2. In the Resolving Clause, Subsection (b), Paragraph (2), Clause (D) of H.J. Res. 766 very significantly identifies the categories of participants in the Conference to be: "representatives of Federal, State and local governments, professional [emphasis added] and lay people, and other members of the general public" instead of the catch-all phrase. "representatives of the general public." In this respect Special Libraries Association is firm in its belief that the professional practitioners of library service must be represented at the Conference thru their appropriate professional associations. 3. In H.J. Res. 766, the concepts expressed in Subsection (c), Paragraph (3), Clauses (A) and (B) appear for the first time. In the opinion of Special Libraries Association, it is important that all Federal departments and agencies (including the Librarian of Congress) be directed (not only authorized) to cooperate and assist in all the endeavors of the proposed Conference. Each of a number of major government agencies is the only repository of government-funded research and development data. 4. Subsection (e), Paragraphs (1) and (2) are important additions. Paragraph (2) is especially important in that the selection of all 28 appointees is not assigned to the President. Without considering the animus of any individual incumbent, it is patently to be preferred that there be several appointing authorities in a matter of such national importance. 5. Subsection (h) in H.J. Res. 766 may be considered by some persons as trivial or, even worse, as a potential area of misfeasance. Knowledgeable professional workers in library and information services are constantly aware-from repeated personal experiences-of the difficulty of producing a report that is readily understood in its specifics by lawmen even when well-informed laymen are convinced of the generalities. Therefore, the authorization to appropriate funds without fiscal year limitations and the continuation of the availability of such appropriated funds for obligation until expended is important. To summarize these specific reactions to the several pending Joint Resolutions, Special Libraries Association supports the overall concept of a White House Conference in 1976, but in considering the specific terminology, it is hoped that you and the members of the House Select Committee on Education will press for the adoption of H.J. Res. 766. May we ask for your continued patience to also consider a collateral matter? We have just seen Senate Report No. 93-521 (Calendar No. 495) as submitted by Senator Pell to accompany S.J. Res. 40. On pages 5-6 of this Report there is reproduced a Departmental Report in the form of a (July 26, 1973) addressed to Senator Harrison A. Williams, Jr., Chairman, Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare signed by Frank C. Carlucci, Acting Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Special Libraries Association disagrees with Mr. Carlucci's centention that the proposed White House Conference is unjustifiable because there is "no evidence of critical unresolved issues in libraries and information science that cannot be handled through the existing channels of communications in the field, i.e., professional associations Mr. Carlucci seems unaware that the funds available to professional associations depend primarily on the dues paid by individual members. How can such a pittance resolve a critical national problem? If SLA were to assign its annual dues revenue solely to this area, we would have available about $250,000 a yearwith nothing left to pay rent, salaries, costs of journal publications, etc. We also disagree with Mr. Carlucci's statement "that a White House Conference solely on the subject of libraries and information science would be too narrowly focused [emphasis added] that these subjects should be examined as part of the broader issue of education [emphasis added]." Special Libraries Association appreciates the efforts of the Bureau of Library & Learning Resources, U.S. Office of Education in HEW. But to continue to subordinate library services to those of formal educational activities is to enshrine the concepts of the 1920's and 1930's. In the existing Federal structure, the problems of education are themselves overwhelmed by the additional critical national responsibilities for health and welfare in HEW. If library and information service is critical to the nation's potential, then they must be brought to the conscious surface of both Congress and the Administration by bringing Federal responsibility for library and information services to a more prominent level than that of the Bureau of Library & Learning Resources. Special Libraries Association does not intend to minimize the contributions of library services to the educational processes at any level from kindergartens to the universities. But the Association must emphatically underline that specialized libraries in American business, industry and research, as well as those in many "not-for-profit" organizations (museums, hospitals, social welfare and the like) and within specialized government agencies themselves, contribute to the nation's growth and development-and with relatively tenuous links to formal education processes. If Secretary Carlucci's position were to prevail, these specialized information services now funded almost solely by American industry and philanthropy would have a very minor recognition in the extremely broad concerns of HEW. Within the past few days I have seen your Oct. 11, 1973 statement when you introduced H.J. Res. 766 in the House of Representatives. In your statement, there are a number of comments which are evidence of your real understanding of specialized library services. These comments are, in my experience, the first real recognition of the value of the specialized library and information services that are the daily duties and obligations of this Association's members at a Congressional level. Let me list several of your statements that have particular relevance to Special Libraries Association. I list these to emphasize the importance of these statements for the legislative record—not to remind you of your own words: 1. "There are, in addition the libraries of hospitals and medical schools, the law libraries to which so many of my colleagues have turned in their time, the libraries of the professional and scientific societies, and the libraries of the larger business firms and trade industry organizations." 2. "... not everyone uses a library, nor does everyone use the same library throughout a lifetime of learning and work, yet the library must be there-ably staffed and well-stocked-for those who need it, when they need it. And the library cannot await a request before obtaining an item. The law library, for example, must be ready to serve its patrons even when they are not preparing for the bar examination or searching for precedents while drafting a brief." 