|
AALL Washington Affairs Legislative and Regulatory Update 02/96
February 1996
Mary Alice Baish
Assistant Washington Affairs Representative
Georgetown University Law Library
111 G Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
202/662-9200 *FAX:202/662-9202
Internet:baish@law.georgetown.edu
The 1996 Outlook: Good News/Bad News
The mood here in Washington is fairly somber as the second
government furlough reaches its 20th day. While Congress and the
executive branch battle over FY '96 budget appropriations and cuts
to balance the budget by the year 2002, many agencies continue to
get by with minimal emergency staffing. Since President Clinton
did finally sign HR 2492, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act
of 1996, on Nov. 20, 1995, the Government Printing Office (GPO) and
the Library of Congress (LC) have not been affected by the current
government shutdown. Self-supporting agencies, such as the
National Technical Information Service (NTIS) and the Patent and
Trademark Office (PTO), have also remained in operation even while,
in their case, the FY '96 appropriations for the Department of
Commerce remains a political bone of contention.
In terms of government information policy issues, I believe
that 1996 will be a seminal year. The 104th Congress is determined
to reassess Title 44 all the while continuing efforts initiated
during the 1st Session to downsize, shift costs, and move rapidly
towards a cybergovernment. We may well see the same strong
determination from members of Congress, particularly from those
House Republicans who are holding out on the budget issues, to make
these changes quickly. So where is the good news in all of this?
Hopes to educate Congress will begin with the GPO Study which
was mandated in the FY '96 appropriations bill. As you read on and
learn that GPO is promising Congress a 90% electronic depository
program by the end of FY '98, you'll understand why information
policy developments this year will be key to the future.
The Government Printing Office
GPO ACCESS Becomes Free to All
Beginning on Dec. 1, 1995, GPO made its ACCESS system
available to direct Internet and dial-in users at no charge. It
noted in the press release that current paid subscribers would
receive refunds as appropriate. In announcing this policy change,
Public Printer DiMario remarked that depository libraries would
continue to serve as important intermediaries to those individuals
who don't own computers or who need assistance.
GPO has been under pressure since the ACCESS system was
created to make it available at no cost. For whatever reason
prompting GPO to make this change now--competition with LC's
THOMAS, the unexpected ease of Internet availability of GPO ACCESS,
or the relatively minimal income GPO realized from subscription
fees--everyone has been pleased with this decision.
The GPO Study
In December, GPO submitted its budget request for FY '97 to
Congress, along with the strategic plan mandated by HR 2492 to
outline how the change to an almost total electronic depository
program would be managed. As advisors to the study, the library
associations had been disappointed in that the progress of the
Working Group had not been available to us. At a December 8th
meeting at GPO, however, Public Printer Mike DiMario made it clear
that there was never an intent on the part of GPO to not involve us
more in the study. Rather, Congressional staff had made it very
clear to GPO that no documents were to openly circulate until they
were substantially agreed on by all members of the Working Group.
We were, therefore, very pleased when GPO last week released
the strategic plan, entitled "The Electronic Federal Depository
Library Program: Transition Plan, FY 1996-FY 1998." It was widely
made available electronically on govdoc-l and in paper through a
special issue of Administrative Notes which was immediately sent to
all depository libraries.
This strategic plan envisions an almost total electronic
program by the end of FY 98. To get through the transition, GPO
has requested level funding for the next two years, along with some
additional monies to award small "technology grants" to the most
needy depository libraries. The report includes a list of some
twenty-odd titles which GPO recommends should always be available
through the FDLP in paper. Among these are some key titles for law
libraries: the bound Congressional Record, the Serial Set (for
regionals only as recommended by the 1994 Serial Set Study Group),
the United States Code, the Federal Register, the Code of Federal
Regulations, the United States Reports, and Statutes at Large. For
those of you who don't have handy access to the special December
29, 1995 issue of Administrative Notes, I have forwarded the
electronic version of the Transition Plan to Aaallnet.
GPO believes that with this appropriations request they are
delivering to the Hill a plan to implement what Congress has asked
for, that is, an almost all electronic program. At this point, it
is probably GPO's best move. The plan defines a strong role for
the Superintendent of Documents and GPO in the future. However, a
myriad of complex questions are clearly not resolved, and these
need to be well examined and understood as the transition begins.
What I believe to be a major stumbling block to this approach,
however, and what may not come out of the final report of the
Working Group, are the true costs of electronic dissemination both
to the government and to libraries. Congress believes that big
bucks will be saved, but there are lots of costs associated with an
all-electronic program that are not well-documented at this point.
As you may recall, GPO last fall unsuccessfully asked Congress for
special funding for a technology study that would collect and
analyze data on the readiness of agencies, libraries and the public
for an electronic program. Along with GPO, we were very
disappointed that the Joint Committee on Printing denied funding
for this much-needed study as we believe that it would provide the
critical information on which to base plans for change. On the
positive side, the transition plan outlines a similar study and we
need to support GPO in getting Congressional approval for it,
hoping that it doesn't come too late.
