[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HISTORY MUSEUM OR RECORDS ACCESS AGENCY? DEFINING AND FULFILLING THE
MISSION OF THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION POLICY,
CENSUS, AND NATIONAL ARCHIVES
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 16, 2009
__________
Serial No. 111-163
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
http://www.house.gov/reform
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
73-161 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York, Chairman
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania DARRELL E. ISSA, California
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOHN L. MICA, Florida
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
DIANE E. WATSON, California LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
JIM COOPER, Tennessee BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia JIM JORDAN, Ohio
MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah
Columbia AARON SCHOCK, Illinois
PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois ANH ``JOSEPH'' CAO, Louisiana
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire
CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
PETER WELCH, Vermont
BILL FOSTER, Illinois
JACKIE SPEIER, California
STEVE DRIEHAUS, Ohio
JUDY CHU, California
Ron Stroman, Staff Director
Michael McCarthy, Deputy Staff Director
Carla Hultberg, Chief Clerk
Larry Brady, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri, Chairman
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
Columbia JOHN L. MICA, Florida
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah
STEVE DRIEHAUS, Ohio
DIANE E. WATSON, California
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
Darryl Piggee, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on December 16, 2009................................ 1
Statement of:
Ferriero, David S., Archivist of the United States; G. Wayne
Clough, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution; and James
H. Billington, Librarian of Congress....................... 7
Billington, James H...................................... 27
Clough, G. Wayne......................................... 19
Ferriero, David S........................................ 7
Weismann, Anne L., chief counsel, Citizens for Responsibility
and Ethics in Washington; Janet A. Alpert, president,
National Genealogical Society; Kevin M. Goldberg, legal
counsel, American Society of News Editors; and Carl
Malamud, president and founder, Public.Resources.Org....... 46
Alpert, Janet A.......................................... 53
Goldberg, Kevin M........................................ 61
Malamud, Carl............................................ 74
Weismann, Anne L......................................... 46
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Alpert, Janet A., president, National Genealogical Society,
legal counsel, American Society of News Editors, prepared
statement of............................................... 55
Billington, James H., Librarian of Congress, prepared
statement of............................................... 29
Clay, Hon. Wm. Lacy, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Missouri, prepared statement of................... 4
Clough, G. Wayne, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution,
prepared statement of...................................... 21
Ferriero, David S., Archivist of the United States, prepared
statement of............................................... 10
Goldberg, Kevin M., legal counsel, American Society of News
Editors, prepared statement of............................. 63
Malamud, Carl, president and founder, Public.Resources.Org,
prepared statement of...................................... 76
Weismann, Anne L., chief counsel, Citizens for Responsibility
and Ethics in Washington, prepared statement of............ 48
HISTORY MUSEUM OR RECORDS ACCESS AGENCY? DEFINING AND FULFILLING THE
MISSION OF THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
----------
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2009
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and
National Archives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:15 p.m. in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Clay, Norton, Driehaus, Cuellar,
and McHenry.
Staff present: Darryl Piggee, staff director/counsel; Jean
Gosa, clerk; Yvette Cravins, counsel; Frank Davis and Anthony
Clark, professional staff members; Charisma Williams, staff
assistant; Adam Hodge, deputy press secretary (full committee);
Leneal Scott, information systems manager (full committee);
Adam Fromm, minority chief clerk and Member liaison; Howard
Denis, minority senior counsel; Chapin Fay and Jonathan
Skladany, minority counsels.
Mr. Clay. Good afternoon. The Information Policy, Census,
and National Archives Subcommittee of the Oversight and
Government Reform Committee will now come to order.
Without objection, the Chair and ranking minority member
will have 5 minutes to make opening statements, followed by
opening statements not to exceed 3 minutes by any other Member
who seeks recognition.
And without objection, Members and witnesses may have 5
legislative days to submit a written statement or extraneous
materials for the record.
Welcome to today's hearing on the mission of the National
Archives. The purpose of today's hearing is to examine the
National Archives' mission and how it is designed and
fulfilled. We will consider several important topics, including
the views of the new Archivist of the United States on NARA's
mission, learning how the leaders of similar agencies, The
Smithsonian Institution and the Library of Congress, balance
competing needs while fulfilling their core missions, and
hearing opinions of agency stakeholders on NARA's performance.
This is a time of rising budget pressures, explosive growth
of Federal, especially electronic records, and mounting urgency
to make these records available to the public, the media, the
courts and Congress more rapidly.
The subcommittee has heard from many of NARA's
constituencies that they are concerned the agency's increasing
emphasis on museum exhibits and related programs may be not
only straining its resources, but diverting its focus from
fulfilling its core mission. As we will hear from several of
our witnesses, managing, preserving and providing prompt and
proper access to Federal records has been and must continue to
be the primary mission of the National Archives.
It is commendable that NARA wants to expand access
programs, increasing the number and title of records available
as well as increasing the number of those who can directly
examine those records and learning from it and interpreting
them for themselves. However, there are questions as to whether
a museum exhibit truly qualifies as a records access program
and if public visitors to a museum are actually exploring
records.
There is also the question raised by many concerned about
the agency, how NARA's elevation of its role as a history
museum above that of its core mission may be increasing the
agency's already considerable delays in receiving, preserving
and opening Federal records.
The National Archives celebrated its 75th Anniversary this
year. Congratulations to all National Archives employees. The
history of the agency demonstrates that from its founding in
1934, each archivist has shaped the focus of the Archives to
meet the unique challenges they face.
Archivist Connor, starting a new agency, had to invent
management procedures for handling Federal records which by
then already had grown to more than 10 million cubic feet.
Archivist Buck changed the Archives from a passive records
repository to an active service agency. Archivist Grover
developed a plan to acquire and administer Presidential records
that resulted in the Presidential Libraries Act of 1955.
Archivist Rhoads improved records management
declassification and opened records for the scholarly use.
Archivist Warner fought for and won independence for the
National Archives. Acting Archivist Peterson prepared the
agency's first strategic plan. Archivist Carlin improved
communication with NARA's constituents and established the
approach to electronic records management. Archivist Weinstein
emphasized civic literacy and expanded museum education and
outreach programs.
We trust that the new Archivist is ready to meet the
current challenges and we offer our strong support for him as
he begins his tenure. It is this subcommittee's hope that
through our hearing today we can gain a better understanding of
NARA's mission and issues of stakeholder concern, and provide
the National Archives with some important information and
advice they can use in reexamining how best to define and
fulfill their mission.
Before we proceed, I would like to recognize the important
contributions of several groups who have greatly assisted this
subcommittee in preparing for this hearing including the
International Association of Jewish Genealogical Societies, a
records preservation and access committee, and 17 other
research organizations. We thank them for their efforts and
statements of support.
And I now yield to my good friend from North Carolina, Mr.
McHenry.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McHenry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your
leadership across the board with this committee and your
dedication and your friendship.
And thank you all for being here today. This is certainly
an important matter of effective governance and making sure
that we have records that are accessible to the public, whether
across the three separate agencies we are talking about today.
Mr. Chairman, if I could, with time being short, with these
votes ongoing, if I could submit my statement for the record
and just say, in short, I certainly appreciate you three
gentlemen being here. I certainly appreciate the importance of
what you are doing as individuals, and the importance of
ensuring that we have records available for future generations,
whether it is the challenges of digital records of keeping the
texts that we currently have available.
So, thank you.
Mr. Clay. Without objection, Mr. McHenry's statement will
be included in the hearing record.
Any other opening statements? If not, we can proceed to the
panel.
Our first witness will be the Honorable David S. Ferriero,
the 10th Archivist of the United States.
Prior to his nomination in July 2009 by President Obama to
lead the National Archives, Mr. Ferriero served as the Andrew
W. Mellon Director of the New York Public Libraries, the
largest public library system in the United States. Among his
responsibilities was the development of the library's digital
strategy, which includes a digital library of more than 750,000
images that may be accessed fee of charge by any user around
the world.
Mr. Ferriero also served in top positions at two of the
Nation's major academic libraries, the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology and Duke University. He is the first librarian to
serve as Archivist of the United States. We want to
congratulate Mr. Ferriero on his appointment, welcome him and
wish him well.
Thank you for being here.
Our next witness is Dr. G. Wayne Clough, the 12th secretary
of the Smithsonian Institution.
Dr. Clough currently leads a plan to digitize much of the
Smithsonian's 137 million objects. Prior to his becoming
secretary in July 2008, he served as president of the Georgia
Institute of Technology for 14 years.
He received a Doctorate in Civil Engineering from the
University of California Berkeley. Dr. Clough has been a
professor at Duke University, Stanford University and Virginia
Tech, and also served as Provost at the University of
Washington.
And after Dr. Clough, we will hear from Dr. James H.
Billington, the 13th Librarian of Congress.
Dr. Billington has served as Librarian for more than 22
years, championing, among other important programs, the
American Memory National Digital Library. He earned his
Doctorate from Oxford University where he was a Rhodes Scholar
at Balliol College.
Following service with the U.S. Army, he taught history at
Harvard University and at Princeton University. Prior to his
appointment as Librarian, Dr. Billington was director of the
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars for 14 years.