'This statement is the basis for the services of special libraries; they must anticipate the needs of their clients. 3. "Our system of self-government requires an enlightened electorate with free access to information and opinion, and the library is as essential to the processes of self-government as the newspaper, the broadcast, the public speech or the legislative debate." SLA has a policy position, "Freedom to Communicate;" the thrust of the Association's policy statement is in total agreement with your statement regarding free access to information. Near the conclusion of your remarks, you state that "The public library is a great and distinctively American contribution . . ." This observation is certainly correct. A less well known fact is that the concept and the establishment of special libraries is a distinctly American phenomenon which began both in the United States and in Canada, before the time of the Revolutionary War. The first special library in the U.S. was that of the Carpenter's Company of Philadelphia; it provided information for carpenters and their apprentices. At about the same time a similar special library was established in Canada in the Province of Quebec. Special Libraries Association will be pleased to submit additional, more specific information if you wish. The Association will also welcome the opportunity to be consulted regarding appointees to the Advisory Committee for the proposed White House Conference on Library and Information Services in 1976. Very truly yours, F. E. MCKENNA, STATEMENT BY DR. ROBERT M. HENDERSON, PRESIDENT, THE THEATRE LIBRARY In the face of the obvious explosion of recorded knowledge and information that must be retained in the Nation's archives and the increasing demands that this knowledge be made easily available to the public, libraries still essentially work with outdated techniques. They recognize the potential value of information storage and retrieval techniques, but are unable to finance the necessary application of these techniques. The Theatre Library Association feels it is essential to coordinate the efforts of the Nation's libraries and archives in making clear their needs and in sharing the knowledge of developing techniques and programs capable of meeting these problems. We enthusiastically endorse the joint resolution calling for a White House Conference on Library and Information Services in 1976, STATEMENT BY HENRY E. BATES, JR., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, URBAN LIBRARY TRUSTEES COUNCIL The Urban Library Trustees Council composed of thirty-one Metropolitan libraries, supports the House Joint Resolution 734 and 766 to authorize and request the President to call a White House Conference on Library and Information Services in 1976. Since its inception the Council has strongly supported the access to information and ideas which is indispensable to the development of human potential, the advancement of civilization, and the continuance of enlightened self-government. The Council is convinced that the growth and augmentation of the Nation's libraries and information centers are essential if all Americans are to have reasonable access to adequate services of large metropolitan public library, the urban community colleges, the colleges and universities, and the school libraries who all desperately need recognition and support if the population of the cities is to be educated and offered the information and cultural resources of the city. In Los Angeles, California, on January 16, 1971, John Hope Franklin, a widely respected historian, Chicago Public Library trustee, and Delegate to the Council spoke of the plight of the cities and libraries, saying: "It is clear that the problem is that historically we have not kept up with the concentration of population; that the large cities are bearing an undue burden of educating, serving, and performing other kinds of duties for the citizenry; and that the population has rushed into the city without the agencies of government at any level taking cognizance of this concentration in terms of their budget. This is the major argument for the metropolitan libraries to be pursuing more assistance. The point is that all of these people are here and we need help to serve them." A White House Conference of Library and Information Services would alert the population at large, the local and state officials, the Congress and the President about the problems, the potential and the importance of one of the earliest still surviving uniquely American institutions. There is an increasing tendency to ignore jurisdictional distinctions in urban areas. Students, in addition to using school and academic libraries are major users of urban puble libraries. Researchers, whether academic, industrial or professional, use the library most convenient for their purposes. This places the central city library in the role of reference and research center for the outlying areas. The White House Conference would concern itself with the potential inherent in the use of advanced technology by libraries and information centers which requires cooperation through planning for, and coordination of, the services of libraries and information centers. The District of Columbia Library with which I am associated, would lend support to the National Commission of Libraries and Information Science desire to celebrate the Centennial of the American Library Association and the Bicentennial of our country with a White House Conference on Library and Information Services. The District of Columbia Public Library, furthermore, would willingly be an example of the beginning of cooperative ventures that are so important in the further development of libraries and information centers. Regional task forces within the metropolitan Council of Governments and cooperative ventures with the local colleges and public schools as well as new methods of delivering services to communities could be examined. As the Honorable Henry S. Reuss, U.S. Representative, 5th District Wisconsin said, "No American's future can be separated from fate of America's cities." Therefore, the Urban Library Trustees Council urges active support toward the convening of a White House Conference on Library and Information Services. STATEMENT BY JOHN M. BRICKMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF CORRECTION Honorable Members of the Subcommittee: On behalf of the New York City Board of Correction, it is my pleasure to submit to this distinguished Subcommittee the following statement in support of H.J. Res. 766. Pursuant to the Charter of the City of New York, the Board of Correction is the government agency responsible for monitoring and evaluating the performance of the Department of Correction, which has operational responsibility for the ten major post-sentence and pre-trial