Statement of the Subcommittee on Education Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee the Education Revenue Sharing Act of 1971 December 9, 1971 The American Library Association is a nonprofit educational organization of about 30,000 members devoted to the development of libraries to assure the continued educational, scientific, economic, and cultural advancement of people in every walk of life throughout the United States. With regard to the bill S. 1669, the Education Revenue Sharing Act of 1971, proposed by the Administration, the Association without question favors the concept of program simplification and the goal of correcting the increasingly severe fiscal mismatch between States and localities faced with demands for services which are rapidly outpacing revenues. In addition, the Association would strongly applaud any effective efforts to free States and localities as well as the Federal Government from "strangulation by the bureaucratic red tape required by the scores of individual programs" referred to by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. On the other hand, we believe that much of the deplored welter of paperwork and redtape could be substantially reduced by administrative measures, rather than through additional legislation. The "demands of grantsmanship" and accompanying uncertainty referred to by the Secretary are not, we believe, results of the categorical nature of Federal legislation, but rather the consequence of late appropriations, slow apportionment or allocation, and arbitrary withholding of funds. Early enactment of appropriations and advance funding would go a long way toward solving these problems. Long-delayed issuance of USOE regulations and refusals to release funds for expenditure are problems that the Administration can solve with the statutory authority it now possesses. In short, the Association is not persuaded that Education Revenue Sharing would make library funds available more quickly or more surely. -2 Our strongest objection to S. 1669 in its present form concerns the curious fifth category "Supporting Materials and Services." Library services have been included in this category with an unlike and disparate group of other programs such as school lunches, counseling and guidance. This categorical conglomeration is totally unjustifiable, in our judgment. School library resources are an integral part of the instructional program and as such are not "supporting" services. They are absolutely basic to the total educational-learning process today. With increasing emphasis on individualized instruction tailored to each student's particular needs, a wide variety of library resources and multi-media learning materials is essential for an effective educational program. School districts report that 50 percent of elementary schools, and from 45 percent to 67 percent of secondary schools, fail to meet their State standards for school library resources in one or more respects. About 34,000 schools are without school library media centers. It is estimated that 425 million volumes are needed to bring school media centers up to nationally recognized standards, and films, tapes, recordings, and other types of instructional materials are likewise desperately needed to meet the demands of modern teaching-learning methods. At the same time, the U.S. Office of Education is calling for educational reform and renewal and development of innovative programs, with special priority to be given to programs for the disadvantaged, the handicapped, career education, desegregation, and the right to read. While it is recognized that all these are deserving of substantial support, it must also be kept in mind that if schools are expected to respond successfully to these new directions, additional school library resources and services will be required to undergird these programs. The burden the school library media center must carry in such an educational environment will be substantial. A less structured educational system, based on local and individual needs, requires greater involvement of informal education sources, such as libraries. For example, as the schools focus new programs on career occupation, vocational resource materials must be made available in libraries to properly support these activities -3 with the latest books, information, and materials available, to help stimulate, broaden and diversify the education of those students opting for career occupations. It must be kept in mind that the school library media center serves the entire school, it cuts across all subject areas, it serves the students and teachers alike. It is not a narrow, categorical-type program; it serves the entire institution, just as the public library serves the entire community. Federal assistance to school library activities is more nearly general aid to education than any other program of Federal aid. So essential is the library to the school that ALA urges separate earmarking of funds authorized for library activities, rather than consolidation with the programs proposed in S. 1669. Furthermore, we oppose the distribution formula as presently proposed. Authorizations for program funds would be greatly reduced under this revenue sharing proposal because they would be based on present allocations for the categorical programs they are designed to subsume, and present allocations are only about half of present authorizations. Although the President's message on revenue sharing referred to a hold-harmless baseline by which no State would receive fewer funds than it is presently receiving, this assurance is not incorporated into the proposed legislation S. 1669 does not hold out any assurance of continuing support in substitution for the ESEA Title II program it is designed to replace. Under S. 1669 States would be permitted to transfer up to 30 percent of the funds available for any one purpose to any other purpose, the only exception being funds for the disadvantaged. Moreover, transfers above the 30 percent limit would be permitted if States demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that such action would more effectively achieve the purposes of the Act. Other serious weaknesses in the proposed legislation are also cause for concern. There is no maintenance of effort provision, no requirement that funds supplement rather than supplant local efforts, and no accountability requirement. The "increasingly evident bankruptcy of the categorical grant-in-aid" device mentioned by the Secretary cannot be satisfactorily solved by consolidation and liquidation. Instead both a serious commitment to and long-range application of adequate financial support are required. Federal aid presupposes a substantial national interest. It is perforce stimulative and equalizing in its effects on State and local support. States and communities were free to provide library resources before enactment of Federal laws, but it was the manifest and long-standing disparity of such local support throughout the Nation, as well as the inherent desirability of national support to libraries, that convinced Congress to present States with incentives substantial enough to assure a marked improvement in the quantity and quality of library resources and services in the schools. Despite the relatively brief period of their operation and the limited funds that have been made available, the elementary and secondary school library programs have been extraordinarily effective in heightening the quality of education. Impressive testimony to this effect is documented in the fifth annual report of the Advisory Council on State Departments of Education, entitled The Federal-State Partnership for Education, most notably in the chapter dealing with ESEA Title II. However, the unmet needs in relation to the Right-to-Read effort, consumer education, prevention of drug abuse and other national priorities remain so great that to permit any slackening or scattering of Federal support would be unconscionable. This, we fear, would be the untoward result of enactment of S. 1669 in its present form. Accordingly, the Association favors the specific earmarking of funds for school library resources, textbooks, and other instructional materials, equipment, and services. |