LM_NET: Library Media Networking
- Subject: DISASTER FOR LIBRARIES & EDUCATION!! POSSIBLE FEDERAL RECISSIONS
- From: Tom Hart <hart@LIS.FSU.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 13:33:01 -0500
In the message I sent last week I urged you to EMail you member of Congress
if they were on the Appropriations committees. Only one member of the House
and Senate has an EMail address on both committees and few of them have FAX
Numbers.
WE MUST RESORT TO THE REGULAR METHODS OF CALLING AND FOLLOWING UP THE CALLS
WITH LETTERS.
ACTION ALERT: IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED TO PROTECT LIBRARY PROGRAMS
As reported in yesterday's ALAWON, major rescissions (or defunding) of FY
1995 library program appropriations have been recommended by the House
Appropriations Subcommittee for Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education. The subcommittee vote was straight down party lines, with all
Republicans voting for the cuts. This is like all the other markup votes
by other appropriations subcommittees cutting many programs, including
agencies benefitting libraries such as the National Endowments for the Arts
and Humanities.
The following is a more complete table of selected library and related
programs slated for cuts in FY95 funding, as approved by various House
appropriations subcommittees on February 22 or 23:
PROGRAM FY95 FUNDING FY95 AMOUNT PROPOSED
(in millions) FOR DEFUNDING
(in millions)
LSCA II pub. lib. construction $ 17.8 $ 15.3
LSCA VI lib. literacy program 8.0 8.0
HEA II-B lib. ed. & training 4.9 4.9
HEA II-B lib. research & demo. 6.5 6.5
ESEA III educ. tech 40.0 30.0
Star schools 30.0 30.0
School facilities 100.0 100.0
Inexp. book distrib. (RIF) 10.3 5.3
Natl. Institute for Literacy 4.9 4.9
Four other small literacy programs 41.1 41.1
Natl. Endowment for the Arts 167.7 162.7
Natl. Endowment for the Humanities 177.4 172.4
Corp. for Public Broadcasting ($285.6m - cut 15% in FY96, 30% in FY97)
NTIA Info. Infrastructure Grants 64.0 30.0
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? The full House Appropriations Committee will meet on
March 2 to package all the subcommittee recommendations into one large
rescission bill, and send it to the House floor. After House passage, the
Senate Appropriations Committee would consider the measure. The cuts or
terminations would not become effective until after House and Senate
passage, any reconciling of House-Senate differences, and until after
President Clinton signed the bill or Congress overrode a veto.
STRATEGY: The ALA Washington Office staff will be participating with its
major education coalition of 100 organizations, the Committee for Education
Funding, in a day of visits to congressional offices on Tuesday, February
28. The aim will be to show that in education and libraries, every dollar
counts; to provide information about the impact of the proposed $1.7
billion cut in education funding; to identify legislators who may support
reversing the cuts; and to develop House and Senate strategy.
ACTION NEEDED AT HOME: Every congressional office should hear from library
constituents in opposition to the major cuts and terminations in these
proposed rescissions. This is just the first step in a concerted campaign
to slash deeper and terminate additional programs in the FY 1996 budget.
An immediate and strong reaction from library supporters is critical, and
will have an impact. Grassroots action could help in the House, and could
have even more of an impact in the Senate.
Call your Representative's local office, or call the Washington office of
any Representative or Senator through the Capitol switchboard (202-225-3121
for House offices, 202-224-3121 for Senate offices). More than 50
Representatives and a small number of Senators have email addresses. A
House directory of email address can be located on the Internet via the
World Wide Web at http://www.house.gov. under Who's Who and How Do I
Contact Them or by gopher to gopher.house.gov. The Senate has not yet made
its members' address available through the Internet.
Ask if your legislator would help to oppose the rescissions. Please send
immediate feedback on the position of your legislator to the ALA Washington
Office at 202-547-4440 or fax to 202-547-7363 or email to leb@alawash.org.
WHAT'S THE IMPACT OF THESE CUTS? Here are some examples of the problems
the rescissions would cause for specific library programs. Use any of
these points, buttressed by local or state examples, in your contacts with
legislators.