So what does all this mean for us? There are no easy answers
and the future of the program is unclear. Yet to be determined are
exactly what incentives there will be for law libraries to remain
in the program, and what public access responsibilities will be
required of depository libraries. Scrambling to find some good
news here, we are now privy to GPO's transition plan and so can
respond accordingly. The Washington Office is working closely with
members of the Government Relations Committee in preparing an
appropriate response on behalf of AALL. Comments on the GPO study
from the advisory groups, including the library associations, the
Depository Library Council, and federal agencies, will be included
in the final report due to Congress in March.
It is apparent that a large burden is on the library community
and end-users to fight the battle over issues such as appropriate
format, long-term access and preservation. And, according to what
we defined in the Framework document last summer, we firmly believe
that government information should be provided in THE MOST USABLE
FORMAT, regardless of cost.
GPO's Initiative with GILS
The first meeting of the Government Information Locator
Service (GILS) Board was held at the Department of Commerce on
December 6th. Created by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
GILS Board includes representatives from the Departments of
Commerce and the Interior, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the
General Services Administration (GSA), GPO and LC. Eliot Christian
from the U.S. Geological Survey, who has spearheaded the
development of GILS from its inception, gave an update on its
implementation. According to OMB Bulletin 95-01, agencies were to
have completed by Dec. 31, 1995 an inventory of their: 1)automated
information systems, 2) Privacy Act systems of records, and 3)
locators covering their information products.
At the meeting, GPO staff demonstrated how agencies can
disseminate their GILS records through GPO ACCESS at minimal cost.
The new GILS Home Page, which will provide hotlinks to agency home
pages, is at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/gils/gils.html.
Additionally, U.S. Archivist John Carlin noted that NARA has
partnered with GPO to have Privacy Act Notices available online
through GPO ACCESS by the end of December. Carlin also made a
motion that the Board initiate and complete a study during 1996 to
determine who GILS users are and how well GILS is meeting their
needs. The motion was unanimously passed.
"Indecency" Language Back in Telecom Bill
December was a busy month for members of the Conference
Committee on the telecommunications deregulation bill. It was no
less busy for the Washington Office and the myriad of AALL members
in key Congressional districts who responded so willingly to our
calls for grassroots support. Two House amendments regarding
obscenity on the Internet were discussed by House members. The
first, introduced by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-ILL), was advocated by many
conservative groups and would be more restrictive than the Senate-
passed Exon amendment. A compromise draft amendment by Rep. Rick
White (R-WA) was then released. The White proposal allayed some of
our concerns in that the very vague "indecency" language was
changed to a "harmful to minors" standard. It also included a
preemption for libraries and educational institutions from any
Exon-type state laws. On the negative side, it lacked the
incentives contained in the House-passed Cox-Wyden amendment to use
technologies to empower parents to minimize their children's access
to what they might deem to be harmful materials.
On December 6th, after House members approved the compromise
White amendment, they proceeded to pass by a vote of 17-16 an
amendment by Rep. Goodlatte (R-VA) which reinstated the vague
"indecency" standard. This came as a big disappointment. In
addition, the latest draft version that we have seen includes
criminal liabilities for the "display in a manner available to a
person under 18 years of age" any communications that might be
offensive according to community standards. If enacted, the
liability from this provision on libraries which offer patrons
Internet access would most likely be fought out in the courts. Our
message to Congress throughout this debate has been that 1) no new
criminal penalties are necessary; and 2) the "harmful to minors"
language is preferable to the vague "indecency" standard. In
addition to the liabilities which the indecency amendment,if
enacted, will create within the United States, little has been
written about the international implications. How the countries of
the world will reach agreement on their different laws and
definitions remains to be determined.
If there is any bright side to this bill, it is in the
universal access and anti-redlining provisions agreed to by the
Conference Committee. A Federal-State Joint Board and a Commission
on Universal Service will be created to carry out the universal
service principles defined in the legislation. These principles
include the availability of quality services at reasonable and
affordable rates. Advanced telecommunications services are to be
equitable to all regions of the nation, including rural and high-
cost areas. Discounted rates are to be available for schools,
libraries and health care facilities.
In terms of timing, Sen. Larry Pressler (R-SD) who has led the
charge to deregulate the telecommunications industry had hoped to
have a final conference committee report ready for floor action
before the Christmas recess. Although the tough budget
negotiations interfered, the report is due for release any day now.
Congress is back in session this week but may adjourn again until
the January 23rd State of the Union Address by President Clinton,
in which case further action on telecommunications will be again
delayed.
LC Hearing on Security Issues
A full-day joint hearing was held on November 29, 1995 on
security and financial management issues relating to the Library of
Congress. According to Rep. Bill Thomas (R-CA), this was only the
first of many hearings to be held on LC's management and financial
situation. As a quick aside, Rep. Thomas chairs both the Joint
Committee on Printing and the House Oversight Committee, and last
summer also promised that we would have a series of hearings on GPO
this spring as well. Thomas made no bones about his intent to have
Congress play a strong and visible role in assessing the operations
and long-term policy strategies for both Legislative Branch
agencies.
Much of this hearing was spent discussing the 1991 financial
audit report by the General Accounting Office (GAO) and how LC has
met those recommendations. No financial audit has been done in the
interim to assess the effectiveness of the GAO's recommendations,
and clearly all agreed that this is needed. Regarding the recent
security problems, LC has contracted to have a full security
analysis done by March 1996. While Rep. Thomas suggested that
perhaps the collection ought to be "padlocked," other members
disagreed and spoke eloquently of the need to provide access to the
public.
Copyright Hearings
There are two current pieces of federal legislation on
copyright of which we need to be aware. The first is HR 989, the
Copyright Term Extension Act, which would give copyright owners an
additional 20 years' protection. Register of Copyrights Marybeth
Peters has drafted an amendment which would provide libraries and
educational institutions with an exemption to the added 20 years
duration of copyright.
I attended a November 15, 1995 joint hearing on S. 1284/HR
2441, the NII Copyright Protection Act of 1995. This is the
legislation proposed in the White Paper Report. Testimony at this
first hearing was limited to government officials and was presented
by Bruce Lehman (PTO), Marybeth Peters and Dr. Mihaly Ficsor (World
Intellectual Property Organization). Lehman differentiated between
the content of communications, BBSs, and public domain information
and that which is produced and sold on a commercial basis. In
briefly summarizing the White Paper recommendations, Lehman then
observed that existing copyright law can support commerce in
cyberspace. Marybeth Peters stressed the need to balance the
exclusive rights of creators and the needs of users, including
libraries. She stated that fair use should be strongly reaffirmed.
The Copyright Office is preparing an analysis of the content of the
Report which did not get addressed in the legislation. This will
be completed early this year. Ficsor stated that if adopted, this
legislation would provide efficient protection for copyright and
would facilitate the growth of the Global Information
Infrastructure.
PTO Bibliographic Records on the Internet
In November, the Patent and Trademark Office announced that it
would provide no-fee Internet access to the past twenty years of
searchable patent bibliographic text data. Responding to swift
reaction from the private sector and also to the requirement in the
Paperwork Reduction Act that agencies hold public hearings when
they initiate new information services, PTO's Office of Electronic
Information Products held a public meeting on December 15th. In
the broader context, they were also seeking comment as they prepare
to draft a comprehensive dissemination plan.
In our December 28th letter to PTO, to which both the American
Library Association and the Association of Research Libraries
signed on, we applauded this decision. Part of PTO's mission is
the requirement to disseminate information to the public on the
patents it grants and the trademarks it registers. Public access
is available at PTO's Virginia location and at the 78 Patent and
Trademark Depository Libraries (PTDLs) throughout the country. In
our letter, we stated our belief that PTO's decision to offer
Internet access was well-founded and timely, and a logical step in
fulfilling their dissemination mission. Further, it would provide
access even to those individuals, often the small, independent
inventor, who might be geographically far removed from a PTDL.
NJ Internet Bill Still in Limbo
Both the New Jersey Library Association and the New Jersey Law
Librarians Association have worked long and hard since the spring
of 1994 to gain passage of a bill to provide no-fee Internet access
to N.J. legislative information (Senate Bill No. 1068). The
version passed by the Senate in January 1995 included an $80,000
appropriations. A hearty grassroots effort in late November
countered an attempt by the N.J. Assembly Appropriations Committee
to impose usage charges while exempting publicly-supported
libraries from these fees. While the usage-fee amendment was
dropped from the final version of the bill, this legislation now
awaits signing by Governor Christine Todd Whitman. The deadline
for final enactment is only days away.
New Rand Draft Report on Preservation
The Commission on Preservation and Access and the Research
Libraries Group (RLG) created a joint Task Force on Digital
Archiving a year ago. The resulting Draft Report, well-worth
reading, is now available electronically from the RLG home page at:
http://www-rlg.stanford.edu. The report is quite lengthy and you
may prefer to order the print copy which is available for $20 from
the RAND Distribution Services, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA.
90407-2138.
....and a Happy New Year!
The Washington Office and the Government Relations Committee
have been very active during the past two months in coalition
efforts on the telecommunications bill. Letters have also been
written in support of the New Jersey Internet bill and PTO's
decision to provide Internet access to patent information. I would
like to remind all our members that these letters are available on
Aaallnet. Also, the revised Government Relations Policy approved by
the Executive Board in Pittsburgh may be found on page 363 of the
new AALL Directory & Handbook.
Despite the high level of discussions on these important
matters and the day-by-day struggle/grind/disappointments as we
strive to be visible and active in them, my hope for the New Year
is that we not lose the sense of challenge and excitement of the
great potential of our rapidly growing electronic world. Barriers
ahead are numerous, complex, and may well be uncompromising. In
light of the many challenges ahead, the Washington Office and the
Government Relations Committee hope that AALL members will continue
to keenly take interest in our work. Grassroots support for our
efforts, particularly during the past few months, has been a
tremendous boost. Our hearty thanks to all who responded to our
calls! Together, we can do even better in the coming year.
© 1996, American Association of Law Libraries
|
