VERMILLION, S. DAK., May 21, 1956. JAMES E. MURRAY, Chairman, Education Subcommittee, Labor and Public Welfare Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Enclosed is a statement which I have prepared in behalf of the library services bill, S. 205. In it I have tried to present the value of the library services bill to the people of South Dakota. Will you please make this statement part of the record of the Senate hearings on the bill? Yours truly, LUCILE F. VICKERS, President, South Dakota Library Association. STATEMENT ON LIBRARY CONDITIONS IN SOUTH DAKOTA In the United States as a whole 63 percent of the total population over 30 years of age has more than an eighth-grade education. In the State of South Dakota only 49 percent of the people over 30 years of age has more than an eighth-grade education. South Dakota is a State, therefore, in which adult education is a great need. Less than half of its people have received sufficient formal education to cope with the problems of economics, politics, invention, and science which today's adult must understand and solve. The life expectancy of these intellectually handicapped adults is 30 more years. For that length of time, therefore, the population of the State will include a core of 183,000 uneducated adults whose opinions and votes may sway the progress or lack of progress in the State. Adult education could leaven this core. But what has South Dakota to offer in the way of adult education? If its public libararies, usually considered the community center of adult education, are considered the source, only one State in the Union has less to offer than South Dakota. Of its people, 53 percent, or 345,490 people, are without library service. Of the 87 libraries which serve 47 percent of South Dakota's people, all of 30 percent, almost one-third, are open only 2 days a week. These libraries spend no more than 56 cents per capita for library service. No more than three of them have budgets equal to the minimum amount set by the American Library Association as necessary for adequate library service. Half of them spent less than $250 for books in 1954. The South Dakota Free Library Commission, on which all citizens without local library service depend for books, could purchase only 1 book for every 125 persons in the State in 1954. What could the library services bill do to remedy the library situation in a State faced with such a terrific remedial problem? First, it could, by setting up machinery for a demonstration center, show the people of the State, who have little conception of adequate libraries what adequate library service is. Second, it could provide supplementary funds to meet the minimum budgets, as outlined by standards of the American Library Association. Third, it could provide the means and machinery for carrying library service to 53 percent of the population denied library service at the present moment. Fourth, it could provide the means by which counties which have reached their levy limitations would be able to provide better library service without exceeding those limitations, or demanding a higher tax limitation. These are the material things the library services bill might accomplish for the State. What things of the mind and spirit might it accomplish? To enumerate them is impossible, because there are no limits to the boundaries of the mind and spirit fired by the power which lies in a printed page. South Dakota has produced a Foss and a Lawrence, whose services to the United States and its people are many and great. No one State, limited by its location and natural resources, should therefore also be limited in its human resources. Rather these should be given a greater opportunity, because other blessings have been denied to them. The library services bill could help the people of the State of South Dakota to achieve these opportunities. Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, TENNESSEE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, Chairman, Education Subcommittee, Labor and Public Welfare Committee, DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: On behalf of the members of the Tennessee Library Association, I want to urge your favorable considerable of the library services bill, S. 205. The features of the bill which we especially like are these: (1) it is limited to a 5-year period; (2) responsibility for planning and administration is in the hands of the State library agency in each State with a minimum of Federal control; (3) it is designed to help the rural areas where help is most needed. Many people in Tennessee do not want Federal aid to libraries as a permanent grant and are even more opposed to Federal control of their libraries. But we think that Federal funds used for a limited time to stimulate local interest and awareness can perform a service which we have not been able to do for ourselves. Since Tennessee already has in operation a program for providing public library service to all its rural people, the State is in a position to make maximum use of all available Federal funds. Although the State's regional library plan is sound and the program has made amazing progress during the last 10 years, service is extremely thin because of inadequate funds. In the 68 rural counties which have joined the regional library program, library expenditures amount to only 24 cents per capita, including both State and local funds, as compared with a minimum of $1.50 per capita recommended by the American Library Association. With such limited funds it is clear that our rural people cannot have good library service. Use of Federal funds will mean an opportunity for them to find out what better library service can do for them. There are 23 rural counties in Tennessee which have not joined the regional library program. Eight of these operate small public libraries with inadequate local funds, while 15 counties have no public library service of any kind. Right now a campaign is going on in two of the latter group for the appropriation of funds to establish a county library and join the regional library program. But it is often difficult for people who have never had the opportunity of using a public library to understand its advantages. Many people do not miss what they have never had. In such situations funds made available by the library services bill could be used to operate a public library for a limited time on a trial basis. The people of the county could then have some basis for making a decision for or against using their local funds to pay for public library service. We believe that the library services bill can make a substantial contribution to the development of