LSCA II PUBLIC LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION AND TECHNOLOGY ENHANCEMENT. This
particular rescission would be highly unprecedented and unfair because some
states have already received LSCA II funds for FY95. LSCA II is a state
formula grant program, but states must have local project applications with
matching funds committed before applying to receive the state's share of
appropriations. Because of the nature of construction projects, funds can
be carried over to the following fiscal year, and the rate at which LSCA II
funds are paid out is slower than for LSCA I and III.
Five states or territories (Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island,
and the Virgin Islands) have already received all their LSCA II funds for
FY95. Another handful of states will receive all or most of their funds
within the next few days. All other states would be unjustly penalized
through withdrawal of their funds under the rescission proposal. In the
past, rescissions have rarely been proposed for state formula grant
programs where awards have already been made to some states.
LSCA VI LIBRARY LITERACY PROGRAM. This program awards competitive grants
directly to public and state libraries for library literacy projects. The
proposed rescission is not just a cut, but a complete termination of a
program where proposals are pending and peer review has already taken
place. Combined with the additional $46 million in other literacy program
terminations, the result would be $54 million less spent in helping adults
to become literate productive members of society.
HEA II-B LIBRARY EDUCATION/TRAINING. Grants would be made in May to
graduate library schools for fellowships and to eligible awardees for
training institutes. The Higher Education Act title II-B program helps
recruit students to library science in areas of shortages such as
children's librarians and technology, and helps recruit minorities to the
field. Many library school faculty receive their doctorates through II-B
assistance. Currently, 76 doctoral students would be cut off in mid-
fellowship; many left jobs on the assumption that their fellowships would
continue.
HEA II-B LIBRARY RESEARCH/DEMONSTRATIONS. The proposed rescission of all
$6.5 million in Higher Education Act II-B library demonstration funds is
not possible, because $5 million of these funds have already been spent in
two recent awards (to Iowa and West Virginia) of $2.5 million each for
demonstrations of online access to statewide multitype library
bibliographic databases using fiber optic networks. The remaining $1.5
million is to be awarded in May for a demonstration project making federal
information and other databases available for public use by connecting a
multistate consortium of public and private colleges and universities to a
public library and an historic library.
***************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
FEDERAL LIBRARY PROGRAMS
Reaching Out, Ramping Up, and Retrainig
All For 57 Cents Per Person !
For the Cost of a Ball-Point Pen, Don't Write Library Funding Out
PASS A BUCK FOR LIBRARIES !
We should strive for every child in America, in every school in America,
no matter how rural, no matter how poor, to have electronic access to the
world of knowledge. That is a national asset. We should strive to make
it easy for every scholar to interact electronically. That's a national
asset. and the work done here (at the Library of Congress) and work done
at other libraries across the country are the most cost-effective invest-
ment in learning that we make. And they have all too often been neglected
because they don't have a big union and they don't have a big lobby and
they don't count in the way people keep score nowadays, but, if you care
about knowledge, here is a place to spend more, not less, money...
--House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Jan. 5, 1995 (at the dedication
of THOMAS [http://thomas.loc.gov], the Lib. of Cong. World
Wide Web access for bills and laws as they are being conside
red
in Congress.)
School Library Media Specialists Nationwide need to join a bandwagon to get
Federal Funding back for School Libraries. In 1994, we earned authorization
of $200 million as a part of ESEA. It is called IMPROVING AMERICA'S SCHOOLS
ACT. We are a part of Title III, Part F (School Library Media Resources
Program).
THE BIG HURDLE IS IN 1995 ! ! WE ARE SEEKING ACTUAL APPROPRIATIONS THAT
WILL AFFECT EVERY PUBLIC SCHOOL IN AMERICA ! !
YOU, THE MEMBERS OF LMNET, ARE ABLE TO MAKE THE MOST RAPID RESPONSES TO YOUR
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
APPROPRIATIONS BILLS WILL BE TAKEN UP LATER IN THE YEAR, BUT WE NEED EACH OF
YOU TO MAKE A CONTACT WITH YOUR SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS IN
THE NEXT TWO MONTHS:
1. Make an appointment with their staff and bring active students and
parents with you. You might get lucky and actually talk with your
Senator and Representative.
