U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

74–234 2012

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS: ENSURING CONTINUITY 

AND EFFICIENCY DURING LEADERSHIP TRANSITIONS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

Held in Washington, DC, April 18, 2012 

Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration 

( 

Available on the Internet: 

www.fdsys.gov 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California, Chairman 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

PHIL GINGREY, M.D., Georgia 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

TODD ROKITA, Indiana 

RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania, 

Ranking Minority Member 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

PHILIP KIKO, Staff Director & General Counsel 

JAMIE FLEET, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

PHIL GINGREY, M.D., Georgia, Chairman 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida 

TODD ROKITA, Indiana 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS: ENSURING CONTINUITY AND EFFICIENCY DURING LEADERSHIP TRANSITIONS 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 2012 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:12 a.m., in Room 

1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Phil Gingrey [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Gingrey, Rokita, Nugent, and Lofgren. 

Staff Present: Peter Schalestock, Deputy General Counsel; 

Kimani Little, Parliamentarian; Joe Wallace, Legislative Clerk; 

Yael Barash, Assistant Legislative Clerk; Salley Wood, Communications Director; Linda Ulrich, Director of Oversight; Dominic 

Storelli, Oversight Staff; Bob Sensenbrenner, Elections Counsel; 

Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff Director; Matt Pinkus, Minority Senior 

Policy Analyst; Matt Defreitas, Minority Professional Staff; Mike 

Harrison, Minority Professional Staff; and Greg Abbott, Minority 

Professional Staff. 

Mr. GINGREY. I now call to order the Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight for today’s hearing on 

the Library of Congress. 

The hearing record will remain open for 5 legislative days so that 

Members may submit any materials that they wish to be included 

therein. 

Mr. GINGREY. A quorum is present, so we may proceed. The witnesses may take their seats. Thank you. 

Due to some technical difficulties, we are not able to broadcast 

today’s hearing. We are hoping that that will be corrected before 

the hearing is over. 

Is it—are we up and running now? 

Okay. Forget this note. We are live. 

Established in 1800 to serve Congress, the Library is the world’s 

largest, with over 150 million items in its collections. In fiscal year 

2011 alone, it received 763,000 congressional reference requests 

and delivered to Congress more than 1 million research products. 

The four service units before us today represent arguably the 

core of the Library. The Law Library; the Congressional Research 

Service, CRS; the Copyright Office; and Library Services fulfill 

vital needs and services to this Congress and to the American people. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

The Law Library ensures Congress has the necessary documents 

for domestic and international legal sources that it needs for its deliberations. The Congressional Research Service has the important 

responsibility of assisting Congress in researching the legislative 

issues before it in a nonpartisan and objective fashion. 

The Copyright Office, responsible for our national copyright system, processes approximately 670,000 registration applications annually. It is also responsible for adjudicating copyright disputes, 

making its services indispensable to United States industries relying on the protection of their intellectual property. 

Library Services oversees the backbone of the Library. It is 

charged with maintaining the world’s largest collection. This unit 

is responsible for acquisitions and all cataloguing. 

However, in this fiscal environment, the Library has seen its 

budget reduced. Like the rest of this country and this Congress, it 

has been forced to increase operational efficiency while maintaining 

the ability to serve its core function and its clients. 

Today, we look forward to hearing from these four service unit 

leaders, all of whom arrived recently in their positions. These four 

units of the Library comprise almost 70 percent of the Library’s 

budget. Thus, it will be important to hear from our witnesses how 

they are managing these resources, how they are finding greater 

efficiencies, and how they will continue to meet their collective and 

individual missions in the future. 

I want to thank each of my colleagues for being here today. 

I would now like to recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren from California, for the 

purpose of providing an opening statement. 

Ranking Member Lofgren. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Chairman Gingrey. And I would ask 

unanimous consent that my full statement be made a part of the 

record. 

Mr. GINGREY. Without objection. 

