REPEAL REQUIREMENT FOR CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE TO PREPARE ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION AND SUPPLEMENTS IN HARDBOUND VERSION

On 2025-03-31, Representative Joseph D. Morelle (D-NY-25) delivered a floor speech titled "REPEAL REQUIREMENT FOR CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE TO PREPARE ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION AND SUPPLEMENTS IN HARDBOUND VER" in the House. The speech addressed taxes and also covered the environment, foreign policy. It referenced legislation: HR1234.

REPEAL REQUIREMENT FOR CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE TO PREPARE ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION AND SUPPLEMENTS IN HARDBOUND VERSION

Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 57 (Monday, March 31, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 57 (Monday, March 31, 2025)] [House] [Pages H1345-H1347] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] REPEAL REQUIREMENT FOR CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE TO PREPARE ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION AND SUPPLEMENTS IN HARDBOUND VERSION Mrs. BICE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1234) to direct the Librarian of Congress to promote the more cost-effective, efficient, and expanded availability of the Annotated Constitution and pocket-part supplements by replacing the hardbound versions with digital versions. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 1234 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. REPEAL REQUIREMENT FOR CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE TO PREPARE ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION AND SUPPLEMENTS IN HARDBOUND VERSION. (a) Repeal.--The first section of Public Law 91-589 (2 U.S.C. 168) is amended-- (1) by striking ``the Librarian of Congress'' and inserting ``(a) subject to subsection (b), the Librarian of Congress''; and (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(b)(1) Upon the completion of the October 2031 term of the Supreme Court and upon the completion of each tenth October term of the Supreme Court thereafter, the Librarian of Congress shall have prepared a digital decennial revised edition of the Constitution Annotated, which shall contain annotations of all decisions theretofore rendered by the Supreme Court construing provisions of the Constitution, in place of the hardbound decennial revised edition of the Constitution Annotated described in subsection (a)(3). ``(2) Upon the completion of the October 2025 term of the Supreme Court and upon the completion of each subsequent October term of the Supreme Court beginning in an odd- numbered year (the final digit of which is not a 1), the Librarian shall have prepared a digital cumulative pocket- part supplement to the most recent decennial revised edition of the Constitution Annotated, which shall contain cumulative annotations of all such decisions rendered by the Supreme Court which were not included in the most recent revised edition of the Constitution Annotated, in place of the hardbound editions of the cumulative pocket-part supplement described in subsection (a)(4).''. (b) Ensuring Availability of Digital Versions.--Section 2 of Public Law 91-589 (2 U.S.C. 168a) is amended-- (1) by striking ``All hardbound'' and inserting ``(a) All hardbound''; and (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(b)(1) The digital decennial revised editions of the Constitution Annotated prepared under subsection (b)(1) of the first section of this Joint Resolution and the digital cumulative pocket-part supplements prepared under subsection (b)(2) of the first section of this Joint Resolution shall be available at a public website of the Library of Congress. ``(2) The Librarian of Congress shall ensure the continuing availability of the documents referred to in paragraph (1) to Congress and the public.''. (c) Repeal of Additional Printing Requirements.-- (1) Mandatory printing of additional copies.--Section 3 of Public Law 91-589 (2 U.S.C. 168b) is amended-- (A) by striking ``There shall be printed'' and inserting ``(a) There shall be printed''; and [[Page H1346]] (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(b) Subsection (a) does not apply after completion of the October 2025 term of the Supreme Court, and the Librarian of Congress shall provide the decennial revised editions of the Constitution Annotated and the cumulative pocket part supplements prepared under this Joint Resolution exclusively in a digital format available at a public website of the Library of Congress.''. (2) Printing of additional copies pursuant to concurrent resolution.--Section 4 of Public Law 91-589 (2 U.S.C. 168c) is repealed. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Oklahoma. General Leave Mrs. BICE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on this bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Oklahoma? There was no objection. Mrs. BICE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this is the Constitution Annotated, or CONAN, as it is better known today, weighing 8 pounds, 14 ounces. Its origins date back to 1797 when Congress passed legislation requiring every Member of Congress to be provided with a copy of the Constitution. These copies were eventually expanded to include Supreme Court case citations so that Members could see which clauses of the Constitution the Court used in deciding cases. However, as the number of citations grew by hundreds, the copies became less useful to Members because most had no idea what the cases were about and what questions were before the Court. So, in 1921, Congress began requiring reprints of the Constitution to include explanatory language that would make sense of the case citations throughout. This format is still used today. Initially, CONAN was printed every 10 years or so, but by 1970, Members began to complain that it was outdated almost as soon as it was printed. They addressed this by requiring that paperbound supplements to CONAN be printed every 2 years. Since 1972, that is what we have done: print a hardbound version of CONAN every 10 years and a paperbound supplement every 2 years. CONAN obviously has a rich history, dating back over two centuries. Nothing about H.R. 1234 erases or changes this history. The Constitution provides the framework for our government, and understanding that framework and how the Supreme Court has applied it to its decisions over the years is as essential today as it was 200 years ago. What has changed, however, is the way people get their information. Today, most of us rely on digital sources for the most up-to-date information, whether it is news, airfares, the weather, or Supreme Court case citations. According to the GPO, the number of print copies of CONAN requested in 2012 by the House, Senate, and the Joint Committee on Printing was just over 1,000. Ten years later, in 2022, the number of requested copies dropped to just 659. It is no coincidence that this drop in requests coincides with the 2019 launch of a digital version of CONAN. Over the past 5 years, the CONAN website has become an invaluable resource to individual citizens, schools, libraries, and, of course, Congress. It has received more than 28 million visits since it was created and features hundreds of pages of constitutional analysis and content. The site is publicly accessible, easy to search, provides links to Supreme Court decisions, and, perhaps most importantly, is updated in real time by the CRS. All of this raises the question of why are we wasting taxpayer dollars printing this giant, hardcover version of CONAN, along with the paperbound supplements, when a superior, digital version already exists? According to the CBO, replacing this version of CONAN with a digital version would reduce the Library of Congress' operating costs by $4 million over the next 4 years. Eliminating the print requirement will also eliminate inefficient use of CRS staff time. Requiring CRS staff to spend countless hours formatting and paginating the print version of CONAN does not support the work of Congress, nor does it benefit our constituents. Mr. Speaker, replacing the CONAN print requirement with a digital requirement is a no-brainer. The digital version provides Members and other users with the most up-to-date information and constitutional analysis available at a significant cost savings to taxpayers. History shows that Congress has consistently taken steps to ensure that CONAN meets the evolving needs of Members and other users. Passing H.R. 1234 is a logical next step in maintaining CONAN's relevancy and usefulness, both to Congress and to the American people. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1234. I urge quick action in the Senate, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1234. This bill, as has been indicated, modernizes Congress and improves efficiency by eliminating the requirement that the Congressional Research Service print hardbound versions of its Annotated Constitution. This measure, which I am proud to co-lead, passed by voice vote last Congress, and I am hopeful it will again today. I will take a moment to thank my dear friend, the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice), who chairs the Committee of House Administration's Subcommittee on Modernization and Innovation. I thank her for all of her hard work. It is always a delight to work with her. I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, I didn't bring a physical copy of the Annotated Constitution. I am not sure I could lift it, and I think Mrs. Bice is stronger than I am. This mandate to print the Annotated Constitution does come with significant and unnecessary personnel cost for the Congressional Research Service. As Mrs. Bice indicated, eliminating it would save us an estimated $4 million over the next 4 years. At the Committee on House Administration where I have the privilege of serving as the ranking member, we spent a significant amount of time talking about the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo. That case ended four decades of precedent known as the Chevron deference, which required courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. While we ma

Referenced legislation: HR1234, HR1234