2. Send a letter and/or organize a letter writing campaign by parents,
faculty and students.
3. Be ready to phone when we need you at a later time.
4. Be ready to E-mail your member of Congress.
WHAT IS THE FEDERAL ROLE IN SUPPORT OF LIBRARIES?
Most library funding is local, but federal stimulus funds administered by
the Department of Education are concentrated on three crically important and
appropriate national goals:
* To extend outreach to those for whom library service requires extra
effort or special materials (such as new Americans, those with
disabilities);
* To adapt new technologies to identify, preserve, and share library and
information resources across institutional, local, and state boundaries;
* To support education, research, and demonstrations in the library and
information science field.
These goals relate directly to national priorities such as:
* School libraries desperately need the funding authorized by the School
Library Media Resources Program in the new Improving America's Schools
Act (ESEA III, Part F). In California, a prisoner has better access to
libraries than a school child; many schools inthe state have no libraries
.
Students need a variety of information resources in all formats in school
as they are being taught in order to develop intellectual curiosity and
critical thinking skills.
As you make contacts with members of Congress and their staffs, we must be
perceived as essential for the continuation and success of our society !
Remember, most of them only remember school libraries as they were when they
went to school. One letter I received from a library media specialist in
1994 expressed it the way others should:
Clearly, if the United States needs a work force that is capable of
critical thinking, then school libraries must be adequately funded.
If a work force is needed that can read and reason well, then school
libraries must be adequately funded. In short, if the economic
security of the United States depends on an educated, competititive
work force, then school libraries must be funded, and funded very
very well. As the situation now stands, I would venture to say that
the prison population in most states has better access to information
in well-equipped libraries than our school children. Please do
whatever is necessary to ensure passage of the Elementary and Secondary
School Library Media Act.
OF COURSE WE MUST MAKE CONTACTS WITH ALL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, BUT THE
FOLLOWING STATES ARE CRITICAL, SINCE THEY HAVE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE AND
HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEES:
PENNSYLVANIA (SENATE CHAIR); ILLINOIS (HOUSE CHAIR); FLORIDA (3);
WISCONSIN (3); ARKANSAS; CALIFORNIA; HAWAII; IOWA; MARYLAND; MISSISSIPPI;
MISSOURI; NEVADA; NEW HAMPSHIRE; NEW YORK; OHIO; OKLAHOMA; OREGON; SOUTH
CAROLINA; TEXAS; VERMONT; AND WEST VIRGINIA.
SENATE AND HOUSE MEMBERS OF THE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEES ON
LABOR-HHS-EDUCATION ARE:
SENATE
Majority Minority
Arlen Specter, PA, Chair Tom Harkin, IO
Mark Hatfield, OR Robert C. Byrd, WV
Thad Cochran, MS Ernest F. Hollings, SC
Connie Mack, FL Daniel K. Inouye, HI
Christopher S. Bond, MO Dale Bumpers, AK
James M. Jeffords, VT Harry Reid, NV
Judd Gregg, NH Herb Kohl, WS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Majority Minority
John Edward Porter, IL, Chair David R. Obey, WS
C. W. Bill Young, FL Louis Stokes, OH
Henry Bonilla, TX Steny H. Hoyer, MD
Ernest Jim Istook, Jr., OK Nancy Pelosi, CA
Dan Miller, FL Nita M. Lowey, NY
****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
************************* _________***********************************
| Tom Hart <__ _ * \ - / Tom Hart |
| <hart@lis.fsu.edu> \--/ \ | 2610 Mayfair Rd. |
| Professor, School of Lib | \ Tallahassee, FL 32303 |
| and Info Studies, / | Home (904) 385-7550 |
| Florida State University, | / |
| Tallahassee, FL 32306-2048 \ | | |
| Office Phone: 904/644-8122 \ / |
| Fax 904/644-9763 \ / |
**********************************************************************
Internet: hart@lis.fsu.edu
LM_NET
Archive Home