The Congressional Budget Office has developed its budgetary estimates based on information and data collected by the Office of Personnel Management and the General Accounting Office. Based on conversations with Committee staff, the CBO estimates assume that individuals receiving retired military pay will not be allowed to use military service credits when calculating their civil service retirement benefits.

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR DAVID PRYOR During the Governmental Affairs Committee's consideration of its budget reconciliation instructions I offered and subsequently withdrew an amendment which would have provided for budgetary saving of $125 million in fiscal year 1983, $150 million in fiscal year 1984, and $175 million in fiscal year 1985-a total of $450 million over a three year period. This budgetary savings would have been achieved by reducing government spending for consulting services, management and professional services, and special studies and analyses. I withdrew this amendment at the urging of several members of the committee who argued against it because savings it would achieve would not be recognized by the Budget Committee under the terms of the reconciliation instructions received by the Committee on Governmental Affairs.

The Committee on Governmental Affairs was instructed to report changes in laws within the jurisdiction of the committee which provide spending authority as defined in section 401(c)(2)(C) of Public Law 93-344, sufficient to achieve certain required budgetary savings. Section 401(c)(2)(C) of the Budget Control Act of 1974, defines spending authority as authority "to make payments (including loans and grants), the budget authority for which is not provided for in advance by appropriation Acts. . . ." Savings can be achieved in two general ways, either through reductions in direct spending outlays, or through reductions in authorizations sufficient to achieve reductions in appropriations. Due to the fact that the instructions to the Committee on Governmental Affairs were limited to direct spending, such as entitlement reductions, several of my committee colleagues opposed the amendment which would have achieved a $450 million reduction over a three year period through reductions in the government's use of consultants.

Although I did not agree with the manner in which the Committee on Governmental Affairs chose to achieve its required budget savings, specifically by capping cost-of-living adjustments and other retirement reductions, and, as a result, voted against the reconciliation package, the package, nevertheless was adopted by the committee and it did achieve the required savings. I was prepared to offer my amendment either as an alternative or an addition to the required savings because non-benefit reductions should be achieved by the Committee. I also intended to offer my amendment because I feel very strongly that consultant expenditures by the federal government need to be reduced.

I believe it is ironic that last year this committee did include in its reconciliation legislation, which was reported to the Budget Committee, a $500 million reduction in spending for consultant services. Wasteful spending in this area of federal procurement has been established through Congressional investigations and hearings, GAO reports and other outside reports. Meaningful savings have been achieved and should continue to be achieved in this area. However, due to specific wording of the Budget Committee's instructions which limit savings to direct spending budget authority, my colleagues urged that the amendment which would have saved $450 million by reducing unnecessary and wasteful consulting services not be offered. This savings needs to be achieved and

properly should have been allowed to be achieved by the Governmental Affairs Committee. However, whether this savings is achieved by the Committee on Governmental Affairs or the Committee on Appropriations, as others have suggested, I sincerely hope savings of this nature will actually be achieved. In my opinion such spending is exactly where the budget should be cut.

If such savings are not encouraged-and it would appear that they are actually discouraged-by the reconciliation process, then something very serious is wrong with the entire budget process. When the discretion of an authorizing committee is so limited that its efforts to achieve savings of taxpayer dollars through reductions such as these are discouraged, then procedure has overruled substance and the Congress and the taxpayer have become victims of our own procedure. I do not believe that taxpayers care what committee gets credit in the reconciliation process, but they should be quite properly unhappy with a process that discourages efforts by any committee to bring down government spending. I intend to work toward correcting a process that appears to be seriously flawed.

DAVID PRYOR.

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

Title VII

United States Senate

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

WASHINGTON, DC. 20810

July 20, 1982

Honorable Pete Domenici

Chairman

Senate Budget Committee
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Pete:

Pursuant to the terms of the First Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for fiscal year 1983, S. Con. Res. 92, and reconciliation provisions set forth therein at subsections (a) and (b)(7) of section 2, I am enclosing legislative changes and report language for inclusion in Title VII of the 1982 Omnibus Reconciliation Bill and its accompanying report. Also enclosed are minority views and separate views.

At a meeting on July 15, 1982, the Committee approved, by a vote of 7-5, changes in law within the Committee's jurisdiction sufficient to reduce budget authority by $168.1 million and outlays by $166.9 million in fiscal year 1983; to reduce budget authority by $192.1 million and outlays by $191.8 million in fiscal year 1984; and to reduce budget authority by $202 million and outlays by $201.6 million in fiscal year 1985. The Committee recommends that these reductions be accomplished through amendments to the VA pension and compensation accounts, and through enactment of a user fee on VA loan programs.

I look forward to working with you on this important legislation. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.