I want to raise with my colleagues my past experience sitting on the public accounts committee, which decided to dispense with the subcommittee on planning. It didn't work out well, because there was no mechanism to vet or to try to convene with compromise on key issues. It ended up that we spent a lot of time in regular committee talking about procedural matters and other things.
I understand the sense of collegiality, about seeing whether we can make this happen within the limited timeframe that is normally reserved for hearing witnesses and conducting studies, but I would like to say that I think it's a mistake to do away with the subcommittee, which we're obviously not doing, because it's already confirmed in our routine orders for this committee. I really like the idea of a subcommittee and having it meet on a somewhat regular basis to vet procedural matters and not have the time consumed within the committee.
My experience with public accounts is that we did very little business during our allotted committee time because we just wrangled about procedure. That's it.