public libraries for our rural people in Tennessee and throughout the Nation. Sincerely yours, BERNARD L. Foy, President. STATEMENT OF Mrs. Margaret J. HOYAL, PRESIDENT, TEXAS LIBRARY ASSOCIATION Library service in Texas is unevenly distributed, because of the great variation in wealth among different sections of the State. Parts of the State are becoming heavily industrialized, and where this is taking place the need for libraries as sources of information has been felt. Once the citizens have realized the importance of libraries, they have done something about establishing them, or improving those which already existed. But those of us who have worked with Texas libraries for many years know that there are large areas of the State where there is no library service at all; the latest figures show 26 percent of the State's population without any library facilities. We also know that there are many libraries in small towns and counties which are completely inadequate, and which need leadership from some source to show them how to improve their book collections and their service to their areas. Another figure on Texas library service which is even more startling is the record of only 26 cents per capita spent by local communities for library service; this places Texas next to the bottom of the list of States in amount spent for local library service. The per capita for the whole State is so low because onefourth of the population have no libraries, and the respectable amount spent by the better libraries of the States is made to appear quite small divided by the total population. Texas is wealthy in natural resources and income, and there are many localities, chiefly rural areas, where a library could be maintained with an adequate budget, if there were some sort of leadership to start the movement and give it impetus. The situation in these areas is that the citizens have never seen a public library, do not know what it is or what it can do for them in the way of education, recreation, and enrichment of their lives. We see no way to plant the seed of the library movement in such areas except by showing the people by demonstration libraries just what they have been missing, and how valuable a public library is in a community. We believe that the money allocated to this State by the Library Services bill would furnish the needed impetus to bring about the establishment of libraries where they do not exist in Texas, and to improve other libraries which are at present inadequate. VERMONT LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, Senator JAMES E. MURRAY, Chairman, Education Subcommittee of the DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: As president of the Vermont Library Association, I am delighted with the House passage of the Library Services bill and am writing to ask that this letter to you be made part of the record of the hearing on the Senate bill (S. 205). The passage of this bill would enable our State, through its State library commission, to organize and demonstrate types of service which should be provided by modern library programs, and to initiate a more permanent and effective service for the 51 towns, with a population totaling 27,000, still without local library service, and receiving only the minimum of service from the State system. Such Federal aid would make it possible to demonstrate to libraries the numerous advantages of closer cooperation and the benefits, both financial and material, to be derived from the fullest operation of the State's larger units of service. In order to make the fullest and best use of Federal aid, the establishment of some new programs and the strengthening of some old ones would seem to be feasible. These might include enlarging of the present regional program with special attention to those sections of the State now lacking local service; demonstration of the advantages of cooperation between towns; more intensive and extensive service to children through local libraries and small rural schools; well-organized adult-education programs geared especially to very small villages, and strengthening of the programs of larger ones; a continuing statewide program covering books and book facilities of the State through regular use of radio, television, etc.; intensive series of workshops or in-service training programs for libraries, trustees, and book custodians. Although local communities in Vermont are rightfull proud of their public libraries and what they stand for, there can be no denying the fact that there is still a decided lack of local service. Stimulation in the form of financial and material aid is needed to protect the service which now exists and to extend its services to meet increased present-day demands. Various important factors in library service on a statewide basis have had to be neglected in the past, due to insufficient funds. In Senator Hill's words: "Rural America lives in a rapidly changing and extremely complex world. As responsible citizens, our rural people must have the same opportunity as their city friends to keep abreast of the rapidly changing developments in the Nation and the world." In a State which is predominantly rural in character, such equality is of the utmost importance. For these reasons, I sincerely urge your wholehearted support of this very vital legislation. Yours very truly, (Mrs.) MARGARET L. FAYER, President. VIRGINIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, Chairman, Education Subcommittee of the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: As president of the Virginia Library Association, I would like to urge the passage of the library services bill, S. 205, and ask that the attached statement be made a part of the hearings. Cordially yours, (Miss) Roy LAND, President. LIBRARY SERVICES BILL, S. 205 With 66 counties in Virginia without public library service, it seems obvious that we need additional funds and outside stimulation. Virginia will spend the money wisely as it can use its public library demonstration plan which was adopted by the General Assembly in 1952. Two counties now have established county libraries as a result of State library demonstration. These are Prince William and Washington Counties. With the amount of money appropriated in 1956 the State library can put on one demonstration each year. With the money provided in the library services bill it could put on from 1 to 3 more demonstrations each year. A demonstration library in Virginia is a model public library set up for a county, or two or more small counties joined in a region. It is financed for a stated period by the sponsoring agency at the rate of a dollar per capita