Ms. LOFGREN. I would simply say that, of course, we all appreciate the work that the employees of the Library of Congress do 

every day on behalf not only of the Congress but of the American 

people. 

I think this oversight hearing is an important one. As we know, 

Dr. Billington has been the Librarian since 1987. He has outlasted 

four U.S. Presidents. And there have been a high number of turnovers, as you have mentioned, at the division level. With so many 

divisions in a state of transition, I think it is a good time for us 

to check in to learn the vision of each of them and to make sure 

that they are in accord with the vision that the Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has on behalf of the Nation. 

So I look forward to the hearing, and thank you for holding this. 

I think it is an important one. And it is the first one we have had 

in all the years I have been on the committee. 

So I yield back. 

Mr. GINGREY. I thank the ranking member. 

Mr. GINGREY. Any other members of the committee have an 

opening statement? 

Okay, I would like now to introduce our witnesses. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

David Mao became the 23rd Law Librarian of Congress on January the 4th this year. Before being appointed by Dr. Billington, Librarian Mao had been the Deputy Law Librarian since June of 

2010. Prior to coming to the Law Library, Mr. Mao had a 5-year 

tenure in the Congressional Research Service. He held positions at 

Georgetown University and practiced law. He earned his library 

degree from the Catholic University of America. 

Dr. Mary Mazanec was appointed Director of the Congressional 

Research Service on December the 5th, 2011. Dr. Mazanec had 

been Acting Director of CRS and has advanced degrees in law and 

medicine. 

Congratulations. 

From 2002 to 2010, she worked with the United States Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, where she served most 

recently as a Deputy Assistant Secretary and director of the Office 

of Medicine, Science, and Public Health. Dr. Mazanec has been a 

Robert Wood Johnson Health Policy Fellow and a senior policy analyst at the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, MedPAC. She 

received her doctor of medicine from Case Western Reserve University Medical School and a juris doctorate from Case Western Reserve University Law School. 

Maria Pallante was appointed the 12th Register of Copyrights 

and Director of the United States Copyright Office last June. Register Pallante has held several key positions within the Copyright 

Office. She has been Acting Register, the Associate Register of Policy and International Affairs, deputy general counsel, and policy 

advisor. In addition, she was intellectual property counsel and director of the licensing group at the Guggenheim Museums. 

Last but not least, Roberta Shaffer is the Associate Librarian for 

Library Services. A former Fulbright Senior Scholar, Ms. Shaffer 

has had a distinguished career as a practicing librarian and as a 

library science educator. Prior to being appointed, Ms. Shaffer 

served as Mr. Mao’s predecessor as the 22nd Law Librarian. Associate Librarian Shaffer has also been the executive director of the 

Library’s Federal Library and Information Network. 

We thank you all for being here today. The committee has received your written testimonies, and at the appropriate time, I will 

recognize each of you for 5 minutes to present a summary of that 

submission. 

To help you keep time, we have a timing device near the witness 

table. I don’t think I have yet figured out quite how to use it, so 

I will try to be rather generous in the 5 minutes. The device is supposed to emit a green light for 4 minutes, and then it turns yellow 

for 1 minute. When the light turns red, it means that your time 

has expired—the gentlewoman’s or the gentleman’s time has expired. I have just got kind of a light gavel. I have never used it 

before, so we will be okay with you. 

Law Librarian Mao, we will start with you, and would you please 

proceed with your testimony. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

STATEMENTS OF DAVID S. MAO, LAW LIBRARIAN, LAW LIBRARY OF CONGRESS; MARY B. MAZANEC, DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE; MARIA A. PALLANTE, 

REGISTER OF COPYRIGHTS, U.S. COPYRIGHT OFFICE; ROBERTA I. SHAFFER, ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN FOR LIBRARY 

SERVICES, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

STATEMENT OF DAVID S. MAO 

Mr. MAO. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lofgren, and members of the 

subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to speak about leadership transition in the Law Library of Congress. 

