1. Introduction
Thank you (Maria Pisa) for that kind introduction.
And thank all of you for that rousing welcome.
I'm delighted to be here with you this
morning, back home in Illinois. I am also pleased to join
such distinguished speakers for this program, including my Washington-based
colleagues Hiram Davis (Library of Congress) and Doria Grimes
(National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration Library).
As the last speaker this morning, I face
a unique challenge. No one enjoys listening to the last speaker
repeat points made by previous speakers. Especially with a program
that places emphasis on "downsizing", "reinventing",
"reengineering", "hollowing", and "contracting
out".
But I don't mind going last. In fact,
I selected the "clean-up" position in this morning's
"batting order". That way, my points have a better
chance of staying with you. And it also provides me a chance
to end this program with a positive challenge for the Federal
library and information community.
My comments this morning focus on the value
of Federal libraries from the standpoint of National information
policy. They reflect the perspective of the National Commission,
a citizens' advisory body. My comments today also reflect
the views of an informed layperson, one that cares deeply about
the role of public information in American society.
2. Doom and Gloom
All of us in the Federal sector are no
strangers to recent feelings of doom and gloom. Many recent newspaper
articles report on various proposals and suggestions for "fixing"
the Federal government. The solutions usually involve program
elimination, cut-backs, recissions, or shutting-down whole agencies.
I don't know which characterization describes the current situation
the best:
Many of those commenting on the future
of the Federal government justify extreme measures to reduce federal
deficits and to cut taxes. Proposals in Congress call for Federal
responsibilities to be "devolved" to State and local
governments, or to the private sector. Hardly any Federal program
is left out from the downsizing and reinvention process. GPO's
Depository Library Program, the Office of Technology Assessment,
the Departments of Education, Commerce, and Labor, as well as
the FCC, are all subjects addressed by various radical proposals
for downsizing, eliminating, or consolidating Federal programs
and functions in the near future.
Somehow, ever since the Vietnam and Watergate
eras, the public seems to have lost faith in the ability of the
Federal government and the competence of the civil service. Bureaucracy
has developed a simply awful reputation. News reports
relate chaos, unease, confusion, uncertainty, and paranoia about
Federal programs.
How can we tell what's really going to
happen? How can we maintain our commitment and our sense of optimism
about the future with all this preoccupation with change?
3. Value of America's Federal Libraries
When we conclude this morning's program
ON AMERICA'S FEDERAL LIBRARIES: VALUE TO SHARE, I want all of
us to see Federal libraries as one of the Nation's most democratic,
unique, and most valuable assets. I want you as Federal librarians
and information managers to revive the spirit, dedication, and
commitment required for us to take advantage of the shifting climate
of change. For I believe that the future is full of possibilities
as well as threats.
When I'm done speaking I want to leave
you committed to several important goals.
I know that these are idealistic goals,
but I think you need to hear them and you need to respond to the
challenges and opportunities facing Federal libraries and librarians.
After all, the Federal library and information services infrastructure
represents one way that America fulfills the government's social
contract with the people. Federal libraries represent government's
return on the publics' trust and investment in democracy.
Maintaining an effective democracy requires
that we have strong Federal libraries and effective public information
systems:
Without the active involvement of Federal
librarians in designing public information services for the future,
we have little chance of seeing democracy develop and evolve in
the next century.
Certainly, much can be done to improve
the complex array of departments, agencies, programs and services
in the Federal sector. In this regard, I don't think that "streamlining"
is necessarily negative, as long as it is done with intelligence
and sensitivity to National concerns. And I don't believe we
should automatically reject the proposals to reinvent government,
even though implementation of these proposals may require some
painful decisions.
3. National Performance Review
Indeed, over the past 18 months I have
learned a lot about the National Performance Review (NPR). NCLIS
has, along with all other Federal departments and agencies, responded
to both phases of the NPR.