I thank all of our witnesses for appearing today and look
forward to their testimony.
It is the policy of the subcommittee to swear in all
witnesses before they testify and I would ask you now to please
stand and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Thank you and you may be seated. Let the record
reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative.
I ask that each of the witnesses now give a brief summary
of their testimony. Please limit your summary to 5 minutes.
Your complete written statement will be included in the hearing
record.
Mr. Ferriero, you may begin.
STATEMENTS OF DAVID S. FERRIERO, ARCHIVIST OF THE UNITED
STATES; G. WAYNE CLOUGH, SECRETARY OF THE SMITHSONIAN
INSTITUTION; AND JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS
STATEMENT OF DAVID S. FERRIERO
Mr. Ferriero. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
subcommittee.
I am David S. Ferriero, Archivist of the United States.
Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the mission of the
National Archives.
I am pleased to appear here alongside the Librarian of
Congress, Dr. Billington, and the secretary of the Smithsonian,
Dr. Clough. I am looking forward to the benefit of their wisdom
as heads of major national institutions that, like the
Archives, preserve and make the historical and cultural
treasures of our country accessible to millions of people.
It has been just over a month since I was confirmed as the
10th Archivist of the United States. I come to the job having
spent my entire career in service to people seeking access to
information, first at the libraries of MIT and Duke University,
and most recently as the Director of the Libraries of the New
York Public Library.
The National Archives exist for access, and I firmly
believe that every component of the agency is in service to
that fundamental mission. We do this in records management by
ensuring that agencies create and maintain records of their
activities for future access. We do this in preservation by
safeguarding the long-term viability of records so that they
can be accessed. We do this in reference services by responding
to requests for access in specific records. And we do this in
our museum and educational programs by making records
interesting and, indeed, exciting to visitors.
Before I comment on the issues that you have asked me to
address, I would first like to say that we, you have my
commitment to an open dialog, from me and my leadership team,
as you conduct your oversight of the Archives.
One concern high on your list and mine is agency security,
both for information technology systems and physical holdings.
We absolutely must be able to ensure that NARA is able to
safeguard the documentary heritage of our Nation.
I am pleased to tell you that on the 7th of December, I
announced the creation of the National Archives Holding
Protection Program. This program will strengthen the protection
of original records, regardless of their format. As a team
leader, I have appointed Mr. Eric Peterson who comes to NARA
from the Naval Information Operations Command where he was
responsible for loss prevention and classified programs.
Also, I know that this committee is very familiar with the
work of NARA's Inspector General. I plan to work closely with
him and the security staff on the front lines to improve NARA
security across the board.
Another priority is meeting the challenge of archiving
electronic records. I believe NARA has built a solid foundation
of promoting and ensuring effective records management across
the Federal Government. However, the agency faces serious
challenges when it comes to electronic records, including the
continuing proliferation of formats in which Federal records
are created and the mixed nature of Federal recordkeeping,
where agencies create both paper and electronic records.
Our responsibility in regard to electronic records it not
just to build the electronic records archives. It is also to
ensure that agencies are managing the electronic records they
create and identify as permanently valuable. We can, and we
will, do a better job of making sure agencies are taking this
responsibility seriously.
The title of this hearing begins with a question about our
museum function. We have been inviting the public to see
records and exhibits at the National Archives for our entire 75
year history, and we have long been leaders in encouraging the
use of primary sources in history and civics education. The
last decade has brought substantial growth in our exhibit and
education programs, thanks to the Foundation for the National
Archives and the Presidential Library Foundations which raise
millions of dollars to fund museum and education programs here
and across the Nation.
More than a year ago, NARA began to look into ways that we
could better provide visitor services at the National Archives
building while retaining the service that we provide to
researchers. The significant drop is microfilm usage made it
possible to reduce the size of the microfilm reading room and
expand exhibit space without diminishing researcher services.
I was dismayed, however, that NARA management did a poor
job communicating with both research staff and researchers on
this issue and in recent weeks there has been a great deal of
concern expressed by some of our researchers about the changes
under discussion. We will be holding a public forum tomorrow
afternoon to discuss these issues. I am personally
participating in the forum, not only as the Archivist, but as
one who has spent four decades as a research librarian. Those
who visit our facilities as researchers are highly valued
stakeholders and they have the ear of this research librarian
turned archivist.
As I set out to improve the agency's communications with
stakeholders, I am including Congress. First, I have already
met with some members of this subcommittee and I am looking
forward to meeting with all of you as soon as possible. Second,
the Archives have 44 facilities in 19 States, and I intend to
reach out to each Congressperson who represents the women and
men who work at these locations.
Additionally, I want all Members to know that they have an
open invitation to visit any NARA facility, especially the one
just a few blocks away, so that they can get a first-hand look
at what we do. We have a great story to tell with the records
we hold which include the records of Congress starting with day
1 of the First Congress. Come and spend 30 minutes with us and
I can promise you a very memorable experience.
Finally, I share this subcommittee's concerns with NARA's
management culture. As I set about changing that culture, my
immediate goal is addressing unacceptably poor survey results
on employee job satisfaction. All NARA employees, from those
operating forklifts to the most senior archivists, are equally
important to the success of this mission. I say this with the
prospective of one who began his career shelving books.
In my very short time as Archivist of the United States, I
have become keenly aware of the skill, talent and spirit that
have shaped this unique organization for its first 75 years. I
have also become aware of the many challenges that face this
agency and, in that regard, I would like to thank you, Mr.
Chairman, and the members of the subcommittee, for the fair and
honest oversight you provide.
I would be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ferriero follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you, so much, Mr. Ferriero, for your
testimony.
Mr. Clough, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF G. WAYNE CLOUGH
Mr. Clough. Thank you, Chairman Clay, Ranking Member
McHenry and the other members of the subcommittee for this
opportunity to testify.
I want to extend my congratulations to my new colleague,
the Archivist of the United States, David Ferriero, and I offer
the Smithsonian's assistance to him in this transition. And it
is a pleasure to be here with my colleague, the Librarian of
Congress, Dr. James Billington.
Our collective mission is extremely important. The National
Archives and the Records Administration preserves the records
of the Federal Government. The Library of Congress serves as
the largest library in the world. And the Smithsonian
Institution preserves the history, arts and sciences, and
cultural traditions of our country. We complement each other as
we pursue our shared goal of preserving our collections and
making them as accessible as possible as fast as we can to
researchers, students, teachers, families and the American
public.
With 19 museums, 20 libraries, numerous research centers,
the National Zoo and more than 137 million objects and
specimens in our collections, the Smithsonian stands out as a
unique entity. Our archival collection includes scientific
documents, records and other media totaling more than 100,000
cubic feet and forms the foundation for research, scholarship,
publications, exhibitions and public programs unique to the
Smithsonian. This year, nearly 30 million visits were made to
the Smithsonian. And we had 188 million visitor sessions on our
various Web sites.
To ensure that we bring our resources to the world, we
recently embarked on the most inclusive and comprehensive
strategic planning exercise in the Smithsonian's history. I
have detailed discussion on this in my written testimony.
Briefly, our new vision calls for us to shape the future by
preserving our heritage, discovering new knowledge and sharing
our resources with the world.
Our plan organizes our activities around four focused
things, so we will not be doing everything or everybody. One is
unlocking the mysteries of the universe, two, understanding and
sustaining a biodiverse planet, three, valuing world cultures,
and four, understanding the American experience. The plan
reaffirms our core values of integrity, responsibility and
organizational excellence.
The Nation's growing diversity challenges us to reach new
audiences and to use new partners to do to so. And we will do
this primarily using digital technology. The newer collections
are available virtually, the less these materials are subject
to harmful handling and damage. And it also saves additional
funds for us because we do not have to process as many
applications for use of our materials. But we also want to make
sure that our school children, the teachers, the parents and
the scholars have access to these extraordinary collections
that we have in Washington.
Our first secretary, Joseph Henry, was legally charged with
preserving the records of the Smithsonian Institution. The
Smithsonian Institution archive holdings constitute the
official memory of the Smithsonian, and document the
development of American sciences, arts, culture and technology.
The United States is one of the most advanced countries in
the world in terms of providing access, public use for public
information. U.S. policies of professional ethics are focused
on the widest most equitable openness for archival holdings.
However, many of our collections remain inaccessible for a host
of reasons: insufficient staff, lack of expertise to work on
special formats, or special language materials. In addition,
some institutions have large backlogs and uncatalogued or
unprocessed material, and we need to work on that.
I look forward to the Smithsonian Institution's
collaboration with my colleagues at the Library of Congress and
the National Archives. We each play an important role in
inspiring the public by engaging them in an exploration of what
it means to be an American in today's world.
For 163 years, the Smithsonian Institution has built the
national collections, disseminated innovative research, and
welcomed millions of visitors to its museums, creating a
reputation so strong that the Smithsonian is known as a symbol
of America throughout the world.
I am extremely proud of our passionate and dedicated staff
and our volunteers, and will continue to work to see that
progress is made, is the same as we go forward.
Again, thanks to the Chair and the ranking member for my
opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Clough follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you for your testimony, Dr. Clough. Thank
you so much for being here.
Dr. Billington, you have 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF JAMES H. BILLINGTON
Mr. Billington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. McHenry,
members of the subcommittee. I appreciate very much being
invited to appear before the subcommittee with two such
distinguished leaders as the Smithsonian's secretary, Wayne
Clough, and the new Archivist of the United States, David
Ferriero. We wish Mr. Ferriero well in this new job and look
forward to working with him.
The Library of Congress is America's oldest Federal
cultural institution and we have had good relations for many
years with the Smithsonian and the Archives whose different
collections and missions generally complement ours. We all
face, however, similar challenges to acquire, preserve and make
accessible important primary materials and to serve both
researchers and the general public.
Congress, Mr. Chairman, has been the greatest patron of the
library in the history of the world, building up for 209 years
the world's largest, most comprehensive and multi-formatted
library covering some 470 languages stored on more than 650
miles of shelving and relentlessly adding 10,000 new analog
items daily.
Our top priority is to serve the research needs of
Congress, which we do with our Congressional Research Service,
providing objective, comprehensive research and analysis on
policy matters, and responding last year to nearly 900,000
research and reference requests from the Congress.
Our law library is the foreign law research arm of
Congress. And we serve Congress in other ways, lending books to
Members and staff, archiving veterans' oral histories collected
through Members' offices, and providing a special Members'
reading room and the beautiful Members Room for meetings in the
Jefferson Building exclusively for Members' use.
Since we are also the de facto national library of the
United States, our second major priority is serving the
American people. Last year, we responded to over half a million
public reference requests in our 21 reading rooms, circulated
22 million free Braille and recorded books and magazines to
disabled patrons all over the country through local libraries,
and fielded more than 6.5 billion electronic transactions on
the library's free educational Web site, which contains nearly
16 million digital files of American history and culture.
Thousands of researchers visit the library annually to
study first-hand our unparalleled collections which include
many materials that cannot be found anywhere else, the Unique
Copyright Deposit of America and the world's largest
collections not just of books and periodicals, but of maps,
music and movies.
We do massive preservation work, notably at the library's
new Audiovisual Conservation Center in Culpepper, Virginia, and
through the congressionally mandated National Digital
Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program, which we
direct and coordinate with 176 partners, including the Archives
and the Smithsonian.
When the library moved out of the Capital and into the new
Jefferson Building in 1897, Congress made it clear that the
interior space was designed to be not only a library, but a
public showcase with exhibitions where visitors could go to be
inspired by the quest for knowledge as an essential part of our
knowledge-based democracy.
With a recent renovation by Congress of the Jefferson
Building, our flagship building, our introduction last year of
interactive enhancements in the public spaces and popular
exhibits, we have found that important balance, serving both
the scholarly community and the general public. The facilities
for the scholarly community have actually been expanded with
the addition through private funds of our Kluge Center.
The Library of Congress has also been an innovator in the
internet age, superimposing new digital collections and
services onto to traditional analog ones, reaching out to the
young generation and to lifelong learners to stimulate
curiosity and creativity wherever they live.
We featured, beginning in the mid-1990's, free digital
access to our collections, putting online both our American
Memory National Digital Library and THOMAS, our legislative
data base. This year, we added a world digital library in 7
languages with some material covering all 192 members of
UNESCO. We also provide online resources targeted specifically
for K through 12 students and teachers using our primary source
documents. Our Web site usage has increased 6,000 percent since
1996.
The library, Mr. Chairman, like America itself, adds the
new without discarding the old. We continue to maintain the
balance in serving Congress and the scholarly community while
welcoming, thanks to the passageway from the New Capitol
Visitors Center, visitors both onsite as well as online to this
unique storehouse both of the world's knowledge and of
America's cultural and intellectual creativity.
Thank you very much for inviting me today and I would be
happy to answer any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Billington follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Dr. Billington. During my
college days, I also remember the Library of Congress having a
pretty good law library. I guess you still do.
Mr. Billington. Yes, we do.
Mr. Clay. I thank all of the panel for their testimony.
And now I recognize my friend from Ohio, Mr. Driehaus, to
begin the questioning.
Mr. Driehaus. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
I want to thank all the witnesses. You represent three of the
most important institutions, obviously, in the United States
and we appreciate the tremendous work.
And Mr. Ferriero, welcome. I just add my congratulations to
everyone else's. This question is to you.
Last week, the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget issued an Open Government Directive that requires
agencies to take a number of actions to improve access to
Government information. Under the directive, each agency must
take steps to reduce its backlog of Freedom of Information Act
requests by 10 percent each year.
What actions will NARA take to reduce its Freedom of
Information Act backlog as required by the Open Government
Directive and what other steps does NARA plan to take to
implement the directive?
Mr. Ferriero. Just before I arrived, the agency established
OGIS, which is the office that is charged with reducing the,
this backlog and working with the agencies, the CIA and the
Justice Department especially, to ensure that we are
streamlining the process. The point person, Miriam Nesbit, who
is going to head up this office, has been in place since the
end of September. She is now building a staff and working very
closely, especially with the CIA, looking at technological
solutions to this problem.
Mr. Driehaus. When you referenced streamlining, can you
give specific examples of what is being done to streamline the
process?
Mr. Ferriero. She is in the very beginnings of establishing
new processes for speeding up the, these requests.
Mr. Driehaus. Okay.
Mr. Ferriero. I would be happy to come back when we have
something concrete to share.
Mr. Driehaus. My other question gets to this balance
between the role of the Archives in collecting information and
making that available to the public, and the display. Mr.
Billington, the Librarian, was talking about the role of the
Library of Congress and the design of the Jefferson Building.
In your testimony, you talk about the balance that is struck
between storing the materials and also displaying those
materials for the public.
Mr. Ferriero, what do you believe is the balance for the
Archives? Is it the same as what we are trying to achieve in
the Library of Congress or is that balance different? Is the
mission significantly different such that we do not do the same
type of, we do not have the same type of emphasis on sharing
and displaying the information as the Library might have?
Mr. Ferriero. I think we have similar missions. We have
different content that we are talking about. My contents are
the records of the United States. And I think we have the same
responsibility to provide the museum and educational aspects of
our mission as the Library of Congress does. This is the way we
excite and interest a whole new generation of people. I am
looking especially at the K through 12 community, about
learning firsthand about this country, about getting a sense of
excitement about our history. And nothing can compare at
looking at the physical, the real, original documents. And it
is in service of training the next generation of researchers
and scholars.
Mr. Clay. Thank you. The gentleman yields back and I go to
my friend from North Carolina, Mr. McHenry.
Mr. McHenry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate your
having this hearing, Mr. Chairman. I think this is an important
discussion for us to have and for the Congress to be aware of
these important documents we have agencies taking care of.
Mr. Ferriero, I certainly appreciate your appointment and
the credibility you bring to a very important agency and an
agency in much need of strong leadership and certainly
appreciate your connection to North Carolina as well, even
though it is with Duke. [Laugher.]
But we have discussed in private, discussed my concerns
about some systemic issues with NARA. Now, granted, you have
only been on the job a few days. But in May, before this
committee, the IG, Mr. Brachfeld of NARA, discussed the loss of
sensitive data from your College Park location. And his, what
he said then was that he saw an agency with complete lack of
internal controls, to paraphrase. How are you going to address
that?
Mr. Ferriero. The security of the collections is high on my
list of these issues that I have identified and we have started
to work on. Security is something that every research
collection deals with and it is this tension between providing
access to collections and protecting them.
Security is a state, a culture of vigilance that is not a
one-off kind of operation. We have come up with a set of
recommendations. And you have done security. It is something
that you think about every day, every minute of your control of
the collections. And that is the kind of urgency that I intend
to create within the agency. The Inspector General was correct.
The culture has resulted in a sense of laxity around security.
Mr. McHenry. And addressing that culture, it seems to me
that security, when I think of security, it is when I go into
the facility and you see the Constitution under a lot of glass
and some serious security. But the concerns that I have are in
a warehouse, and the disappearance of many terabytes of
information. It is interesting that I learned this year what a
terabyte is and the discussions we have about that massive
amount of information. And now the story today about finding
emails from the Bush administration.
And so there have been some losses. There have been some
gains. But I think they show that there is a need of a cultural
change and I appreciate your willingness to address that. But
what are the substantive steps you will take to change the
culture?
Mr. Ferriero. We have established the Holding Security Task
Force. We have hired a person with a security background to
head up that team and he has the authority, working with the
Inspector General, to analyze the situation and come up with a
whole new set of security procedures and policies.
And I should say that security is not the responsibility of
just a few in the organization. Everyone who works for NARA has
to have this sense of vigilance around security.
Mr. McHenry. Okay, certainly.
Mr. Ferriero. This is another one of those areas where I
would be happy to come back and report to the subcommittee on
exactly what we have come up with.