Although only in the position since January, I am nearing 7 

years of service in the Library of Congress and have seen a reenergized and revitalized Law Library emerge under the direction of 

my predecessor, Roberta Shaffer. I have assumed the leadership of 

a service unit with unique collections and expertise that not only 

plays a vital role in supporting the work of Congress but also advances the knowledge of laws and legal information worldwide. 

The highest priority of the Law Library is to provide the Congress with timely, authoritative, and confidential foreign legal analysis and information. For example, in 2011, the Law Library staff 

prepared many legal research reports, special studies, and memoranda in response to congressional inquiries. More specifically, foreign law specialists and analysts provided foreign and comparative 

law reports related to a range of current U.S. legislative issues, including banking, citizenship, immigration, taxation, and terrorism. 

Current priorities during this fiscal year include working with 

other organizations within the Library to design the next-generation Legislative Information System. Additionally, the Law Library 

is collaborating with other parts of the Library and external entities regarding the digitization of historical legislative documents. 

The Law Library’s Reading Room is currently undergoing a renovation that will include technologies so that clients may better access virtual collections and utilize improved study space to access 

physical collections. In the renovated Reading Room, Law Library 

staff will be able to train Members and staff on THOMAS, give topical seminars and offer briefings on a wide range of foreign legal 

issues. 

Later this year, the Law Library will launch law.gov as it pursues a long-term strategic plan aligned with Library of Congresswide digital initiatives which will afford Congress and other constituents the benefits of more timely, targeted, and complete legal 

knowledge. 

Going forward, in fiscal year 2013, the Law Library will continue 

to classify the 800,000 volumes to Class K to the extent the budget 

will allow. 

Working within the broader Library of Congress Web enhancement process, the Law Library will continue to establish law.gov as 

the vehicle for providing access to digital legal information. Together with other library service units, the Law Library also will 

continue to coordinate training that the Law Library provides to 

the Congress and staff. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

The Law Library’s priorities are not without fiscal constraints 

and challenges, however. Reduction in the Library of Congress 

budget hampers creation of a workforce with the skills necessary 

to implement the envisioned future mission of the Law Library. Because the Law Library relies heavily on contractors, a reduced 

budget means bids for contractual services with decreased labor 

hours, which lead to lower collection maintenance activity levels 

and a decreased ability to preserve a backlog of official foreign nations’ laws, regulations, and legal information published exclusively 

in newspaper form. 

The Law Library also lacks storage space for its vast collections, 

which significantly impedes the Law Library’s ability to maintain 

a comprehensive and current legal collection. Moreover, the Law 

Library is currently able to house less than 50 percent of its rare 

items in storage conditions that meet Library of Congress security 

requirements. To provide proper security as well as environmental 

controls for this material, a new vault for Law Library rare materials must be constructed in the Madison Building. 

Despite the challenges that it faces, the Law Library will continue to provide the Congress with accurate, authoritative, and 

timely foreign legal analysis and will continue to acquire, preserve, 

and make accessible world-class legal collections. In a budget-constrained environment, the Law Library will leverage all Library of 

Congress resources and collaborate both internally and externally 

to ensure that it maintains the highest-quality staff and delivers 

products and services efficiently and in a cost-efficient manner. The 

Law Library of Congress is committed to maintaining its unique 

role as a leader for the world’s legal and information communities. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I thank you 

again for the opportunity to testify today. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Mr. Mao. 

[The statement of Mr. Mao follows:] 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 18 here 74234A.001
7 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 19 here 74234A.002
8 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 20 here 74234A.003
9 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 21 here 74234A.004
10 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 22 here 74234A.005
11 

Mr. GINGREY. Dr. Mazanec. 

STATEMENT OF MARY B. MAZANEC 

Dr. MAZANEC. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lofgren, and 

members of the subcommittee, I, too, want to thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Congressional 

Research Service of the Library of Congress. 