President Clinton and Vice President Gore began this initiative in March of 1993 to re-examine what the Federal government does and how it does it, the twin missions being to make government work better and cost less. Phase one of NPR in 1993 and 1994 concentrated on how government operates in a customer-driven, streamlined mode. It had four key principles:
Vice President Gore launched NPR 2 with
a 3 January 1995 memorandum to each Federal executive-branch agency
head earlier this year. Phase two of NPR concentrates on defining
what government should (and should not) be doing. To quote
from the Vice President's memorandum:
"This phase two NPR review will examine the basic missions of government, looking at every single government program and agency to find and eliminate things that don't need to be done by the federal government. It will also sort out how best to do the things government should continue to do."
The Commission's responded to the Vice
President's charge with a five-page agency options review, sent
to his office in late February. The report addressed the question:
"If your agency were eliminated, how would the goals or programs of your agency be undertaken - by other agencies, by states or localities, by the private sector, or not at all?"
The Commission took the Vice President's charge very seriously. We examined whether there is a need for NCLIS in the future. We examined what our government would be like if there were no independent, advice-giving, citizens' group like the National Commission to make recommendations to elected leaders.
The NPR 2 process required every agency to identify just exactly why it should continue to function as an essential federal responsibility. It forced us to define the role of government today and in the future. And it continues to force agencies to examine the consequences of elimination.
The Commission concluded that NCLIS fulfills a critical role in determining the need for policies to assure that all the people of the U.S. have the opportunity to participate in the global information age.
NCLIS's existence is unique to our democratic society. It's function is inherently governmental. No other national, independent, governmental organization is charged to determine the library and information needs of the people, with special attention to the needs of rural areas, the economically, socially, or culturally deprived, and to the elderly.
The Commission does not represent libraries or the library profession. Rather, the Commission provides an independent basis for evaluating policy options for achieving national goals in response to the needs of the all the people of the nation.
NPR 2 provides an opportunity to re-examine programs, missions, and agency structures in an effort to re-define the nature and character of government. As a result of this review, I am more convinced than ever that the National Commission's role is essential, now and into the future.
4. Measuring the Value of Federal Libraries
and Information Services
Just as the Commission's NPR2 response
reviews the essential nature of the NCLIS policy advisory function,
so the Federal library community must address questions about
the essential nature and value of the services you provide.
The Commission's review concludes that
the President and the Congress must continue to receive advice
and recommendations from a citizens' group in order to achieve
National goals. In like manner, the Federal library community
needs to formulate a rationale for continuation by defining the
value of the information services your libraries provide.
This effort to define the value of Federal
libraries must focus on clearly defining the nature of the "return
on investment" that Federal libraries and information services
provide, both to the Federal sector and to the Nation at large.
Determining the worth that Federal libraries supply is not simple.
Librarians are not generally accustomed
to talking and thinking about measuring service value, especially
in the Federal sector. We are more comfortable in discussing
information access, resource management, electronic libraries,
and resource allocation, along with "downsizing", "reinventing",
and "restructuring" operations.
However, in order to address questions
of long-term survival and effectiveness, the Federal library community
needs to develop the ability to qualitatively and quantitatively
measure the value that our libraries and information services
provide to our users and to our agencies.
Actually, Federal librarians have a good
start on developing the statistical data set needed to begin to
measure value. Maria (Pisa) has been intimately involved with
a FLICC (Federal Library and Information Center Committee) project
to measure Federal library and Information center resources and
services by collecting descriptive statistics for the first time
since 1978. A survey was sent to 1,200 libraries and information
centers in January 1995. This survey will provide a comprehensive
and current picture of Federal libraries and information centers
relative to their mission, organization, collections, services,
automation, and management.
This survey comes at a critical juncture
in federal information services as agencies are rethinking their
priorities and technology is redefining the meaning of "library".
This important effort must develop and grow. It must produce
a data set that will support future Federal library and information
management and policies.
We all know that it's difficult to refute
proposals to eliminate your budget, function, and your job if
you can't describe the impact your library is having on the agency.
We need to evolve from collecting statistics, to performing analysis
and research based on standardized statistical systems. We then
need to develop to a system for measuring quality that demonstrates
the value of tax dollars invested in Federal libraries in real,
measurable, understandable terms. We all know that this value
is real. We need to develop ways to demonstrate this reality.
This, then is the challenge: Federal libraries
and librarians must develop ways to clearly describe, define,
and defend those American Values that you and your libraries provide
to our Nation.
Democracy can't afford the alternative. Thank you for you attention.