May 22, 1973
Page 16422
FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR LIBRARIES
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, our Nation observed National Library Week during the week of April 8-14. Normally, this week is a week of celebration of the Nation's library resources. But for those of us who view libraries as a priceless educational resource, it was a week of sorrow. The cause of this sorrow was the administration's proposal to end Federal support for public libraries.
Mr. President, I have received many letters from my constituents in Maine expressing concern about the threatened cutoff of funds under the Library Services and Construction Act, and the impact such a cutoff would have on library services and related educational facilities in Maine.
For instance, a major casualty of the administration's proposal would be the Maine State Library.
The State library provides services to the handicapped and the elderly. In cooperation with New Hampshire and Vermont, it provides films to small communities which would have no other access to such materials. The library has provided a WATS telephone service to Maine high schools to give students access to a wider range of research materials. It is currently developing a centralized subject research service to upgrade educational access to those materials. And the library provides additional books and materials to under-equipped school libraries. One-half of the elementary schools in Maine do not have libraries, and some 250 small towns have no libraries. The Maine State Library is servicing these communities with a bookmobile service. In addition, the State library is working on providing access to library services to the disadvantaged in cities and rural areas.
An end of Federal aid would cripple these programs. Currently, Federal funding provides 53 percent of the general budget, and 60 percent of personnel budget, of the Maine State Library. It is unlikely that State revenue sharing funds would be available if Federal funding is ended.
Mr. President, Maine's situation is not unusual. But the administration has requested no funds for 1974 grants for public library services, stating that "responsibility for this program should now be assumed by the State and local governments." It is extremely unlikely that libraries will receive the funds they deserve in the scramble of competing interests for revenue sharing money. The administration argues that funds under the Library Services and Construction Act were to serve only as "seed money" to stimulate local support for public libraries, beginning at the inception of the act and ending at the start of the fiscal year 1974. But from such seeds grow plants that must be nurtured and cared for if they are to flourish. And the Federal Government should retain that responsibility, through continued funding of the Library Services and Construction Act.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter. from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, outlining the administration's position, several newspaper articles, and a number of letters from my constituents in Maine be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
Washington, D.C.,
March 14, 1973.
Hon. EDMUND S. Muskie,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: Thank you for your letter of February 7 concerning the status of funding for the public library programs.
On March 8, the President signed H.J. Res. 345, the Continuing Resolution, which authorizes the office of Education to continue operations through June 30, 1973. Under this authority, a total of $30,000,000 will be allotted to the States for public library services.
As you have stated in your letter, no funds were requested in fiscal year 1974 for grants for public library services. However, since the enactment of the public library program in 1956, Federal funds have provided library services for the first time to more than 17 million people, and about 87 million people have benefited through improved library services. Today, nearly every citizen is in a library service area. This is due in large measure to the increased local support for public libraries, which it is felt was stimulated by the "seed money" from the Federal Government. It is felt that responsibility for this program should now be assumed by the State and local governments.
Sincerely,
[From the New York Times, April 30, 1973]
DIM LIGHT ON BOOKS
Librarians are not usually known for their political activism, but on May 8 libraries across the country will dim their lights in protest against the Administration's meat ax threat to books.
Under the present budget proposal, the $140 million-a-year Federal appropriation for library subsidies would be wiped out after July, 1973. Neither public libraries nor those in schools and colleges would henceforth get direct grants. Any subsequent aid would have to come out of general revenue sharing, but the vociferous claims on such funds by forces with much more political clout would leave slender hope for libraries.
It is not as if Congress' contribution to libraries had been overly generous. The Federal share of the $3.60 spent per capita for public libraries is only 15 cents, and school libraries get only $1.75 per pupil from the Government. In fact, the Administration builds its case on a contention that the amounts are so small that they can readily be replaced by state and local subsidies. But this argument ignores the reality that the schools are already in desperate financial straits and many public libraries are struggling against creeping deterioration. About 40 per cent of the nation's elementary schools have no libraries at all.