Mr. McHenry. We have also had, before your appointment, a
discussion about the electronic records and the ongoing changes
there. Can you touch on that? It is sort of an open-ended
opportunity for you to discuss this because, in terms of these
changes in technology, just in the last 5 year. You know, I
have a Kindle from Amazon.com. You know, that technology was
not available 5 years ago. The BlackBerry today is much more
powerful than the BlackBerry was 5 years ago, and on and on and
on.
So, how are you going to establish this electronic records
system that we can continually update and it makes sense 20
years from now?
Mr. Ferriero. Well, it is, it is another one of those
challenges that is at the top of my list to figure out and get
right. This is an initiative that was started many years ago.
In the time that NARA launched this process, the technology has
changed already. The time line needs to be shortened.
The challenge is that every agency has been allowed to
create their own electronic records management system with
varying platforms and software packages and they do not talk to
each other. So, it is a little more complicated that just
ingesting all of these electronic records. It is establishing a
set of standards.
But primarily, and philosophically, at heart is the
Archives, the Archivist, reassuming his responsibility for
ensuring that the agencies are creating these systems and
delivering in a way that we can deal with them. And that is
something that there has been great laxity in the past. No
annual audits.
And, as you and I discussed, in most agencies it is usually
a junior person who has responsibility for records, high
turnover, not adequate training, and the Archives has not
stepped in to, you know, exercise their authority.
Mr. McHenry. Well, thank you for your straightforwardness
on this and your vigilance and we wish you the best.
Mr. Ferriero. And I do not want to paint a picture of this
is a piece of cake and it is going to be easy to solve. It is
not.
Mr. McHenry. Well, we are glad you are in charge and I know
it certainly is not an easy, it certainly is a challenge and a
distinct challenge based on the culture you are walking into
and these electronic records, in particular, and what that adds
to this whole general challenge.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. The gentleman's time has expired. The gentleman
from Texas, Mr. Cuellar, is recognized.
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to welcome all
three of you all. We appreciate what you all do and Mr.
Ferriero, also welcome.
Let me ask you one question for all of you all. Do you all
have a strategic plan for each of your agencies, that is, a
strategic plan that has the core mission, that has the goals,
that has the indicators, the inputs, and can you all make that
available to us? Mr. Ferriero.
Mr. Ferriero. The Archives does have one. It was recently,
it was updated just before I arrived. It is not my strategic
plan.
Mr. Cuellar. Okay.
Mr. Ferriero. But I will be happy to make it available to
you.
Mr. Cuellar. When you say it is not mine, I assume you are
going to make some changes to it?
Mr. Ferriero. I think a new Archivist needs to establish
himself in the agency. And one of the ways of doing that is
creating his own strategic plan.
Mr. Cuellar. And is there a way to measure your results?
Mr. Ferriero. Every strategic plan should have, should
include, evaluative measures. Yes.
Mr. Cuellar. Thank you. Mr. Clough.
Mr. Clough. At the Smithsonian, you have our plan. I'm
sorry. You have our plans and it is in the materials that you
have. And it is a plan that we just developed and it took about
a year to develop. We had a cultural problem also at the
Smithsonian, and so we wanted to make it an inclusive process
to get people to buy in to the plan. And we finished that, and
we are very pleased with the way the results have come out.
We do, we are required by our Board of Regents to have very
explicit goals, and measurables against those goals. And so we
have goals that we expect to be measured against over the life
of the plan, which is basically 2010 to 2015, but also annual
goals. And of the annuals goals, we actually measure our
progress toward those goals every quarter.
Mr. Cuellar. Okay. Good.
Mr. Billington. We are halfway through our current
strategic plan and we are engaged, we have engaged in a
virtually year-long process of revising and extending it to
2016. We are nearly finished that exercise. We have been
conducting a really thorough review, as well as a review of our
management agenda, and it will have some new emphasis and we
will get you a copy of this. It is almost complete and we will
get it to you as soon as you want it.
However, revision of the basic strategic plan that we have
been operating under for 2\1/2\ years. That is the normal
thing, in mid-course, reexamination of your strategic plan,
which is what we have been doing. And we have decided that the
changes should be fairly significant and last through 2016.
Mr. Cuellar. Okay. And I would ask you all, because I heard
Mr. Clough what you said. I just got a copy. It was not
attached to your testimony. I just got it right now. But there
is no measurements and what percentage. Is that in a different
document? Because one of the things that I want to see Federal
agencies in doing is to have the mission, the goals and then
what you are trying to measure, because I am looking at what
just got provided to me and I do not see the performance
measures. And why would you put them apart from the strategic
plan?
Mr. Clough. The plan, the Executive Summary of the Plan
speaks to what we will measure, but not exactly what we have
measured because we thought it would just be too much detail
for the average person. But that is all available in public
records. And we have, in fact, what we try to do as we develop
the plan was to bring all of our, our stakeholders, meaning not
just those of the Smithsonian but those outside the Smithsonian
into the process of deciding what we should measure. And so
that is available, and we can make that available to you.
Mr. Cuellar. Yes, sir, thank you. And I appreciate all the
work that you all do. Give me an idea, from each of you all,
what you all measure?
Mr. Clough. What we measure?
Mr. Cuellar. Yeah.
Mr. Ferriero. Okay, let us start with [remarks off mic].
Sorry. How many people come through the door, but more
interesting and more valuable are qualitative kinds of
measurements. How effective was the visit? Did you get what you
need? How qualified are the staff that you interact with? What
did you learn from the experience? And then there are measures
on resources, use of resources.
Mr. Cuellar. Right. Mr. Clough.
Mr. Clough. Somewhat similar for us in that, for example,
for a museum visit, we survey our visitors and we have a
standard to which we aspire for visitors saying this was an
excellent visit, or this was a very good visit, or this was
informative to me in a particular way. So, we have those kinds
of measures. We also look at the number of people who come to
our Web sites, how long they stay, what they tell us that they
are learning. We are looking for more of a two-way exchange
today as opposed to us simply measuring some temperature, but
literally letting them tell us what they think. And we look for
management expertise, excellence as well.
Mr. Cuellar. My time is up. But let me just say this. I
would ask you all to, one of the things about the measurements
is that, I do not want to get caught up in measuring activity
or how many pencils you have. I mean, that is a very simplistic
idea, example. I would ask your staff that is sitting behind
you that we measure the end results, the goals, to do that.
Because it is easy to measure activity.
But, once you set your mission and your strategic goals,
how do we measure the end results? You know, what are the
results? In other words, you can say, how do you improve
education? There are certain things you look at by just
counting how many teachers you have. So, I would love to sit
down with you all because I am a big believer in having Federal
agencies to do a lot more on the deeper thinking of strategic
planning on this.
But first of all, I just want to again say thank you to all
three. We really appreciate the work that you and your staffs
are doing.
Thank you.
Mr. Clay. The gentleman's time has expired. The gentlewoman
from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, is recognized for 5
minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank
you for bringing all three of these kinship agencies before us.
They are very important to the District of Columbia, but
exquisitely important to the Nation of the 20 million people or
so who come to visit the Nation's capitol every year. Many do,
in fact, visit all three of these institutions.
I have questions. Let me begin with you, Mr. Ferriero. You
are the junior member of the trilogy here, and I welcome you
and congratulate you on your appointment. I congratulate you on
the work on the exhibits that are up now and on your coming
Civil War exhibition, which is much anticipated.
I strongly endorse the transformation that has been
underway for some time so that the Archives lose that aura. The
word archives sends out the message, not to anybody I know, I
was a history major so it would have interested me, but it is
unfortunate that it does not fully describe in any sense what
the Archives means to anyone even mildly interested in our
country.
So, I very much applaud what you are doing. I see the
Archives much more as a museum like the Smithsonian Museum,
frankly, that if you come here you ought to go to the Archives
just the way you go to the Library of Congress to say, this, I
have heard all my life about, let me see what really happens in
here, let me look at it. The very same thing for the Archives.
Now, I am not suggesting a name change here. But I am
suggesting that you are transforming how, and this has been
underway for some time. I am not sure Congress has been fully
aware of how that transformation, how you keep up with that
transformation, because with everybody else it seems to be we
are back into the old Archives business, making sure that you
do the filing, and that scholars can find what they need. Far
be it from me to say that is not important. But the fact is
that you serve the entire country.
And there was a question asked by one of my colleagues
about the so-called balance. Let me pick out one of the things
that you do to ask you whether or not Congress needs to look
more carefully at a transformation of its own, perhaps.
If you go before an immigration court, you do not have any
rights. I mean, you are not in the country, figuratively
speaking, yet you are challenging some kind of order. So, we
have immigration court, and you do not have discovery there.
As I understand it, if you want to find out anything about
what the Government, the other side who is in court with you,
has on you, you have to do a FOIA request. And I understand
these requests, which are very important, just as are the kind
of requests we had in mind when we passed FOIA, or enacted
FOIA, were important. But somebody, whether somebody stays in
the country or leaves, whether or not there is false
information regarding whether the person has been involved in
some activity, terrorist or not, is what Government is relying
on, that also is important.