detention facilities in New York City. In effect, the Board of Correction serves as the citizens' watchdog body over the New York City prison system. I submit this statement in the hope that the Subcommittee will recognize that significant attention must be paid to libraries in correctional facilities and institutions throughout the United States, and with the knowledge of that for far too many years, prison libraries, like prisons generally, have at best been the subject of minimal public attention and concern. Shortly after the violent riots that rocked the New York City prison system in the fall of 1970, the Board of Correction initiated an informal inquiry into the provision of library services to inmates. In Fiscal Year 1970-71, the total allocation in the City budget for the purchase of materials for prison libraries was $2,000. On December 4, 1970, the total inmate population of the New York City prisons was 13,050. On a per capita basis, this allocation was equivalent to slightly more than 15¢ per inmate. In the same fiscal year, the total appropriation from City funds for trained library staff was $15,600 for three library aides, at a salary of $5,200 each per annum. Since these salaries were too meager to attract qualified personnel, the jobs went unfilled. Even if these positions had been occupied, it is highly doubtful that three persons working at subsidence-level salaries with a budget of $2,000 could have provided even minimum standards of library service within such a vast, widely-dispersed prison system. The picture for Fiscal Year 1971-72 was essentially unchanged; what library services that did exist in each institution were provided by a single correction officer who, however dedicated, was unskilled in library science or administration. Based upon this inquiry, the Board of Correction committed itself to work jointly with the Department of Correction to seek markedly increased public funds and private sector support with which to provide adequate prison library services. In Fiscal Year 1972-73 and the current fiscal year, the allocation in the City budget for prison library materials was increased to $32,000. Coupled with a declining inmate population (8,973 on December 4, 1973), this increased appropriation has raised the per capita allocation to approximately $3.50. However, the provision for library staff has remained essentially unchanged. The current allocation is $16,500 for the same three library aide positions. For the reason mentioned earlier, these jobs still remain unoccupied. With the passage of a bill by the New York State Legislature to provide funds for the establishment and improvement of institutional libraries, $37,267 has been allocated to the New York City public library system to provide library services to the City's prisons. These funds are to be used solely for the purchase of reading materials, and do not provide for increased library staff. Over the past two years, immeasurable assistance in upgrading our prison libraries has been received through the Books for Prisoners Project of the Association of American Publishers. Following the compilation of a model bibliography for prison libraries, the AAP solicited 134 of its member publishing houses who voluntarily donated 1,074 new titles. As a result, 8,028 volumes, valued at over $90,000, have been added to the shelves of eight of New York City's prison libraries. Additional contributions under the same program have been made to the Federal prison in Leavenworth, Kansas and a state institution in Chino, California. While we are deeply appreciative of the unparalleled concern and generosity of the AAP, we cannot expect the publishers to support prison libraries volun tarily on an ongoing basis. The initial private contributions must be expanded and institutionalized, on an annual basis, by a massive infusion of public funds. Although we have made significant progress in improving our prison libraries over the past three years, we are still far from meeting the acceptable standards for prison library services as set forth by the American Correctional Association. Our libraries are still little more than collections of books made available to inmates for their recreational reading. While pleasure reading goes a long way toward lessening inmate tension by reducing the deleterious effects of rampant boredom and idleness, a significant percentage of our inmate population is only marginally literate or even functionally illiterate and can derive virtually no benefit from recreational reading. Therefore, the prison libraries must be viewed as more than mere repositories of books. They must play a dynamic central role in the rehabilitative program of the correctional system. Library materials, services and programs must be specifically tailored to mesh with and supplement each ongoing educational and restorative program within the prison. Such an integration of library services and rehabilitative programs can only be achieved by professional library staff, which in the New York City prisons is currently non-existent. Public funds must be appropriated to entice qualified librarians to work within our correctional system. Historically, prisons have languished at the bottom of the list of governmental budgetary priorities. Similarly, prison libraries are a low priority expenditure within the correctional system. Hopefully, a White House Conference on Library and Information Services would highlight the need for a reordering of our budgetary priorities and emphasize to all levels of government the desperate need for massively increased public funding for our prison library systems. We often say that the prison walls stand as much to keep the community out as they do to keep the prisoners in. Your efforts can play a major role in the effort to open the prisons. MICHIGAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, Hon. JOHN BRADEMAS, Rayburn House Office Building, DEAR CONGRESSMAN BRADEMAS: We were pleased to receive a notice that the Select Education Subcommittee will hold hearings on a proposal to convene a White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services. We thought you might like to know that the Michigan Library Association, at its Fall Conference in Troy, Michigan passed the following resolution. Whereas, there is a bipartisan proposal for a White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services in 1976, and Whereas, the Honorable Gerald Ford of Michigan has lent his support to this proposal, therefore, Be it resolved, that the Michigan Library Association urge the President of the United States to support legislation and funds for a 1976 White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services. We applaud your efforts to call attention to the libraries of the country and stand ready to lend assistance in any manner you need. Sincerely, O FRANCES H. PLETZ, |