Recently, during National Library Week, President Nixon saluted the librarians and underscored their importance to a well-informed nation. Now the Administration claims that the Federal library aid program has been so successful that it can safely be eliminated. Apparently, in the Administration's new budgetary vision, there are two forms of social and educational programs whose appropriations are to be cut or eliminated – those which failed and those which succeeded.
The epitaph for the libraries' killed subsidies therefore might well be: their success is their own reward. Rejecting such perverse sentiments, the librarians say that in darkening their libraries they will be "dimming the lights on the public's right to know." Theirs is a symbolic warning to the nation not to let the lights be turned out on books and knowledge.
[From the New York Times, May 9, 1973]
LIBRARIES PUT OUT LIGHTS IN NATIONAL FUND PROTEST
(By George Goodman, Jr.)
At noon yesterday, the lights went out in the Hunts Point branch of the New York Public Library. In fact, lights were dimmed or turned off in libraries throughout the country, though not from a loss of power.
It was all part of a protest by the American Library Association to draw public attention to the
federal government's plan to cut $148.7 million from funds for special learning programs primarily conducted for minorities and the poor.
"The cuts mean a loss of a chance for self-respect and dignity mainly for black and Spanish- speaking youth," said Lillian Lopez, coordinator for special services at Hunts Point and nine other branches in the South Bronx slums.
CANDLE LIT AND BLOWN OUT
Mrs. Lopez lit a candle then blew it out while visitors in the reading room sat for nearly 30 minutes in semi-darkness.
"I thought there was some kind of religious ceremony going on," said Yolanda Rodriguez, a 20-year-old biology major at Lehman College.
Miss Rodriguez came to study along with John Velez, a 23-year-old student at Bronx Community College who hopes to become a medical technician.
"There are so many community things going on here," Miss Rodriguez said, "you never know what to expect."
Films, lectures, dramatic productions, books and other materials geared primarily for Spanish- speaking youth are provided in the special project for which funds are due to expire in June of this year, library officials said.
Mrs. Lopez told a visitor yesterday how students who would otherwise have little incentive for pursuing higher professional aspirations depended on the special project.
"Sometimes it's just through a youngster making personal contact with a Puerto Rican member of our staff who is something of a model for achievement," she said, "but I also remember young people coming to me for help in finding books on Puerto Rican history that they cannot find elsewhere."
On a tour of the library's dwindling collection, Sylvia Beanson, chief librarian, described as "frustrating" the shortage of materials, which she said was becoming more critical because of cutbacks.
"When books are lost we can't afford to replace them," she said.
A tutorial program may be among the first programs affected, she added. "And through such programs we have drawn more and more youngsters here to read and check out books."
In Hawaii, where library officials intended to participate in the light-dimming protest, government officials overruled them.
The state librarian there, James Igoe, said Hawaii's system has been hit hard by a budget cut and added that 22 per cent of the jobs were currently unfilled.
The national protest was a result of letters suggesting the protest and other steps mailed by the American Library Association's Chicago headquarters several weeks ago.
[From the Wall Street Journal, Feb. 27, 1973]
DO LIBRARIES NEED FEDERAL AID? WHITE HOUSE SAYS NO, BUT LIBRARIANS SAY THEY'LL SUFFER
(By John Pierson)
President Nixon's plan to stop helping libraries has spawned some dark humor in Detroit.
"Some of our money comes from traffic tickets, prostitution fines and other penalties" explains Robert Croneberger, the city's deputy library director. "If Nixon cuts off the federal money, we're thinking of urging people to 'run a red light for your public library' or 'walk the street for your public library.'"
Turning serious, Mr. Croneberger says that loss of federal dollars would force Detroit to stop buying magazines for 30 branch libraries and to close 15 storefront libraries, many of them in black neighborhoods.