I do not know how you prioritize among the FOIA requests or
what, or whether you are in, have any strategy for keeping
yourself from being buried in FOIA requests, whether you have
asked for a different way to handle FOIA requests, perhaps
outside of the Archives, whether you have asked for more
funding or staff to handle it. Or are you just sitting there
letting the FOIA requests come in and somebody goes and look
when she gets ready to, when she gets down to you?
And of course if they get to the case, and I am not
suggesting that all of these cases are full of content, but
obviously they have the right to the FOIA because the courts do
consider them if they happen to get the information in time.
And guess what? If you do not get it in time, since you have no
right to discovery, off with your head.
What does the Archives do when it sees, I will not even
call it new, but it certainly is not anticipated, use piling in
on you? Are there more FOIA requests of this kind than any
other FOIA requests? What are you doing about it?
Mr. Ferriero. You are asking very good questions. And I
said, this new OGIS operation that has been set up on the
Archives is charged with speeding up and reducing the time to
process those kinds of requests.
I do not have concrete information about the nature of
requests, but I can get that information and supply it. And
this is, you know, we met 3\1/2\ weeks ago----
Ms. Norton. Is it the largest number of FOIA requests?
Mr. Ferriero. This is the first I have heard about this
category of FOIA requests. So, I, at first blush----
Ms. Norton. Well, I think it, I am suggesting that, you
know, you can get all the money you want to. There are certain
kinds of things you will never get enough money to handle. I
think you ought to have your staff and your counsel looking at
whether or not you ought to suggest that either some minimal
rights be granted to people before immigration courts, which is
in the jurisdiction of the Congress, or that something else be
done. Because I do not see a way for you to get on top of what
is an ever increasing number, nor do I think that the taxpayers
of the United States ought to keep pouring money into something
of a kind if there is another way to do it.
I notice your budget has doubled with respect to
Presidential Libraries. I wonder if that is getting some kind
of preference over the last 10 years, some kind of preference
over other kinds of things because, after all, they are
presidents. Is that the case? I mean, have you had a doubling
of your budget in any other part of what you do?
Mr. Ferriero. Not that I am aware of. Although the budget
has kept up with the increasing volume of material that the
Archives is responsible for.
Ms. Norton. Say that again?
Mr. Ferriero. Every year, the Archives bring in more and
more content and the budget has increased to support that. In
terms of the Presidential Libraries, the staff prepared, just
before I arrived, and submitted a report on the future of the
Presidential Libraries which spells out five different
scenarios for investigation. And I would expect that we would
have a hearing on that in the New Year to talk about the future
of the Presidential Libraries.
Ms. Norton. I think that requires our attention, Mr.
Chairman, because it is another area that can just run away
with. After all, these Presidential Libraries are supposed to
be supported by their own foundations as well as the taxpayers
here and the Archives do have some responsibility. But it
strikes me, it is interesting to me that that budget has grown,
has doubled.
Mr. Ferriero. It is a public private partnership. The
libraries are built by private foundations and----
Ms. Norton. And the foundations have to know that they have
to keep working hard. And if they see the Government taking on
more and more of it, there will be a disincentive there.
I would like to ask Mr. Clough a question. The last time I
looked, 70 percent of the funding of the Smithsonian was from
the U.S. Government. Is it about that percentage now?
Mr. Clough. Yes, it is about 65 percent by Federal
appropriations and 35 percent by----
Ms. Norton. I am very concerned with the fund-raising
record of the Smithsonian. Here we have the most unusual, I
would call it a unique collection, of museums, nothing like it
in the world. Any city that had it in its midst would regard it
as a treasure trove. I am struck dumb by why the Smithsonian
has not been able to raise more private funds from across the
United States. I need to know what your fund-raising model is,
considering that I do not expect that the U.S. Congress is
going to raise the percentage. We can hardly keep up with your
backlog of repairs and alterations.
Mr. Clough. Well, we are working hard on getting the
message out about the Smithsonian and telling the correct story
about the purposes that it serves to the American people and
the world. This past year----
Ms. Norton. What is the fund-raising strategy?
Mr. Clough. I'm sorry?
Ms. Norton. What is the, is there, you know, if you go to
places like New York----
Mr. Clough. Yes.
Ms. Norton. You know, where you have major museums that
have major fund-raising strategies----
Mr. Clough. Yes.
Ms. Norton. Even though the city of New York supports them.
Is there such a strategy there besides telling people, this is,
you know, let them know the kinds of things they can see? That
is not going to raise funds.
Mr. Clough. We are very close to having all the pieces in
place. The first part was to develop our strategic plan, which
we did, and that is now public. And then from that, we build
what we call our case statement, which is that we have goals
that we think that the American people and Members of Congress
support for us. And then we try to identify the target for
people who, corporations, foundations and so forth, who would
support us.
And this past year, we were pleasantly surprised. We had a
goal of $120 million in private philanthropy and we raised $127
million. So, we did better than we expected on that side. We
think with the strategic plan in place and with a definite,
concerted effort to reach out to the American people, we will
do better.
And our goal is to have a national campaign. And you all
know from having your university experience that that takes a
structure which we have not had. We are in the process of
working with our Regents to put that in place. And by the end
of the year, we should have not only the ideas, but also the
structure in place to actually get this done. So I think you
can look for better results from us shortly.
Mr. Clay. The gentlewoman's time has expired and perhaps
that is the subject of another hearing.
Ms. Norton. I think so, Mr. Chairman. If I may request a
fund-raising hearing on the private fund-raising on all three,
but especially the Smithsonian. And the words national campaign
were uttered. And you come from the academic----
Mr. Clay. Staff will work with you on that.
Ms. Norton. Exactly, Mr. Chairman, if I may so. Otherwise,
the pressure is going to be on us to do something which we will
not do.
Mr. Clay. Okay.
Ms. Norton. We already are charging to get into the so-
called butterfly exhibit. The Congress of the United States, 20
million people come here are our constituents. We pay for this
whole array. And the notion of charging to get in any part of
it is anathema to us. So, I regard the butterfly exhibit as----
Mr. Clay. We will examine those issues----
Ms. Norton [continuing]. As an outrage and ask that we get
private funds for that as well.
Mr. Clay. Thank you. Thank you.
Let me ask Dr. Clough, what can Congress do to support the
work of our three great cultural institutions in fulfilling
what you describe in your testimony as our, as your collective
mission? What can we do to be of help?
Mr. Clough. Well, I think it is a joint effort, a
collective partnership between yourselves and us and the
American people to fulfill our missions, which I think are
fundamental and very important to our history and to the
generations that will follow.
I think, as was indicated by Dr. Ferriero, that Congress
does a good job in terms of supporting our missions
financially. Obviously, we could use additional funds because
it is a struggle to find that balance between, if you will, the
security and the access type of the equation and we deal with
that every day. But we are very appreciative of the support we
do get from Congress. This past year, in fiscal year 2010, for
example, we got $2 million in addition to the funds that we had
before to help us with collections care and security of our
collections. And we very much appreciated that.
But I think working collectively together, thinking
together about the future of these institutions and making sure
we are all headed in the right direction, is a powerful way to
go forward.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
Dr. Billington, you write in your statement that the
Library of Congress, the Smithsonian and the National Archives
complement each other. In your opinion, is there room for more
cooperation between these three institutions, especially in
leveraging each one's inherent strengths, but organizationally
and in your collections?
Mr. Billington. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think there is. I
think that there are fundamental, clear, fairly clear lines in
the sense that the official record of the U.S. Government is in
the Archives, the Smithsonian has a vast array of things, but
generally speaking, covering many of the areas that we do but
in a different way. I mean, they tend to have three dimensional
objects for exhibition. We tend to have two dimensional
records, whether it is films, well, they have films, too. There
is some duplication, but there is room. There is a fairly
distinct division of labor which I think we all more or less
honor.
And so, but I think there is room for more collaboration.
We all report to different committees, of course. I mean, you
were mentioning, in terms of private fund-raising, we never
even had a development office before I became Librarian. We get
donations but our staff is very small. We have no Board of
Governors, so there is no Board to help us in this regard.
But we have two major donations, one from Mr. Kluge to set
up a Kluge Center that is really a great additional boon to
bring major scholars here for their work. And we also got this
unprecedented gift from the Packard Humanities Institute that
has enabled us to create this Audiovisual Conservation Center
which has been able to bring back the world's largest
collection of recorded sound and films, all in one place. They
have been scattered. But that is a consolidation.
And I think there is additional work that we can do and I
would hope that we will have more conversations among ourselves
to see if we cannot work together even more specifically than
we have in the past.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
And Dr. Ferriero, along the same lines as Ms. Norton's
questions, Presidential Libraries now make up about one-third
of NARA's budget. And yet the backlog of FOIA requests at the
libraries are years long and growing every year. It is
estimated that it will take 100 years to process just the
Reagan Library materials and the Bush and Clinton Libraries are
facing similar issues.
NARA continues to renovate not only aging buildings, but
relatively young, permanent museum exhibits and educational
programs, including using cutting edge technology and design.
Is the Presidential Library System focused on the right
priorities?
Mr. Ferriero. Well, as I said, this is the subject of, I
think, a future hearing. I can tell you in terms of resources
the museum aspect of Presidential Libraries is about 4 percent
of the budgets of the Presidential Libraries. So, in terms of
resource allocation, it is the appropriate balance.
The issue around maintenance and upkeep is one of the big
issues in terms of the long-term future of the Presidential
Library System. These are facilities that, with any
decentralized system, over time require maintenance and upkeep.
And there are soon to be 13 of more than 40 facilities that I
am responsible for around the country.
Mr. Clay. Let me ask you about the FOIA requests. Last
week, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
issued an Open Government Directive that requires agencies to
take a number of actions to improve access to Government
information.
Under the directive, each agency must take steps to reduce
its backlog of FOIA requests by 10 percent each year. What
actions will NARA take to reduce its FOIA backlog as required
by the Open Government Directive? And what other steps does
NARA plan to take to implement the directive?
Mr. Ferriero. Well, as I said, this new office that we have
set up is charged with specifically looking at that and making
a set of recommendations about how we can reduce that backlog.
Mr. Clay. Okay. All right. Well, I look forward to working
with you in that capacity and all of the responsibilities of
NARA. Welcome aboard.
Mr. Ferriero. Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Let me thank the entire panel for their testimony
and you are dismissed. And we will call forward the second
panel. Thank you.
It is the policy of the subcommittee to swear in all
witnesses. Would you please stand and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Thank you and you may be seated. Let the record
reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative.
Let me find my page. I would now like to introduce our
second panel. Our first witness will be Anne L. Weismann, Chief
Counsel for Citizens for Responsibility in Ethics in Washington
[CREW], a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting
transparency and accountability in government and public life.
Ms. Weismann earlier served as Deputy Chief of the
Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission and
prior to that as Assistant Branch Director of the Civil
Division of the Department of Justice. She has supervisory
responsibility over litigation on the FOIA, the Privacy Act,
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and statutes governing
Federal and Presidential records.
Ms. Weismann received her B.A., magna cum laude, from Brown
University and a J.D. from George Washington University's
National Law Center.
Welcome to the subcommittee.
Our next witness is Janet A. Alpert, president of the
National Genealogical Society, a service organization that
leads and educates the national genealogical community and
promotes access to, and preservation of, genealogical records.
Ms. Alpert is an amateur genealogist who has been researching
her family for almost 30 years. In 2004, she retired from a 35
year career in the title insurance industry.
She received a B.A. degree in political science from the
University of California at Santa Barbara and an MBA from the
University of Connecticut.
Thank you for being here.
Our next witness will be Kevin Goldberg, legal counsel,
American Society of News Editors. Mr. Goldberg's expertise is
in First Amendment, copyright and trademark issues and he
regularly advocates issues involving freedom of speech on
behalf of press organizations. In 2006, he was inducted into
the National Freedom of Information Hall of Fame for his
continued and superlative service in pursuit of open
government.
Mr. Goldberg earned a B.A. degree from James Madison
University and graduated with high honors from George
Washington University Law School.
Thank you for being here, Mr. Goldberg.
And our final witness will be Mr. Carl Malamud, president
and founder of Public.Resource.Org, a non-profit corporation
that makes government information more broadly available on the
Internet, including over 90 million pages of documents and
1,000 videos. The organization has been leading a national
effort called Law.Gov to make America's primary legal material
more broadly available.
Mr. Malamud previously served as Chief Technology Officer
at the Center for American Progress. In the 1990's, he ran the
first radio station on the internet and was responsible for
putting the SEC, EDGAR and Patented data bases online. He is
the author of eight professional reference books and numerous
articles and has been a visiting professor at the MIT Media Lab
and Keele University.
And I thank all of our witnesses for appearing today and
look forward to the testimony.
Ms. Weismann, we will start with you.
STATEMENTS OF ANNE L. WEISMANN, CHIEF COUNSEL, CITIZENS FOR
RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON; JANET A. ALPERT,
PRESIDENT, NATIONAL GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY; KEVIN M. GOLDBERG,
LEGAL COUNSEL, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEWS EDITORS; AND CARL
MALAMUD, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, PUBLIC.RESOURCES.ORG
STATEMENT OF ANNE L. WEISMANN
Ms. Weismann. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member McHenry and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today
about the mission of the National Archives and Records
Administration at this critical juncture.
As Chief Counsel for CREW, we have been pushing NARA for
years to assume the leadership role Congress envisioned for the
agency through the Federal Records Act. Today, NARA must make
some key decisions. The appointment of Dr. Ferriero as the new
Archivist and the administration's dedication to a transparent
and accountable government present NARA with unique
opportunities to reexamine its mission and priorities and
establish a new roadmap for how to achieve them.
Most importantly, the Archivist must decide whether NARA
will continue to elevate its role as the museum of the Nation's
history over its role as a records access agency, the question
this committee has posed. This juncture also affords Congress
an opportunity to reexamine the laws that govern recordkeeping
in the executive branch.
First, the dismal state of electronic recordkeeping across
nearly all agencies in the Federal Government cries out for a
new direction from NARA. As documented in a report we issued in
April 2008, and the periodic reports from the GAO, to date NARA
has failed to affirmatively and effectively assist agencies in
developing and implementing effective records management
policies.
The GAO's June 2008 report notes specifically that NARA's
failure to conduct inspections of agency record management
programs since 2000 leaves us with limited assurances that
agencies are appropriately managing the records in their
custody and that important records are not lost.
We at CREW are confronted with this problem all the time as
agencies tell us repeatedly in response to our FOIA requests
that they simply have no way to access and search their
electronic email records. Although this failure has now reached
a crisis point, NARA continues to abdicate its statutory
responsibilities and fails to recognize the urgency of the
situation, opting instead, time and again, for a more passive
role that avoids any direct conflict with the agencies it
oversees.
NARA justifies its failure to take on a more active role as
resulting from the limited enforcement authority that the FRA
confers on it. But we strenuously disagree and urge Mr.
Ferriero to reevaluate the need for additional legislative
authority only after NARA exercises the full authority it
already has.
Second, we urge NARA to conduct an independent audit of the
Electronic Records Archive or ERA, including an analysis of its
status, functionality and feasibility. Launched in 2001, the
ERA has been promised as the answer to the long-term
preservation of electronic records. But, in the intervening
years, we have seen huge cost overruns, multiple instances of
contractor mismanagement, and growing doubt about whether the
ERA is capable of delivering on this promise. And just as
critically, NARA has yet to tackle the issue of public access
to records once they make their way into the system.
Such an audit also has to consider the actions of the
contractor Lockheed Martin and answer questions about its
conduct. Why, for example, has Lockheed Martin applied for
numerous patents related to the ERA despite the fact that the
project is entirely federally funded?
Even more fundamentally, should NARA even continue with the
ERA given its problem to date? We ask the new Archivist to take
a clear-eyed look at this question and, if necessary, have the
courage to abandon the project if it cannot deliver on its
promises.
Third, NARA suffers from a culture of passivity that has
prevented it from becoming an effective leader in the
management and preservation of our Nation's history. And I am
pleased that Dr. Ferriero recognizes these problems. With each
day, month and year that goes by without effective management,
we lose another slice of our history.
President Obama has promised an unprecedented level of
transparency and accountability. But this promise cannot be
fulfilled if agencies fail to preserve agency records.
In short, the status quo is unacceptable. We ask NARA now
to reinvigorate and redefine itself as part of the solution,
not the problem. We also ask that Congress consider legislative
amendments that I have outlined in my written testimony that
would add a measure of accountability and provisions that would
better ensure compliance.
We welcome the opportunity to work with this committee and
the new leadership at NARA. I am happy to answer your
questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Weismann follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Ms. Weismann. We look forward to
working with CREW.
Ms. Alpert, you may proceed for 5 minutes.
STAEMENT OF JANET A. ALPERT
Ms. Alpert. Good afternoon Chairman Clay and members of the
subcommittee. Thank you for the invitation to testify before
the subcommittee today.
My name is Janet A. Alpert and I am the president of the
National Genealogical Society. Our members range from family
history researchers to professional genealogists. The
genealogical community is well represented in this room today.
The following points are more fully described in my written
statement which has been presented to the subcommittee.
Additional statements of support and concern from other
genealogy groups are available on our Web site at
www.ngsgenealogy.com.
The National Archives and Records Administration is a very
important source of original records for the genealogical
community. As a result, we are their largest research user
group. The National Genealogical Society supports the mission
of NARA, but we are concerned that the two most important
priorities, to safeguard and preserve the records of our
government and to ensure the continuing access to the essential
documentation, are becoming secondary to the third tenant of
the mission, to promote civic education and historical
understanding of our national experience.
Several examples support our position. NARA has a backlog
of documents which have not been processed and many more
records which will be coming to NARA for processing and
safeguarding over the next few years. We are not aware of any
plans to accommodate the increasing volume of records. It is
important for the major collections to stay at the National
Archives Building in Washington, DC, because people who travel
here to do research need easy access to the other collections
at the Library of Congress, the Smithsonian and the DAR
Library.
Second, the extensive record groups at NARA require skilled
experts to assist researchers. Due to budget cutbacks, staff
reductions and retirements, we believe the skill level of the
staff is diminishing rather than increasing.
