Mr. LYNCH. Yes, sir.

Chairman METCALF. Congressman Giaimo?

Representative GIAIMO. I want to go back to something that was said, to be certain I understood it right and that it was accurately stated, and that was that there was no anchoring permitted at the Watergate hearings.

Mr. DAVIS. No broadcasting from within the room.

Representative GIAIMO. I understand National Public Radio anchored the Watergate hearings, and they were the only ones to do so, and I am informed that the only prohibition was against interruption of the hearings themselves.

Mr. JORDAN. I believe all radio networks broadcast at one time or another the proceedings, but I do not think anyone

Representative GIAIMO. It is my understanding that there was no prohibition against anchoring.

Mr. SMALL. You could broadcast from the room while they were in recess, but not while in session.

Representative GIAIMO. I wish you would check that.

Mr. DAVIS. They were very strict about the rule as far as we were concerned.

We could do some broadcasting, but we could only do it during a

recess.

Once the gavel went down, you could not do anything until there was recess for lunch or adjournment for the day.

Mr. JORDAN. I suppose you could say yes, you could anchor the Watergate hearing, but as Mr. Davis said, you were not allowed to broadcast from that room while the sessions were going on, so if you were to anchor, you would have to do your anchoring during the

recess.

It would be possible that way, I guess.

Chairman METCALF. Did that apply to television, and to radio? Mr. JORDAN. To both. We all did our anchoring as Mr. Davis said outside the room, for most of us, outside the building downtown. Chairman METCALF. Congressman Cleveland?

Representative CLEVELAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

By way of comment, I want to call to the panel's attention that this book I referred to this morning, "We Propose: A Modern Congress," has a chapter by then Congressman Ellsworth, in which he spoke for television and radio coverage of the House and Senate floor procedures. He introduced legislation, and several of the rest of us did, and I remember that in two or three sessions of Congress I introduced that legislation, and we really did not receive much support.

I got a little ink in my own district, and that is where it counts, but we received no particular assistance from any of the major networks, and I just think the record should show that.

You people certainly feel slighted, but there was no real substantial support for the legislation that was pending in 1966, in 1968. Now, there is one other point; this is a technical matter.

There was some thought-and this committee has originated the thought that we might at some time help the Members with closed circuit television so that either a Member who is in his office attending to some business, or his legislative or administrative assistant can follow the floor proceedings. If we had closed circuit television, which

would go to the Members' offices and other spots perhaps in the House or Senate Office Buildings, is this the type of thing that you could have a takeout of and use for your purposes?

In other words, if this television was showing who was speaking. and following the affairs on the floor of the House, is this something you could take a copy of, is this technically feasible?

Mr. JORDAN. Technically it is certainly feasible.

Representative CLEVELAND. And then you would do your own

editing.

I wanted to know if we did go to closed circuit television, whether you people, having access to this, could take out what you thought was newsworthy for your use.

Mr. SMALL. What you suggest poses a number of problems.

To begin with

Representative CLEVELAND. I am not suggesting. I am asking you a question.

I am saying there is a suggestion that we might have closed circuit television, so some Members and their staff could follow what is on the floor.

We have already taken the first step on an experimental basis. We have had a teletype system whereby we have been kept up to date in our offices minute by minute on the procedures on the floor of the House.

For obvious reasons, if you are in a committee like this, or if you are in the office talking to constituents, and if you have to go to the floor quickly for a vote, this helps you.

I am not making the suggestion this could be the answer. I am simply asking you the technical question: If we did have closed circuit television of the floor proceedings, could you take from that whatever you wanted for your purposes?

Mr. SMALL. Technically, yes, but it creates a number of problems. To begin with, each of us have contracts which we honor faithfully with craft unions that do just that kind of work.

This would create labor relations problems for us if we were accepting a feed from technicians hired by the Congress.

Second, it has been our experience that people engaged in closedcircuit television do not have quite the eye for television picture that an experienced cameraman would.

Representative CLEVELAND. You mean they would not have the foresight to catch Mr. Brooks scratching his nose?

Chairman METCALF. Or Democrats failing to applaud some of the statements the President of the United States made

Mr. SMALL. Lastly, I think of great concern to all of us, that people who have the power to turn the camera on also have the power to turn if off, so we have fought for many years, for example, at the White House, any attempts, and there have been a number in the last three administrations since I have been in Washington, any attempts to do our filming for us, and just provide us with handout film.

Representative CLEVELAND. Again you are reading something into my question that was never there in the first place.

We are not trying to tell you you have to take this.

I am just simply asking you if we had closed circuit television, and if you had permission to use it, could you use it?

I am not saying you will use it. I am asking, technically, could you use it?

Mr. SMALL. The answer is yes.

Chairman METCALF. Is not that the service you accept from the United Nations, essentially?

Mr. SMALL. Yes; but again in the United Nations, you have standard feed equivalent of what would happen when you meet on the floor of the Chamber.

You do not have television of committee meetings, or other meetings. Chairman METCALF. Very well.

Now, Senator Byrd has introduced in the Senate a proposal for closed circuit television coverage of Senate floor activities.

Now, is not that just exactly equivalent to the kind of service that is furnished to you by the United Nations on a paid basis? Mr. SMALL. Yes.

Chairman METCALF. And you accept it, and use it?
Mr. SMALL. Yes.

Chairman METCALF. And if we were able to put in the House and in the Senate a closed-circuit television system, and have a union operative handling it, would not we be doing just exactly the same thing that they do at the United Nations, if you tapped into that system? Mr. SMALL. If you are doing it, Senator, for your benefit, and the purposes described by Mr. Cleveland, I would say it is worthwhile. If you were doing it primarily to service the television networks, I would say it would be a waste of taxpayer money, because we are perfectly willing and capable to do our own coverage and would prefer it.

Chairman METCALF. Mr. Jordan?

Mr. JORDAN. I do not think we speak with one voice on this issue, on this particular question, and I think it is a very important question. I share the fears that Mr. Small has expressed about such a system. In other words, about a system that is operated by anyone other than us.

That does not mean that I would not accept it, because I have accepted it at the United Nations, but I do have those fears.

Representative CLEVELAND. Would any others of the panel like to

comment?

Mr. LYNCH. I would say simply if that were the decision of the Congress to go that direction, and if it were installed, and that was the only access, I would say yes.

Chairman METCALF. I was just pursuing this because there was a recommendation that we follow the lead of the United Nations, and I did not see any difference between their closed circuit system, which you have accepted and which you pay to use.

Mr. DAVIS. There is a difference between the two.

There is a difference in that the United Nations is not run by the U.S. Government.

It is an international body. If you deal with the press office of the United Nations, you find out that your clout is maybe no more meaningful than the Biafra's so far as getting coverage. In this country you would have a different situation viz-a-viz your labor unions, and so forth, because this is a Government operation.

You do not have the same leverage at the United Nations as you have here.

Chairman METCALF. I think that is a very valid point, Mr. Cleve

land.

Representative CLEVELAND. I am not sure if you were here yesterday. But if you were, you know a number of us feel that one of the important aspects of this hearing is for Congress to reform our operations and procedures, so that we improve our performance as a legislative, oversight and factfinding institution. I also believe that some of these reforms, in addition to helping Congress improve itself as an institution, and help it to do a better job, would also make it easier for you people, the news media, to cover the job we are trying to do, and to make us more accessible and comprehensible. So these are just a couple of the proposals floating around, and I would like to get the panel's reaction to them.

One of the suggestions has been that there be a brief period of timeit would have to be brief in the House and the Senate-but there would be a brief period of time before voting on a major complex bill in which there would be a set time of 10 or 15 minutes for the opponents and proponents to sum up the arguments on the bill.

Now, I would like to have the reaction of the panel as to that. Would that type of procedure or procedural change in the House assist you in covering us, particularly if you had the cameras available-and even if you did not-you could sit in the galleries and take notes.

Could I have reaction of the panel on that type of procedural reform?

Mr. LYNCH. Well, I would say that that type of reform would be useful in some respects.

Of course, there is no, as I am sure you understand, we would reserve the right to cut away or pick up as much or as little

Representative CLEVELAND. We have said a thousand times there is nobody on this committee even dreaming of ordering you what to

cover.

Chairman METCALF. We want to give you as many opportunities to cover as much as you can. We feel the Congress has not given you such opportunities, and I think you have made a constructive suggestion. Mr. LYNCH. I am trying to make the point we assume this reform is not programed for us, but for yourselves.

Representative CLEVELAND. I wonder if it would be helpful to you in covering the procedures of the Senate and the House if a reform, such as this, were implemented.

Mr. LYNCH. I would say yes.

Mr. SMALL. I think if you looked at the history, since television began covering, you would find with each succeeding convention, they have done just this sort of thing, changed their patterns of operation to condense it, and make it more meaningful and move on and been more interesting, and I am sure the same general rules would work well in the Congress.

Representative GIAIMO. Will you yield?

Does that mean we will look at television like they looked at tha political convention down in Miami, with those reforms you jus mentioned?

Mr. SMALL. We just covered them, Mr. Giaimo.

Mr. JORDAN. I think that needs repeating. We just covered them. I think you should set your own procedures, and we will cover you. If you have 20-hour sessions, we will cover. That does not mean we will be there all the time, but we will cover.

I am not so sure we should be in the business of telling you how to run your sessions.

Representative CLEVELAND. I am repeating for the 10th time, we are not trying to tell you what to cover, and you are telling us you are not going to tell us how to reform our procedure.

I just want your opinion. You have been around here.

Would this, or would it not help?

Mr. JORDAN. Having made my disclaimer, I would say yes, it would help.

Representative CLEVELAND. How about this matter of overlapping jurisdictions. You have heard me discuss this; there are 17 different committees talking about energy.

You people are interested in energy; everybody is interested in it. Would it help you in covering Congress if we were to structure our committees so we would not have 17 committees on the same subject at the same time?

Mr. JORDAN. Yes, it would.

Mr. LYNCH. Yes.

Mr. DAVIS. It would probably help the energy crisis too.

Chairman METCALF. Would you yield for just a moment?

I have tried to be here for all of the hearings, gentlemen. As you know, the lights go on, and the bells ring, and we live by these lights and bells-and there is a Senate rollcall vote underway on the conference report on water resources.

I am going to have to be excused, and leave you to the tender mercies of Vice Chairman Brooks.

On leaving, I want to emphasize that you have been most helpful as a panel, and I think that we are trying to achieve the same objective: Greater communication, via the medium, between the Congress and the people of the United States. So this is not the end of your participation in the work of the committee in this area.

You represent the radio and television industry. We are going to continue to consult and advise you as we proceed, and to ask for your assistance. You have been very helpful today, and I think the very fact that the questions have been searching indicates our high regard for your experience in directing radio and television coverage in the House and the Senate. So may I express my own personal appreciation to you before leaving, as you know, because I have to go vote. Thank you so much. Congressman Brooks, you are on your own. Representative BROOKS. Mr. Cleveland, you have a couple of more questions.

Go right ahead.

Representative CLEVELAND. I am going to skip over questions I had on other congressional reforms that might make it easier for you to report, budget reform, and more systematic scheduling of legislation. I think we just had a good example of the fact you just never know when something is coming up on the floor.

29-801-74- -10