Congressional Commissions: Costs and Cost-Saving Strategies

Congressional Commissions: Costs and Cost-Saving Strategies

Updated December 19, 2014
Congressional Commissions: Costs and Cost-Saving Strategies
Overview
commission was authorized to hire a staff and
Congressional commissions are temporary advisory bodies,
commissioners, who were paid at the daily equivalent of
usually established by statute, that provide independent
Level IV of the executive schedule.
advice to Congress, make recommendations for changes in
public policy, study or investigate a particular problem or
The commission completed its work and officially
event, or perform a specific duty.
terminated on May 31, 2007. The commission held a total
of 16 meetings and issued one report. Total commission
Commission costs vary widely. Commemorative
costs were $4,445,000. According to the Federal Advisory
congressional commissions, such as the Civil War
Committee Database, 6% of the total cost ($264,000) was
Sesquicentennial Commission proposed in the 110th
spent on travel costs and 62% ($2,785,000) was spent on
Congress, are often authorized annual funding of several
staff and member costs. The remaining expenditures (32%,
hundred thousand dollars. Commissions that examine
or $1,400,000) were for “other costs,” which included “all
specific public policy topics and report to Congress, such as
administrative costs not attributable either to personnel
the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, are typically
payments or to travel and per diem ... [and] may include the
authorized greater amounts of money. The cost of
costs of meeting rooms, transcripts, maintenance of a
commissions proposed during the 112th and 113th Congress
committee web site, etc.” (See Figure 1). The commission
ranged from several hundred thousand dollars to $8 million.
employed an annual average of seven FTEs.
Overall expenses for an individual commission are
Figure 1. Antitrust Modernization Commission Costs
dependent on a variety of factors, the most important of
which are the number of paid staff and the commissions’
duration and scope. Many commissions have few or no full-
time staff; others employ large numbers, such as the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United
States (the 9/11 Commission), which had a full-time staff of
80. Additionally, some commissions provide compensation
to members; others only reimburse members for travel
expenses. Many commissions finish their work and
terminate within a year of creation; in other cases work may
not be completed for several years.
Secondary factors that can affect commission costs include
the number of commissioners, how often the commission

meets or holds hearings, and the number and size of
Source: Federal Advisory Committee Database
publications the commission produces. Although
congressional commissions are primarily funded through
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
congressional appropriations, many commissions are
Upon the United States
statutorily authorized to accept monetary donations and
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the
volunteer labor, which may offset some costs. Occasionally,
United States was established by P.L. 107-306 on
commemorative commissions are not provided any
November 22, 2002. The statute established a 10-member
appropriated funds.
commission and directed the commission to complete its
work in 18 months. The commission was authorized to hire
Costs of Specific Commissions
a staff, who were paid at a rate not greater than Level V of
The following provides summaries of the costs and staff of
the executive schedule.
three recent commissions.
The commission completed its work and officially
The Antitrust Modernization Commission
terminated on September 20, 2004. The commission held a
The Antitrust Modernization Commission was established
total of 12 public hearings and issued one report. The
by P.L. 107-273 on November 2, 2002. The statute
commission received $14,000,000 in appropriations and
established a 12-member commission and directed the
employed 80 full-time-equivalents (FTEs).
commission to complete its work in three years. The
National Gambling Impact Study Commission

The National Gambling Impact Study Commission was
established by public law on October 22, 1994. The statute
https://crsreports.congress.gov

Congressional Commissions: Costs and Cost-Saving Strategies
established a nine-member commission and directed the
Reducing the Size of a Commission
commission to complete its work within two years of its
Two options for reducing costs without adjusting the
first meeting. The commission was authorized to hire a staff
compensation of members or staff are to reduce the number
at a rate not greater than Level V of the Executive
of members to be appointed or reduce the authorized size of
Schedule. Commissioners, who were not federal
the commission’s staff. It could be argued that reducing the
employees, were authorized to be compensated at daily
size of a commission—for example, from 24 members to 15
equivalent of Level IV of the executive schedule.
members—could provide cost savings without adverse
effects on the quality of the commission’s work or the
The commission completed its work and officially
ability to locate qualified individuals to serve as
terminated on approximately August 1, 1999. The
commissioners. However, if a commission is too small, a
commission held a total of 17 meetings and issued one
full range of viewpoints may not be represented, which
report. The commission was appropriated a total of
could negatively affect the commission’s work products.
$5,000,000 in FY1997 and FY1998. The commission
Similarly, reducing the size of the staff could adversely
employed 10 staff members.
affect the quality of the commission’s work, or its ability to
complete its work in a timely manner.
Cost-Saving Strategies
Shortening the Statutory Lifespan
Reducing Compensation for Members
Limiting the time available to a commission for the
Commissions that compensate members typically do so at a
completion of its duties is another option for reducing
rate equal to the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic
commission costs without decreasing member or staff
pay prescribed for Level IV of the Executive Schedule
compensation, and without reducing the number of
($157,100 in 2014). By reducing or eliminating costs
commissioners or size of staff. Many commissions are
associated with member compensation, the overall cost of a
given several years to complete their work, and it could be
commission can be lowered. It could be argued that
argued that a shorter amount of time would not negatively
reducing or eliminating member compensation is the most
affect the quality of the commission’s work. In some cases,
practical option for reducing overall commission costs,
a shorter commission lifespan might also result in a larger
since many commissions do not compensate members.
pool of potential commissioners, because of the reduced
commitment of time.
It could be argued that the use of volunteer members factors
into Congress’s favorable consideration of these
Shortening the lifespan of a commission, however, raises
commissions. But that might not be appropriate as a
some concerns. If a commission is not given enough time to
legislative strategy for all commissions. On the one hand,
fulfill its duties, the final work product may suffer.
reporting lower personnel costs may increase chances for
Alternately, the commission could request more time to
consideration and passage of legislation creating a
complete its work, potentially incurring more costs and
commission. On the other, without compensation for
negating any savings originally achieved.
members, it may be difficult to attract the qualified
individuals necessary to achieve a commission’s mandate.
Limiting the Mission or Duties
If cost-saving strategies that reduce the operational costs of
Reducing Compensation for Staff
a commission are unattractive, legislators might consider
Similar to reducing member compensation, reducing staff
altering the commission’s mission or duties. By limiting the
compensation can arguably result in significant cost
commission’s mission or reducing its scope of duties, costs
savings. Most statutes creating congressional commissions
associated with meetings, hearings, and other commission
authorize the commission chair or the chair-appointed staff
activities could be reduced. Similarly, limiting the mission
director to fix the rate of staff compensation, with the
or duties of a commission might make it possible to reduce
proviso that the rate does not exceed a specified amount.
operational expenses without negatively affecting the
Typically, the amount specified is either Level IV or Level
quality of the work. However, this strategy might not
V of the Executive Schedule ($157,100 and $147,200
increase the chances of favorable consideration; altering a
annually, respectively), although some commissions are
proposed commission to attract legislative support may
authorized lower maximum rates for staff compensation.
alienate members of its current coalition of support.
While reduced staff compensation could result in cost
For more information, see CRS Report R40076,
savings, it may make it more difficult to hire qualified staff;
Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and
and it could negatively impact the commission’s ability to
Legislative Considerations, by Matthew E. Glassman and
efficiently function, resulting in a lower quality work
Jacob R. Straus.
product or an increase in time needed to complete the
commission’s mission.
Matthew E. Glassman, Analyst on the Congress
IF10027

https://crsreports.congress.gov

Congressional Commissions: Costs and Cost-Saving Strategies

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10027 · VERSION 2 · UPDATED