Three, plans are underway to reduce the research area so
the museum and exhibit area can be expanded. Continued access
to microfilm and adequate research space is necessary until
more of the records are digitized and available online.
Four, NARA has shown leadership in developing partnerships
with third parties to digitize many records which are very
valuable to genealogists. However, we are not aware of plans to
make these digitized records available to the public for free
over the NARA Web site at the end of the 5-year contract
period.
So, as to the question, history museum or records access
agency, from what we have heard, some of the planned exhibits
will duplicate records already available on line through local
libraries and they may misrepresent the complexity of the
research process.
We support civic education and we think it can best be
accomplished at the national and regional archives through
hands-on workshops with student groups and teacher training on
using documentary sources in the classroom. We believe it would
be more cost effective to spend the money building interactive
learning and exhibits online which would reach the broader
public, not just people who visit the National Archives in
Washington, DC.
There are already many wonderful museums among the Capitol
Mall. Yet, there is only unique collection of original records
at the National Archives.
In summary, we recommend that the new U.S. Archivist, David
Ferriero, take both appropriate short-term action and establish
long-term strategies that support the priorities of records
preservation and access.
We also hope you will include genealogists in the planning
process. The genealogical community stands ready to support the
Archivist in building a world class research facility and model
for emerging democracies around the world.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Alpert follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Alpert, for that
testimony.
Mr. Goldberg, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF KEVIN M. GOLDBERG
Mr. Goldberg. Thank you.
Chairman Clay, Ranking Member McHenry and members of the
subcommittee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to
testify today on behalf of the Sunshine in Government
Initiative, a coalition of nine media organizations that
includes the American Society of News Editors.
Mr. Chairman, as you know, SGI and ASNE have a long history
of working with this subcommittee on issues relating to the
proper management and distribution of government information.
We are here today to define the challenges facing the National
Archives and Records Administration in fulfilling its mission
in this area.
NARA's mission mandates that the agency ensures that the
people can discover, use and learn from America's documentary
heritage. The democracy, civic education and historical
understanding functions of the agency's mission statement are
impossible without public access to records created not just
decades ago but on a continuing basis.
Now, a much-quoted visionary for government transparency,
former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, saw an active and
informed public as critical to a healthy democracy. Those who
won our independence, Brandeis wrote, believed that public
discussion is a political duty and that this should be a
fundamental principle of American government.
Having previously declared that sunlight is said to be the
best of disinfectants, Justice Brandeis also clearly saw access
to government information as democracy's oxygen. You cut off
its supply, democracy dies.
Ensuring access to information is central to SGI's mission.
It is one of ASNE's core values. But 43 years after FOIA's
passage, obtaining government information in a speedy or low-
cost fashion can still be difficult, if not impossible, for a
reporter from a major daily newspaper, let alone the average
citizen.
That is why today's hearing is so important. Ensuring
NARA's dedication to distributing its own records and its newly
vested ability to assess other executive branch agencies'
disclosure decisions is vital to our democracy.
First, NARA must perfect its own access policies and
activities. The agency, like so many others, has significant
processing backlogs. NARA issued a FOIA Improvement Plan on
October 16, 2006 in which it claimed it responded to 76 percent
of all FOIA requests within the statutorily mandated 20 day
response period. Well, Mr. Chairman, that falls into the C
range on a 100 point rating scale. That is satisfactory, but I
was not treated too kindly by my parents when I brought home
Cs.
NARA rightly notes that resources to address FOIA were
reduced as FOIA requests increased. But part of the problem is
that the agency does not appear to have fully implemented its
own recommendations made in 2006. There are several links to
NARA reference guides and to archival research catalogs. But
the legally mandated access to actual records via NARA's
electronic reading room appears limited and unimproved since
2006.
The need for NARA to get its own house in order is more
significant now that Congress has entrusted the agency with a
new office designed to deal with the public and other agencies
to make FOIA work better. NARA must lead by example as the
Office of Government Information Services becomes a key contact
point for the public on FOIA and reviews other agencies'
compliance with FOIA.
For this hearing, I want to emphasize that for OGIS to be
effective, the Archivist must embrace OGIS' active engagement
with other agencies and the public. OGIS can first help
unburden agencies from their FOIA requests by pushing agencies
to put more information online without waiting for a request.
More information online means fewer burdensome requests.
As requesters understand that they have an ally in this new
office, they will reach out to OGIS for assistance and
education. This should result in faster processing as OGIS
quickly resolves imprecise or misconstrued requests.
Finally, OGIS intervention should be able to head off
litigation when parties are simply at an impasse.
But OGIS effectiveness in making FOIA work better for
Federal agencies and the public will ultimately hinge on
whether the office receives the proper support from the
National Archives as a whole. This support rests on two key
components: funding and independence.
OGIS was appropriated $1 million in fiscal year 2009 and a
budget of $1.4 million for fiscal year 2010. That money has
allowed the office to hire a total of six employees. The office
will eventually need more staff to accomplish its goals. This
is why the Congressional Budget Office estimated OGIS would
require a budget of $3 million in its first year and about $6
million each thereafter to be fully functional.
As important as proper funding is a commitment to OGIS
independence. The combination of independence and recordkeeping
acumen is the main reason Congress has the office within the
National Archives. We hope that OGIS Director Miriam Nesbit and
her staff will be given the trust and leeway needed to develop
OGIS.
We thank you for the opportunity to present our views on
the future of the National Archives and the importance of this
new OGIS office to the agency's mission.
I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Goldberg follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Mr. Goldberg.
Mr. Malamud, you are up for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF CARL MALAMUD
Mr. Malamud. Thank you Chairman Clay and members of the
subcommittee. I am particularly honored to be here today,
following not only our dynamic new Archivist but also the
secretary of the Smithsonian and the Librarian of Congress.
Your invitation to testify asked me to discuss NARA's
mission to preserve and ensure access to records, and asked if
I believe the agency's efforts in exhibits and other programs
influence that performance.
When President Hoover laid the cornerstone for the National
Archives Building, he stated there will be aggregated here the
most sacred documents of our history, the originals of the
Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution of the
United States. The display of the Declaration of Independence
and of the Constitution are certainly a visible symbol of our
National Archives. But they are merely a symbol. It is the
preservation of records and the corollary processes of
gathering those records from the agencies and making them
available to the public that are the core challenges of this
unique institution.
The Electronic Records Archives are certainly the biggest
challenge facing the Archivist. This $551 million computer
system has had a long history of false starts. Just last month,
both the GAO and NARA's own Inspector General testified to this
committee they have no idea what the system does, how it works,
and where the money went.
We do know that after $237 million spent to date, the
system has no back-up and restore capabilities. We do know that
public access to ERA is an afterthought. And we do know that
the contractor, Lockheed Martin, has taken out 15 patent
applications on the system. With a half a billion dollars in
taxpayer money on the line, it goes without saying that the
software should be open source so that any State archivist
could run the same system.
The ERA system is so complex because of the incoming deluge
of electronic records. When the National Archives was being
created, Archivist Connor faced a similar situation. At first,
the Archives were simply unable to keep up. Archivist Connor
instituted a series of changes, moving examiners closer to the
source and providing better guidance and standardized forms and
schedules to the agencies.
For many years now, records management has been sorely
neglected. Guidance has been limited to telling agencies to
print and save, and a recent survey shows no agency-wide
policies for important archives such as electronic mail. It was
heartening to hear Archivist Ferriero list this area as one of
his key concerns, stating that he would reinstitute agency
inspections and that NARA should play a leadership role.
In addition to electronic records, one of the key
challenges facing NARA is digitization of older materials.
Looking back again at Archivist Connor, we see that NARA dealt
with an incoming deluge of paper records by pioneering an
important set of technical advances, including the development
of microfilm. Digitization of paper and other materials should
be a key priority for NARA, as well as the Smithsonian, the
Library of Congress and the Government Printing Office.
In 1935, NARA secured President Roosevelt's support to get
WPA funding to employ white collar workers to survey Federal
archives. Recovery.gov shows no stimulus funding for NARA and,
in the midst of the current depression, there is a tremendous
opportunity to put people to work by creating public works for
the digital age, an opportunity France seized just this Monday,
announcing $1.1 billion in stimulus funding to scan their
national library.
Instead of viewing digitization of materials as an
opportunity, the Archives has declared the task to be out of
scope and has created as an alternative a series of public-
private partnerships with organizations such as Amazon.com. It
is my understanding from NARA officials that a similar
arrangement may be in the works in which a large number of
congressional hearings would be scanned by LexisNexis and made
available on that retail information system.
In his opening statement at his confirmation, Archivist
Ferriero also quoted Archivist Connor and his observation that
45 percent of the records he surveyed were infested with vermin
and insects and that records mingled higgledy-piggledy with
empty whiskey bottles. This was a defining moment for the new
institution and I think the National Archives faces another
defining moment today.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Malamud follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for that testimony.
Let me start with Ms. Weismann. In your testimony, Mr.