I am honored to have been appointed the CRS Director by Dr. 

Billington last December. My transition to the Director of CRS has 

been seamless, due in large part to the excellent, dedicated, and 

talented staff working at all levels throughout the Service. 

My vision is that CRS remains Congress’ primary source for the 

analysis and information that it needs to perform its legislative 

functions. As you recall, CRS’s work is driven by the core values 

of timeliness, authoritativeness, objectivity, balance, confidentiality, 

and nonpartisanship. 

CRS recently completed its annual legislative planning process, 

identifying over 160 issues before Congress and organizing its product line and its Web resources around those issues. We have also 

met with the leadership offices to ensure that CRS is well positioned to support Congress’ legislative agenda. 

Additionally, in conjunction with this committee, we are beginning our planning for the CRS Seminar for New Members of the 

113th Congress. The last seminar was attended by a record number of new House Members, and we expect another productive exchange with the freshman class of the next Congress. 

Looking back over last year, in fiscal year 2011, CRS completed 

more than 760,000 responses and services for Members and committees. This number includes analysis and information requests, 

product requests, electronic services, and seminars. 

Since becoming Director, I have made it one of my top priorities 

to meet personally with Members, committees, and senior congressional staff. The purpose of these meetings is to elicit feedback and 

suggestions about how we are serving the Congress and how we 

can do our job better and more efficiently. Since the beginning of 

the 112th Congress, I have held meetings with nearly 30 Members 

and 85 senior staffers. The meetings have reaffirmed the findings 

of the 2010 Customer Satisfaction Study, which found that a majority of CRS clients are very satisfied with our products and the services that we provide. But there is always room for improvement, 

and we can do better. 

Since becoming Director, I have also sought the input of CRS 

staff at all levels, initiating a series of open staff meetings and 

brown bag lunches, inviting staff to raise questions and concerns 

and to brainstorm with me and offer ideas about how we can do 

our work better and more efficiently. In addition, on a regular basis 

I meet with the president of the Congressional Research Employees 

Association. 

Turning to fiscal considerations, I am continuously examining 

our budget priorities, and I have directed my senior management 

team to review our current organization to determine where we can 

continue to achieve efficiencies and synergies between offices and 

divisions. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

CRS is operating at its lowest staff level in more than 3 decades. 

As of March 31st, 2012, CRS had 618 employees, a decline of 53 

persons in the last 2 years. Although this decrease in manpower 

means that the service has limited flexibility to develop new analytical capacity in increasingly complex areas such as health care, 

energy development, military weaponry, and financial regulation, I 

am focused on maintaining the highest level of service for the Congress. To this end, one of my top priorities is to strategically reshape the workforce, while maintaining broad analytical capacity. 

CRS will continue to work with its congressional clients to scope 

out and prioritize needs and to meet these needs in a timely manner. 

While we are operating under increased budget pressure, especially in technology and research materials, we recognize that it is 

not just our analysis that we provide, but it is also how we provide 

it to a 21st-century Congress. Our technology needs to evolve as 

Congress has evolved. And we are committed to making improvements in this area. 

In closing, I want to thank you once again for this invitation to 

appear before you. Together with my colleagues at the Library, we 

are ready to serve the Congress and the legislative process, and I 

look forward to working with you. 

Thank you. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Dr. Mazanec. 

[The statement of Dr. Mazanec follows:] 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
13 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 27 here 74234A.006
14 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 28 here 74234A.007
15 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 29 here 74234A.008
16 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 30 here 74234A.009
17 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 31 here 74234A.010
18 

Mr. GINGREY. Ms. Pallante. 

STATEMENT OF MARIA A. PALLANTE 

Ms. PALLANTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lofgren, Mr. Nugent, I also 

want to thank you for the invitation to appear today. 

I also want to apologize for my voice. I was traveling last week 

and unfortunately came back with an ill-timed head cold. And—— 

Mr. GINGREY. It sounds great. