Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (NY-10), the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet, delivered an opening statement at the hearing on “GSA’s Failure to Meet the Needs of the Judiciary: A Case Study of Bureaucratic Negligence and Waste.”

Rep. Nadler stated, “The purpose of today’s hearing is to consider whether taxpayer dollars are being wasted when it comes to renovation of our federal courthouses. This is an important issue, and the Committee with jurisdiction – the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee – is already exploring it.  Management of the government’s public buildings is not within our jurisdiction.  And this hearing does not involve funding issues central to the judiciary’s ability to fulfill its constitutional obligations or manage its critical operations, considerations that are within our jurisdiction.” He continued, “Moving forward, I hope that our Committee will devote its time and resources on solving the critical funding issues that truly involve the unique interests of the judiciary, and leave oversight and management of public buildings where it belongs.”

The following is the full text of Congressman Nadler’s opening statement (as prepared for delivery):

“The purpose of today’s hearing is to consider whether taxpayer dollars are being wasted when it comes to renovation of our federal courthouses.     

“This is an important issue, and the Committee with jurisdiction – the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee – is already exploring it.  Management of the government’s public buildings is not within our jurisdiction.  And this hearing does not involve funding issues central to the judiciary’s ability to fulfill its constitutional obligations or manage its critical operations, considerations that are within our jurisdiction. 

“The fact that some public buildings house federal courts does not itself explain or justify injecting this Committee into the oversight of those buildings or of GSA.  This is particularly true when we have not yet held a single hearing on the impact that sequestration and shortsighted budget cuts have had on the judiciary’s ability to fulfill constitutionally-required and congressionally-imposed duties.

“There are undoubtedly legitimate concerns regarding particular renovation projects, and I appreciate the efforts of Judges Conrad and Johnson and Ms. Smith to explain some of them to us today.  Although they are speaking in their individual capacities, and not as representatives of the judiciary as a whole, I commend their commitment to ensuring greater accountability and improving GSA’s service delivery going forward.  There is no question that Members on both sides of this Committee take seriously allegations of waste, particularly in times of fiscal constraint.

“My concern is whether today’s hearing represents the best use of this Committee’s resources.  The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee already is well aware of the problems with the Poff Courthouse, which is located in Chairman Goodlatte’s district, and it is otherwise actively engaged in robust oversight of GSA. 

“That Committee held a hearing in 2011 on the Poff renovation, and Chairman Goodlatte testified about his concerns.

“We will hear more today about ongoing concerns with the Poff Courthouse renovation, as well as concerns regarding the Domenici Courthouse in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

“While today’s hearing highlights these two projects as ostensible GSA failures, it is notable that GSA only learned of complaints about the Domenici Courthouse after being notified of this hearing just last week – on the same day that the Majority issued the public hearing notice.  The failure to alert GSA or ask for its response before scheduling this hearing does not demonstrate genuine interest in meaningful engagement with the agency. 

“As we hear about problems with particular projects, we should also not lose sight of the fact that GSA owns or operates more than 9,000 properties across the United States.  The judiciary rents space in approximately 779 different GSA-managed buildings.  Learning about problems at a handful of locations does not provide the necessary background, expertise, and context to engage in appropriate oversight.

“That responsibility lies – and should remain – with the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, of which I am also a member.  GSA is the subject of robust oversight and well-deserved criticism by its committee of jurisdiction.  Some of that oversight has involved particular courthouse projects.  I am not aware, however, of any formal complaint ever coming from the Judicial Conference of the United States regarding the GSA’s management of courthouse buildings. 

“The Conference did notify us just yesterday that it recently initiated a partnership with the GSA to identify and address concerns that judges have with deficiencies in GSA service delivery.  I understand that Chairman Goodlatte also has requested that the Government Accountability Office examine the GSA’s selection process with regard to facilities renovated using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding.  

“These reviews may identify system-wide issues that need to be addressed.  To the extent they do, I hope that the Members of this Committee will work with and through our colleagues on Transportation and Infrastructure.  It is that Committee, and not this one, that needs to continue holding GSA’s feet to the fire.

“Moving forward, I hope that our Committee will devote its time and resources to solving the critical funding issues that truly involve the unique interests of the judiciary, and leave oversight and management of public buildings where it belongs.

“With that, I yield back the balance of my time.”

 ###