with the hope that the local community will appropriate sufficient funds for expenditures at the end of the experimental period. Each demonstration is under the supervision of the State library board of trustees. Senator JAMES E. MURRAY, WISCONSIN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, La Crosse, Wis., May 22, 1956. Chairman of Education Subcommittee, Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. MURRAY: The Wisconsin Library Association is deeply concerned about adequate and extended library service for all Wisconsin citizens. The news that the House of Representatives passed the library services bill was cause for great rejoicing. The responsibility now lies with the Senate to make it possible for all people of our Nation to have an opportunity to continue their educational pursuits through books and other library materials, so necessary today for daily living, and of paramount importance in a democracy. A statement of what this library services bill (S. 205) will do for the people of Wisconsin is enclosed. May I ask that this statement be made a part of the record of the hearing on the library services bill (S. 205). Your personal interest is greatly appreciated. Sincerely yours, GERTRUDE R. THUROW, President. WHAT THE FEDERAL LIBRARY SERVICES BILL WOULD MEAN TO WISCONSIN The population of Wisconsin having no library service (20 percent of the total) is rural. The percentage of the State's population listed as inadequately served (another 30 percent, approximately) resides principally in communities of less than 8,000 people so that actually 50 percent of Wisconsin's population which needs help in establishing or improving its library services is rural within the definition of the library services bill. The problem in establishing service for the unserved population, or improving service in inadequately served areas, has two aspects. One of these is the initial expense involved in bringing groups of libraries or small municipalities into a mutually beneficial larger library organization. The other is the considerable expense involved in setting up adequate stocks of books, and library materials, and the original cost of bookmobiles. On a number of occasions in the recent past counties or other like sizable areas have been interested in organizing rural service or improving present inade quate services. When the problem they face has been gone into in detail, the consideration, which has proved the greatest obstacle in getting official approval and appropriations for library service, has been the large cost necessary to get started. The Wisconsin Free Library Commission and the Wisconsin Library Association jointly have developed long-range plans for the improvement and extension of public library service for all Wisconsin residents. These plans are in harmony with the provisions and purposes of the Federal library services bill. The passage of this bill would enable the many areas in Wisconsin now unserved or inadequately served to initiate their library service on a firmer basis than would otherwise be possible. In the past, these newly established services have been struggling along for a number of years at a substandard level until they were gradually able to be built up with collections and services which they need, or they died aborning. Some of these struggling library organizations have not reached any recognized standards. We feel that by spending the Federal money allotted to our State to help counties or regions established or improve their library services, these areas in turn would be able to bring them up to recognized standard which they in the future would be willing and able to maintain. We have observed that when a library's patrons have once experienced adequate, modern public library service they are ready to give it the kind of support which it needs to keep it going. The use of the Federal funds to establish library service at this adequate level or to improve existing library service would give the residents of the areas so benefited up-to-date, adequate library service. We are confident that they would then be ready to continue supporting it at the financial and organizational level required to keep it adequate. It is difficult to predict with accuracy what will be accomplished with the Federal funds, but on the basis of past experience we feel certain that if the library service bill passes and the appropriations become available for the following 5 years, at the end of such time we would have: 1. A number of new countywide library systems which would serve large blocks of rural and small-town citizens through local library branches and stations and one or more bookmobiles. 2. One or more regional library systems wherein two or more neighboring counties have joined together in an adequate system of public library service for all of the residents of the region in the same way in which county libraries would serve their patrons. 3. One or more experimental federations of libraries. Such special organizations are tailor-made to fit areas in which local conditions provide obstacles to the organization of the simpler county or regional system. Although it might appear to be highly improbable that within a 5-year period the Federal library services bill will provide the impetus for bringing adequate library service to the entire unserved population of Wisconsin, it seems to us that we would be able to make long strides in this direction during the 5-year period, and it does seem highly probable that with the assistance of Federal funds we would be able to benefit a majority of the 50 percent of Wisconsin population which is now inadequately served or not served at all. The great benefit which the Federal library services bill would do for Wisconsin would be to speed up the rate of development of adequate library service, and the Wisconsin Library Association feels confident that once this movement for better libraries attains the impetus which the Federal library services bill would give it, the Wisconsin Free Library Commission and the Wisconsin Library Association working together can keep library development going at the new rate so that within not too great a span of time our entire State would be fully and adequate served by modern, well-equipped public library systems. These are the principle reasons why the Wisconsin Library Association urges the Congress to approve the Federal library services bill and to appropriate funds for its implementation during this session of the Congress. With its aid Wisconsin will be brought much nearer that goal of a living library for the entire State toward which we have been striving for 65 years. |