March 1990. 9-41.
57. 39. Although J. Timothy Sprehe believes "The only progress made on electronic dissemination at GPO has come about because Congress passed a law requiring the certain tasks be accomplished," there is evidence to the contrary (U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Downsizing Government and Setting Priorities of Federal Programs: Hearings before Subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations, February 2, 1995, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995,1200). In 1984, GPO requested $800,000 to support the construction of a Federal Documents Database and online dissemination of that information and was told "GPO should not go beyond existing legislative authority in devising operational require" ments," see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriation Bill, 1985, Report Accompanying H.R. 5753, 98th Cong., 2nd sess., 1986, H. Rept. 811, 30. In 1989, acting Public Printer Joseph E. Jenifer strongly argued for GPO's authority to perform online dissemination, see U.S. Congress House Committee on House Administration, Subcommittee on Printing and Procurement, Title 44 U.S.C. - Review, Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Print-ing, 101st Cong., 1st sess., 23 May, 1989, 4-79. Subsequently, GPO supported a bill, H.R. 3849, which would have provided explicit statutory authority to offer online services, see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, The Government Printing Office Improvement Act of 1990: Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Printing, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 7 March 1990. 9-41.
58. 39. Although J. Timothy Sprehe believes "The only progress made on electronic dissemination at GPO has come about because Congress passed a law requiring the certain tasks be accomplished," there is evidence to the contrary (U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Downsizing Government and Setting Priorities of Federal Programs: Hearings before Subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations, February 2, 1995, 104th Cong., 1st sess., 1995,1200). In 1984, GPO requested $800,000 to support the construction of a Federal Documents Database and online dissemination of that information and was told "GPO should not go beyond existing legislative authority in devising operational require" ments," see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Legislative Branch Appropriation Bill, 1985, Report Accompanying H.R. 5753, 98th Cong., 2nd sess., 1986, H. Rept. 811, 30. In 1989, acting Public Printer Joseph E. Jenifer strongly argued for GPO's authority to perform online dissemination, see U.S. Congress House Committee on House Administration, Subcommittee on Printing and Procurement, Title 44 U.S.C. - Review, Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Print-ing, 101st Cong., 1st sess., 23 May, 1989, 4-79. Subsequently, GPO supported a bill, H.R. 3849, which would have provided explicit statutory authority to offer online services, see U.S. Congress, House, Committee on House Administration, The Government Printing Office Improvement Act of 1990: Hearings Held Before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Printing, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., 7 March 1990. 9-41.
59. 40. See, "Electronic GPO - Decentralized" in OTA, Informing the Nation, 85-104.
60. 41. U.S. Government Printing Office, GPO/2001: Vision for a New Millennium, (Washington, DC: GPO, 1991).
61. 42. GPO/2001, 3.
62. 43. Alice M. Rivlin, Acting Director, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, prepared statement before the U.S. Senate Rules and Administration Committee on "Various Government Printing Proposals" (3 February 1994). (Available on request from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.)
63. 44. GPO/2001, 34.
64. 45. See, for example, U.S. General Accounting Office, Agency Printing Plants-Choosing the Least Costly Option (PLRD-81-31) (Washington, DC: GAO, 1981); OTA, Informing the Nation; U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Oversight Hearing on Consolidation of Department of Defense Printing Services, 102nd Cong., 2nd sess., 4 August 1992 and U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Review of the Defense Printing Service: Hearing before the Joint Committee on Printing, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., 15 July 1993.
65. 45. See, for example, U.S. General Accounting Office, Agency Printing Plants-Choosing the Least Costly Option (PLRD-81-31) (Washington, DC: GAO, 1981); OTA, Informing the Nation; U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Oversight Hearing on Consolidation of Department of Defense Printing Services, 102nd Cong., 2nd sess., 4 August 1992 and U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Review of the Defense Printing Service: Hearing before the Joint Committee on Printing, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., 15 July 1993.
66. 45. See, for example, U.S. General Accounting Office, Agency Printing Plants-Choosing the Least Costly Option (PLRD-81-31) (Washington, DC: GAO, 1981); OTA, Informing the Nation; U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Oversight Hearing on Consolidation of Department of Defense Printing Services, 102nd Cong., 2nd sess., 4 August 1992 and U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Review of the Defense Printing Service: Hearing before the Joint Committee on Printing, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., 15 July 1993.
67. 45. See, for example, U.S. General Accounting Office, Agency Printing Plants-Choosing the Least Costly Option (PLRD-81-31) (Washington, DC: GAO, 1981); OTA, Informing the Nation; U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Oversight Hearing on Consolidation of Department of Defense Printing Services, 102nd Cong., 2nd sess., 4 August 1992 and U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing, Review of the Defense Printing Service: Hearing before the Joint Committee on Printing, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., 15 July 1993.
68. 46. See, for example, "Department of Commerce Dismantling Act," 104th Congress, 1st sess., S 929.