Norton Announces Committee Passage of Her Bill Allowing D.C. to Transmit Legislation to Congress Electronically

Chairwoman Maloney, thank you for marking up my District of Columbia Electronic Transmittal of Legislation Act. This bill would bring the congressional review process for legislation adopted by D.C. into the electronic age by permitting D.C. to transmit legislation electronically.

I want to be very clear: While I do not believe there should be a congressional review process for D.C. legislation, this bill does not change the review process for D.C. legislation, other than giving D.C. flexibility in the form it transmits legislation to Congress. This bill has only one purpose: reducing administrative burdens on D.C. and Congress.

The D.C. Home Rule Act requires the Chair of the D.C. Council to transmit legislation to Congress for a review period before the legislation may take effect. The legislation takes effect after the review period, unless a resolution of disapproval is enacted into law during the review period. The Home Rule Act is silent on the form of transmittal, but Congress has always required the legislation to be physically transmitted.

Electronic records are recognized as valid under federal and state law, and the federal government and state and local governments conduct official business electronically. For example, under the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, which was enacted into law more than 20 years ago, with respect to any interstate transaction in which the parties consent, "a signature, contract, or other record relating to such transaction may not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form." Twenty years ago, the E-Government Act, which facilitated the federal government providing information and services to the public electronically, was enacted into law.

Federal agencies transmit regulations and other documents to the Federal Register electronically. Congress is also capable of conducting official business electronically. In fact, the House already does so. For example, the House permits Members, including acting through their staff, to introduce legislation and submit statements into the Congressional Record electronically.

The requirement that D.C. physically transmit legislation imposes costs on the Council. The Council engages in a 12-step process to physically transmit legislation, including printing two copies of each bill and committee report, arranging a time for delivery of these documents to the offices of the Speaker and President of the Senate, and having two staffers drive to the Capitol to deliver the documents--two are required because of parking restrictions.

The physical transmittal process also imposes costs on Congress. The following congressional offices and committees are involved in the physical transmittal process: the offices of the Speaker and President of the Senate, the House and Senate Parliamentarians, the House Clerk, the Senate Secretary, this committee and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

The aftermath of the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol highlighted the burdens of physical transmittal. After temporary fencing was installed around the Capitol, D.C. employees could not enter the Capitol, delaying transmittal of D.C. legislation until D.C. Council and congressional staff eventually developed a workaround. D.C. Council and congressional staff arranged to meet outside the fencing to transmit legislation.

I recognize that Congress requires all so-called executive communications, including D.C. legislation, to be physically transmitted, but D.C. is the only entity required to transmit legislation to Congress for a review period and this committee has jurisdiction over the transmittal process for D.C. legislation.

I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense bill.

Source