Malamud mentioned it also, you bring up the fact that NARA's
ERA contractor, Lockheed Martin, has applied for 15 patents
related to the program, which is taxpayer-funded. Now, can you
please explain your concern that you have with the contractor
applying for patents?
Ms. Weisman. Well, I share Mr. Malamud's concern that this
should be open source material. It is just inexplicable to me
why it is that it is the subject of private patents. And if it
were patentable, why the Government does not hold those patents
and not a contractor. We are not talking about a system that
has been built with commercial off-the-shelf software. It is
being developed and built entirely with Federal funds.
And I think it speaks to the larger concern I alluded to,
which is NARA's failure to effectively oversee the contractor.
And I know that the Inspector General at NARA, who I guess has
testified before this committee, has also written some reports.
And I think they detail his concerns as well.
It is hard to really get to the bottom of it except that,
at a minimum, it appears, at least to CREW, that NARA just does
not have the technical and other know-how to effectively and
adequately supervise this contract. And I think that is why
here we are, these many years later and these many, many
millions of dollars later, raising a question about whether we
should even continue or abandon this project.
Mr. Clay. Mr. Malamud, did you have anything to add?
Mr. Malamud. Very quickly. I think the National Archives
has a role to play in managing not only its own archives but in
leadership to the archives in the 50 States and throughout the
world.
When they invented the microfilm and lamination and the
airbrush in the 1930's, they did not patent those and their
contractors did not and it spread throughout our archival
science. The ERA system is something that any State archive
should be able to run. And most importantly, by making it open
source, we can see how the system functions, make sure it is
secure, and make sure that it does the job that it is supposed
to do. After all, it is our money as taxpayers that helped pay
for this.
Mr. Clay. Thank you. Thank you for that response.
Going back to Ms. Weismann. In your written testimony, you
urged the new Archivist to reevaluate the need for additional
legislative authority only after exercising the full authority
NARA currently has. Can you briefly explain what you meant by
that statement?
Ms. Weismann. Yes. Time and again, when we have gone to
NARA and urged it to take a stronger leadership role, they have
suggested that they are limited because they have very limited
statutory authority. One of the provisions of the Federal
Records Act that we have had an ongoing dispute with them about
on this issue is the obligation to conduct inspections. They do
not do that. And agencies know that they are not going to be
inspected for records compliance and we have massive non-
compliance.
And NARA has suggested, time and again, that it does not
have the statutory authority to do anything more than it is
already doing. If you look at the law, I think it is very
clear. Congress envisioned, not only envisioned but commanded
the Archivist to conduct inspections. And I think this is yet
one of any number of examples where they have taken a very
narrow view of their statutory authority.
It is kind of remarkable really because sometimes we are
dealing with runaway agencies that have a very expansive view.
But NARA seemingly does not want to take on these
responsibilities. And, frankly, it has seemed very risk
adverse. It does not want to be in conflict.
But we really welcome the new Archivist because it is our
understanding that he shares the view that the problem is not a
lack of statutory authority, it is a lack of will in exercising
the authority they already have.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
Ms. Alpert, how has the practice of genealogical research
changed and has NARA kept up with the needs of researchers in
terms of resources, staffing and records processing?
Ms. Alpert. Well, I think it is a continuation of this
discussion about electronic records. NARA was a leader, as one
of the other panelists said, in the 1930's. And now, so many of
the records are going to be electronic. The new records are
coming in electronically.
And there are many, many records behind the scenes that are
still in paper format and they are actually, if you are talking
about pension records, they are actually in folders that are
hundreds of years old.
So, I think the real challenge for the Archivist is how he
takes NARA to the next generation and how he keeps up with this
electronic challenge that he has.
Mr. Clay. And I think Mr. Malamud made a great suggestion
as far as directing some of the stimulus money toward
modernizing archivists' records.
Ms. Alpert. As genealogists, the WPA work that was done
exists on every county in the United States and we use it often
because they characterized a lot of the records that existed.
So, the work that was done in the 1930's is still being used
today. It was extremely valuable.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response. And let me say that,
before I ask Mr. Goldberg a question, is that we asked for the
stakeholder community to let you offer suggestions to Dr.
Ferriero and his staff so that there can be a better working
relationship between the two entities, I mean, between several
entities. And so, I do not want this to appear to be
adversarial in any way, but suggestions to the new Archivist as
he enters his first phase in his new position.
Mr. Goldberg, in your testimony, you discussed the
challenges facing the new Office of Government Information
Services or OGIS. What actions do you believe the new Archivist
can take immediately and in the long run for OGIS to help meet
its goals?
Mr. Goldberg. Well, actually this is a particularly apt
question coming on your previous comments about an adversarial
role. I actually think we have had, our members of SGI, have
had a wonderful relationship, not only with the new OGIS
office, but with the National Archives as a whole. We worked
very well with the prior Archivist and hope that that
continues. We have every reason to expect that it will
continue.
In the short term, I think that the Archivist must place
his trust in this new office. There are some very talented
people there. We know Miriam, both from her work in Government
and out of Government. We know she is going to do the job. She
is extremely knowledgeable about these issues. So, one of the
things he can actually do is let her do that job.
In terms of supporting her in that job, and her staff, I
think that comes in two areas. One, they really have to be
championing the funding. This office is drastically under-
funded. Even State offices have more money and more employees
allocated to them than this office has. Pennsylvania has about
10 full-time employees, Connecticut about 20, to accomplish the
same tasks on a much smaller scale.
I also think it is going to be important, if they can do
it, to get this office back downtown. It is a wonderful
facility in College Park. But these folks are going to have to
meet with other agencies. There was just discussion in the
prior panel about meetings with the CIA. Well, that means you
have to get from College Park to Langley. Anyone who has ever
done that in rush hour traffic knows that it is almost
impossible to get things done. You waste half your day doing
it. So, I think that could really help them accomplish the
mission if they have more accessibility to their agencies.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that answer.
Mr. Goldberg, why is it important that NARA immediately
address their processing backlog? What is the practical impact
of the backlog on transparency in open government?
Mr. Goldberg. Well, for our members, primarily journalists
and authors, it simply means that information does not get out
to the public. It means that waiting for necessary information
will either result in the short-cutting of deadlines, or the
short-cutting of publication, or the missing of deadlines
outright. In either case, the public is the one that loses out
as they lose viable information that they would be reading in
stories.
I have another more indirect effect and that is that for
journalists and authors, they are going to now need to go more
often to secondary sources to obtain information. Some of those
people may not want to talk on the record. That really does our
members a disservice in not being able to put the most credible
publication forward, but also, of course, has led to other
problems that we have seen in other areas, you know, needing
the passage of a Federal shield law, things like that, to
protect journalists that are covering Government.
I think that we could help all of these problems out by
ensuring that more of the direct, primary source information
gets out to the public immediately.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
Mr. Malamud, a key item in several of these partnerships is
that while NARA may not provide free online access to the
digitized records for a period of several years, they may
provide free access to their NARA facilities. We have heard
from researchers that NARA may not be providing enough space
and resources within their facility. But is there a larger
problem here?
Mr. Malamud. Well, Mr. Chairman, let me first reiterate
your thoughts about working with NARA. There are no criticisms
here. I have been very impressed by the new Archivist's
openness and frankness.
When you think about the NARA facilities, I think there is
one every 10,000 square miles in the United States if you look
at the total area. And if you look at the internet, NARA is
everywhere on the internet. And today, public means online.
If we are going to make materials available, we have to
make them available on the internet. And that is the problem I
have when we put a 5-year lien on the public domain materials,
such as the deal with Amazon.
Mr. Clay. You wrote in your testimony that the cost of
scanning paper records would decrease dramatically on a larger
scale. What are your thoughts on establishing such large
scanning projects and what would be the costs and benefits?
Mr. Malamud. Well, scanning is something that has several
effects. First of all, it does provide public access. It also
means that the storage requirements are significantly less. The
state-of-the-art today is about 10 cents a page for paper
documents to scan them, run through a CR and make them
available. I believe if NARA and the Library of Congress and
others were to engage in large scale scanning, that cost per
page could get down to a nickel, maybe even lower.
And it is something that would have a tremendous benefit
and it would be, as I said before in my testimony, an enduring
public work for our digital age. It is something that needs to
be done and I hope that the new Archivist will embrace that
challenge rather than looking at it as something that just
cannot be done.
Mr. Clay. In your comments you talk about there is one NARA
facility for every 10,000 square miles in the United States.
You really concern me because both of them, both facilities
that were mentioned today, I have an attachment to one, being a
Maryland Terrapin and having the facility in College Park I am
very fond of that; and two, St. Louis houses the Personnel
Records Center, so we also founded that. So, I guess it is just
the nature of the beast. But you, Mr. Goldberg, really raise
concerns there to talk about eliminating those.
Let me thank the panel for their testimony today. And when
staff initially proposed this hearing, I figured it would just
be another boring hearing, especially with the subject matter.
But having a new Archivist on board, we certainly welcomed him
and we are all inspired by the future of the Archives because
of who is heading it now.
And also, this panel raised some very interesting issues
that you made me aware of and educated this committee on. So,
we are appreciative of that.
And on that note, this hearing is concluded.
[Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]