1. Hearing Addresses Problems at the Library of Congress
2. No Progress On Interior Appropriations Bill
3. Istook Amendments to Lobby Reform Bill Defeated
1. Library of Congress Problems
On November 29 Senator Mark Hatfield (R-OR), Chair of the Joint
Committee on the Library, and Representative Bill Thomas (R-CA), Chair
of the House Oversight Committee, co-chaired a hearing on the Library
of Congress that focused on a number of fiscal and management issues
as well as the security of the collection. The House and Senate
subcommittees with responsibilities for legislative branch
appropriations, the Senate Rules Committee, and the House Oversight
Committee shared with the Joint Commit tee on the Library in holding
the hearing. Eight members of Congress attended the hearing. In
addition to Hatfield and Thomas, other members attending were Senators
John Warner, senator@warner.senate.gov (R-VA), who chairs the Senate
Rules Committee; Connie Mack (R-FL), who chairs the Senate Legislative
Branch Appropriations Subcommittee; Claiborne Pell (D-RI), Ranking
Minority on the Joint Committee on the Library; and Representatives
Robert Ney (R-OH) and Ed Pastor, edpastor@hr.house.gov (D-AZ), both
members of the Joint Committee on the Library; and Rep. Ron Packard
(R-CA), rpackard@hr.house.gov, Chair of the House Legislative
Appropriations Subcommittee;
In opening comments Senators and Representatives stressed the
importance of the Library of Congress as a national treasure and noted
that it was making some progress toward correcting problems. Yet
despite the cordial atmosphere of the hearing, many witnesses
described deficiencies as being quite serious. Senator Hatfield
stated that there would need to be a series of hearings and that such
matters as the Library's use of psychological testing for "fitness for
duty" would not be addressed at this time. Senator Mack identified as
the impetus of the hearing the alleged collection security problems
that a former Library police detective described in a letter to the
Attorney General in August. The police detective has claimed that her
demotion was an attempt by managers to minimize security violations.
Three representatives of the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO)
composed the first panel. The testimony addressed in part the
progress the Library had made in correcting problems that had been
identified in the 1991 GAO report, "Financial Audit: First Audit of
the Library of Congress Discloses Significant Problems." This report
stated: "We found the Library's financial and accounting records to
be in such poor condition that we were unable to audit significant
account balances." The report made eight specific recommendations for
improving the Library's financial affairs. While the Library has
adopted many of the recommendations, the most important one --
conducting a comprehensive audit -- has not yet been accomplished.
The witnesses stated that the degree of progress made on the other
recommendations cannot be fully assessed until the comprehensive audit
is completed. Senator Mack said from talking to some people at GAO he
gathered that there were sufficient red flags to suggest that the
Library of Congress financial system is still so deficient that the
accounts may not be auditable. However, the GAO witnesses said that
they wouldn't know until March, when they complete the initial part of
their current study, as to whether an audit in 1996 would be possible.
The second panel consisted of the Inspector General (IG) and the
Assistant IG for Investigations for the Library. John Rensbarger, the
IG, stated that his work had been hampered by the fact that his office
was non-statutory and not really independent as is the case with most
agency IG Offices. He said that when he had sent a letter to Congress
detailing some of his concerns that the Librarian told him that he was
hurting the institution. Rensbarger said that restriction on funds
and a small staff limited his work and affected his independence.
However, he noted that since the allegations of theft made in August
and since Senator Mack's office had started making inquires, the
situation of the IG's Office had greatly improved. Rensbarger also
discussed the fact that the Library police, which do have statutory
authority, would not cooperate with the IG and the failure of the
police to respond to District Court inquiries.
The third panel was made up of representatives of Computer Sciences
Corporation, a firm specializing in physical security programs which
began in October a six-month project on improving the Library's
overall security posture. Mike Kenney noted in his testimony that the
Library has a dual responsibility of protecting and of making
available its collection to the general public, scholars, and members
of Congress. "A balance must be struck," he said, "between the
conflicting requirements of availability and security." When asked to
evaluate the Library's security plan, he stated that it was more a
list of problems than an integrated plan. Also in response to
questions, he stated that the greatest security threat was internal
and not external.
The last witness was the Librarian of Congress, James Billington. He
discussed the Library's mission, the acceleration of its tasks with
decreasing staff, and the new digital library initiatives. He
stressed that no loss is tolerable and that the Library wants to work
with the Joint Committee to strengthen the Library. He said that the
Library would benefit from several specific actions of Congress --
passing legislation to give the IG statutory authority and providing
proper authority for the Library's revolving funds.
Senator Warner commented on how much time Billington was spending on
administrative details and asked if it was not time to consider a
strong number two to handle day to day operations while Billington
could consider broad library challenges and improving the overall
library system in the United States. Billington replied that he would
consider it and get back to Warner with a detailed response.
2. No Progress on Interior Appropriations Bill --
The prospects for passage of an Interior Appropriations Bill before
December 15, when the current Continuing Resolution expires, appear
dim. The two most glaring obstacles -- on which House Republicans
cannot agree -- involve mining patents on federal land and logging
in Alaska on federal land. However, there are other provisions in
the bill that could lead to a Presidential veto. The Interior Bill
is among seven of the 13 FY'96 appropriations bills that have not
passed. The possibility of these appropriations bills getting
caught up as leverage in the upcoming debate on the much publicized
budget bill seems likely. The budgets for the National Park
Service, historic preservation, the Arts and the Humanities
endowments, the Smithsonian, and other cultural agencies are part of
the Interior Appropriations Bill.
3. Istook Amendments to Lobby Reform Bill Defeated --
On November 29 by a unanimous vote the House of Representatives
passed the Lobby Reform Bill. Since the Senate has already passed
this bill, it will now go to the President for his signature. This
bill bans the practice of lobbyists giving members of Congress
expensive gifts and vacations. Representatives Ernest Istook (R-OK)
and David McIntosh (R-IN) tried unsuccessfully to attach amendments
to the Lobby Reform Bill that would have severely restricted the
already limited advocacy activities of nonprofit organizations,
including educational and scholarly associations. Passage of the
Istook amendments would have required sending the bill back to the
Senate -- perhaps jeopardizing passage of the Lobby Reform Bill.
********************************************************************
H-Net subscribers are invited to redistribute the NCC reports.
For the complete file, GOPHER UIC.EDU then follow:
Researcher/History/H-Net/NCC
The NCC is a coalition of 53 scholarly organizations, including
H-Net. NCC is the history profession's lobby in Washington, and
its positions reflect the consensus of its member organizations.
********************************************************************
--