Most librarians are unable to see a funny side to Mr. Nixon's budget axe. While the fight over ending federal aid to libraries involves only about $140 million – roughly 7% of what U.S. libraries spend each year – the President's plan looks to some like a threat to cut off essential operating funds and dim the lamp of book-learning. In any case, this struggle over economizing is raising many of the issues implicit in Mr. Nixon's call for a "new federalism."
The President and his people say federal aid to libraries has been so successful that it's no longer needed. Librarians and their friends in Congress say libraries' needs require that aid be increased, not abandoned.
The administration says libraries are local things, which Uncle Sam has no business paying for. Librarians say book-sharing across county and even state lines is the wave of the future and one that needs federal money.
Nixon & Co. say librarians can make up the loss of earmarked aid funds by persuading state and local officials to let them have revenue-sharing dollars. Librarians doubt they can compete with teachers, firemen, sewage treaters and other local operative for those precious revenues Washington has promised to share with the states and towns and cities.
THREE PROGRAMS TO GO
Since 1965, the federal government has been helping 60,000 public and private elementary and secondary schools buy books, magazines, films and other library materials. Since 1956, the government has helped 12,000 public libraries buy books and other materials, as well as pay salaries and operating expenses and put up buildings. And since 1965, Washington has been giving 2,800 college and university libraries up to $5,000 each for books, periodicals and such as well as for training librarians and conducting research. These three programs will get the axe, if Mr. Nixon has his way.
The economy blow wouldn't come all at once, it's true. Though Mr. Nixon's budget for the fiscal year starting July 1 proposes to halt the flow of federal funds, there would be enough aid money in the pipeline for libraries to receive $73 million next year and $27 million the year after, officials say. Then zero, if the President prevails.
Mr. Nixon's obvious aim in cutting off aid to libraries – and a lot of other items – is to hold down federal spending. But apart from that, administration officials argue that the aid program, at least for public libraries, has outlived its usefulness. "It's stimulated a lot of state initiative, and we're all proud of it," says John Hughes, acting associate commissioner of education for libraries and learning resources. Due to federal dollars, says an Office of Education budget paper, "today nearly every citizen is in a library service area."
Not so, reply champions of the aid program. "Despite noteworthy progress," Germaine Krettek of the American Library Association testified last year, "an estimated. 20 million Americans are still without access to public library services in their communities."
A CRUCIAL 2 PERCENT
"Stimulate" – Mr. Hughes' word – is an important word, librarians add. They insist that federal dollars are needed to finance the more avant-garde library projects – books by mail, bookmobiles in the ghetto, films and games for non-readers – that cautious state or local officials are reluctant to try until they've proved their worth.
Detroit's public library gets less than 2 % of its money from Uncle Sam, but according to Mr. Croneberger it's a crucial 2%. "Local money is kind of existence money," he says. "The money for any kind of experimental thing has to come from someplace else."
When it comes to college and university libraries, the administration maintains that a $5,000 grant isn't enough to help a poor college much and isn't enough to be noticed by a rich one. So, while proposing to do away with this help. Nixon planners want to double general aid to the neediest "developing" colleges. Eileen Cooke, director of the American Library Association's Washington office, replies that aid even to rich colleges has been useful, since they have been obliged to put up matching sums and to maintain their previous levels of library support.
Basically, Nixon men argue that libraries aren't something the federal government ought to be messing with. Writing in this newspaper recently. Richard Nathan, a former deputy under secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, asserted: "Libraries simply are not a national government responsibility. Books usually stay in the community for loan purposes. This is a good case of a federal program that should be turned back to the states and localities."
To librarians and their supporters, Mr. Nathan is guilty of horse-and-buggy thinking. Modern communications make it possible to send books all over the country with ease. So it's wasteful, say librarians, for every library to try to acquire every book.
"Libraries spent maybe 100 years trying to build up bigger collections," says Charles Stevens, executive director of the National Commission on Libraries and Information Service, a planning group, established by Congress in 1970. "Now library cooperation is on the verge of breaking out and doing what should have been done for the past 30 years." And federal aid is needed for this, it is argued.
Commission member Louis Lerner, who publishes suburban newspapers around Chicago, says 90% of an average library's calls are for 10% of its books. "So libraries are looking for federal money to build regional centers, which would cross state lines, to circulate that other 90% of the books," explains Mr. Lerner, a trustee of the Chicago Public Library.
ROLE OF THE PROPERTY TAX
Congress spoke of "national goals" in setting up the commission, and Mr. Nixon himself, in signing the legislation, said libraries "are among our most precious national resources." The commission recently resolved that "national equality of access to information is as important as equality in education."
Comparing libraries to schools raises an important money question. Like schools, public libraries depend for much of their money on local property taxes. City residents are arguing in court that unequal property tax bases mean unequal education. If the courts strike down the local property tax as a method of financing schools, libraries too may find themselves looking elsewhere for money. "If the property tax is overthrown," says Illinois library director Alphonse Trezza, "what a time for us to face a cutoff of federal funds!"
Nixon administration men maintain that revenue-sharing should provide plenty of money, if librarians will only go after it. Under general revenue-sharing, the federal government is giving the states and localities $30 billion over five years, with few strings attached. Local governments must spend their share on any of nine "priority" activities, one of which is aiding libraries. States can spend their money on anything.
Moreover, Mr. Nixon has asked Congress to replace some 30 "categorical" education programs, including aid to school libraries, with special revenue sharing for education. Schools would get $2.8 billion next year and would have broad discretion in spending it.
OUT OF THE STACKS
The administration view is that school libraries will have a chance to compete for education revenue sharing money just as public libraries already can compete for general revenue-sharing dollars. "Libraries perhaps need to be somewhat more aggressive," says Mr. Hughes of the education office. "Discontinuing their money may add to their desire to be so." That's a polite way of saying what many Nixon men feel: Librarians have got to get out of their musty stacks and get down to city hall and fight for their funds; if libraries can't convince the people they serve that libraries are worth supporting, maybe they're not.
One influential Democrat on Capitol Hill who doesn't buy this argument is Rep. Carl Perkins of Kentucky, chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, which authored the three library programs that the administration proposes to kill. "I deeply regret that there's no money in the budget for libraries," Rep. Perkins told a recent hearing on aid to school libraries. "I want to protect this library program, and I don't know any way to do it except through the categorical approach."
Some librarians have indeed been successful in getting their hands on revenue-sharing dollars, giving some credence to the administration's position. Trustees of Chicago's public library wrote every city alderman, explaining how library services would be cut in his ward unless the city coughed up more money. The result: $1 million in revenue-sharing funds for Chicago libraries. Detroit's public library has obtained $375,000 in revenue-sharing funds this year.
But for Detroit, this isn't quite the windfall it might seem. The city's library system has been ordered to absorb hefty municipal pay increases by laying off employees, and the $375,000 merely permitted them to keep those workers on. Detroit's librarians still insist continuation of direct federal aid is needed to finance their magazine purchases and keep their storefront branches open. In any case, most librarians despair of doing as well as Chicago or Detroit.
"Local demands are so great," says Miss Cooke of the library , association. "They want more police, more fire protection and so forth. The average workingman looks at a library as a luxury ... until he needs a particular piece of information. Then he hollers, 'Why isn't the library open?' "
Mr. Hughes of the education office thinks librarians are throwing in the towel too soon. "It's premature to say that libraries aren't going to fare effectively in the competition for those funds," he says.
In his new budget, President Nixon promises that "the power to make many major decisions and to help meet local needs will be returned to where it belongs – to state and local officials, men – and women accountable to an alert citizenry, and responsive to local conditions and opinions."
But local opinion isn't always friendly toward libraries or the values they stand for, fears Mr. Lerner of Chicago. "In a sense," he says, "the federal government should regard itself as the protector of the sick, the crippled, the blind and ... intellectual values."
AUGUSTA, MAINE,
January 31, 1973.
Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. MUSKIE: I am concerned over the rumor that President Nixon may cut off federal aid to libraries. As a librarian at the Maine State Library, I see some of the ways in which the Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) benefits Maine. Loss of these benefits would be a serious blow to state library services.
To begin with, the LSCA supports five of the eight State Library bookmobiles which serve the numerous small communities which cannot afford their own libraries. These bookmobiles are the only contact some Maine residents have with a library.
Second, the LSCA furnishes materials such as talking books, large print books, and mechanical page turners to the physically handicapped and the elderly. Without these aids, many people in Maine would not be able to enjoy library materials.
Third, the LSCA funds the WATS line and the teletype system, both of which speed interlibrary service by putting libraries throughout the state directly in touch with the State Library.
Loss of LSCA funds would be a real setback for library services throughout the state. Please work to keep funds for libraries in the President's budget.
Sincerely,
MARY SAUNDERS.
BRIDGTON, MAINE,
February 14, 1973.
Senator EDMUND S. MUSKIE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: I am writing to you in regard to the rumored cancellation (LSCA) which would mean no more Bookmobiles. I beg of you to do all you can to keep the Bookmobile in service. My Bookmobile is the Harrison Area #7. I am an 81 year old lady with no immediate living family. I live all alone seven or 8 miles from the village of Bridgton, Maine on a country road in a farm house. Reading is my greatest pleasure and I do a lot of it.
The monthly visit of the Bookmobile is a high spot in my lonely life. I go to the Bookmobile that stops in Denmark, Maine. Besides the books I get from it, is the pleasure of seeing so many children there taking out books. The children come in by the dozens and I observe the books they take out – books on how to make things – on stamp collecting, on aeroplane construction. Many other worthwhile subjects of interest. God only knows they might turn to drugs if we took away the books. We certainly would not want to have that on our conscience.
I beg of you, Senator Muskie, to do all you can to let us keep the Bookmobiles. We have had a particularly terrific rugged winter here in this farming area of Maine. Reading is one of the things that keeps us sane when we are housed in by enormous drifts of snow. I know that I speak for many of your constituents here in Maine. Please help us.
WILHELMINA B. FARRAND.
SMYRNA MILLS, MAINE,
February 14, 1973.
Senator EDMUND S. MUSKIE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: Due to the cutback in federal spending, our five bookmobiles in the state will no longer be in operation after June 30th. I urge you, as a senator of our grand State of Maine, to consider the importance of these bookmobiles. I can see eliminating programs that have not been successful, but bookmobiling has become a "must" for our many rural towns. Circulation has increased immensely over the past 15 years.
I have been associated with the Houlton Bookmobile for over eight years, and I can honestly say bookmobiles perform a public service of immeasurable significance. When we circulate over 60,000 books a year, it's a good indication that these traveling libraries are serving a worthwhile purpose.
I'm sure you're familiar with towns such as Danforth, Brookton, Bridgewater, Linneus, Smyrna Mills, Oakfield, Crystal, Benedicta, Sherman Station, Stacyville, Medway, Springfield, Winn, Carroll, and many others. Why deprive the people of these small rural towns a service that is so beneficial to them?
I wish you could witness the experience of driving into a school yard, and seeing children "peeking" out the windows, with big smiles all over their faces, and lips in movement, saying "Here comes the bookmobile!" It's a joy that is hard to express.
Please, I urge you again, to weigh the importance of the bookmobiles in our hundreds of Maine towns. Let's not take away something that is so vital to our people – young and old. Keep bookmobiles alive!
Very truly yours,
Mrs. WILLIAM BRYANT.
EDITH A. LOMBARD SCHOOL,
Springfield, Maine
February 7, 1973.
Senator EDMUND MUSKIE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: We are unhappy that President Nixon is planning to remove library assistance funds.
Because we do not have a library, it is not easy for us to get reading materials. We would be very pleased if we could continue having our bookmobile. Please help us.
Sincerely,
DAWN THOMPSON,
Fifth Grade Class.
In the manner of the "Declaration of Independence," we affix our signatures.
Carolyn Stevens, Hubert C. Aldrich, Cynthia Purinton, Scot Averill, Melanie Gordon, Holly Jacob, Gail Worster by E. W. in her absence, and Kevin Ham, Graylin Toby, Dane Glidden, Scott Seibrer.
Guy Stevens, Charles Lowell, Kelly Mute, Shelly Ham, Dawn Thompson, Phyllis Stevens, Michael Cramer, Pamela Doane, Paula Dicker, Kendall MacDonald, and Mr Erroll Woodward, Teacher Principal.
FEBRUARY 15, 1973.
Senator E. S. MUSKIE,
Senate Office Bldg.,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: We are a small island community (three villages), a few miles off the coast of Mt. Desert on Swans Is.
Our communities and school have been serviced by the Bookmobile Library once a month for the past few years. This service has become a very welcomed and important part of our lives especially during the long winter months.
We now understand that the funds paying for 3/4 of this service through the Library Services and Construction Act may be discontinued due to new cut backs in the Federal Budget.
We urge you to do all you can to prevent this or to find some other source of funding to continue this service to such isolated communities such as we are.
Need it be brought to your attention what this would mean to our already culturally deprived community?
Sincerely,
MRS. MARSHALL P. BAILEY.
CITY OF SOUTH PORTLAND, MAINE,
January 24,1973.
Hon. EDMUNDS. MUSKIE,
U.S. Senate,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: I have been very much perturbed by the fact that the FY Labor-HEW Appropriation Bill has twice been vetoed. My chief interest has been in the fate of the Library Services and Construction Act. Maine's libraries have been suffering from acute starvation for many years as documented by the Governor's Task Force on Library Services in Maine. The Library Services and Construction Act has provided a little badly needed nourishment since its inception in 1956. If this bill is not passed and funded Maine libraries will return to the pallid and undernourished condition of the pre-1956 era, With one difference only. People are beginning to know they are missing something.
Practically every improvement made during the last 15 years has been the result of federal funding.
If the Library Services and Construction Act is not passed the following services will be lost:
1. Bookmobile services to the 250 Maine towns that have no library.
2. State library loans of books and materials to individuals and libraries throughout the state.
3. Free cataloging services for books published within the last two years.
4. The publication "Downeast Newsletter."
5. State wide library public relations program.
6. Free films for use for library programs or for other programs in the community.
7. Talking book service to the blind.
8. Materials and mechanical aids, such as page turners, magnifier view tables, etc., for the visually and physically handicapped.
9. Advisory service to institutional libraries.
10. Special programs, such as the mobile library services to the disadvantaged residents in Portland and the service to the shut-in elderly in Lewiston.
11. Money for the construction of badly needed library buildings.
12. A telephone-teletype network which enables a library to locate any book in the state for one of their borrowers. The book is then sent to the library for the use of the said borrower.
13. Special workshops and training sessions provided by the State Library for public librarians.
14. Publishing of the Directory of Special Subject Resources in Maine so that borrowers may know where to locate special subject materials.
15. 53 per cent of the State Library budget and 60 per cent of their staff are funded by the Library Services and Construction Act. State library service will be drastically curtailed if no federal money is forthcoming.
16. In the Greater Portland area, libraries from eleven cities and towns have combined with the PRIME Resource Center in Portland to provide films, filmstrips, records, cassettes, tapes, graphic arts equipment, etc., to the libraries and organizations in these towns. The federal money that supported this venture came from the Library Services and Construction Act. This pilot project seems to be in danger of rapid extinction due to lack of funds.
Despite library requests, I do not know of one library that seems likely to benefit from the revenue sharing monies.
Knowing of your concern for education and libraries, I feel sure that you would be interested in our concern about the fate of the Library Services and Construction Act.
Sincerely yours,
ANN STINSON,
Director, South Portland Public Library.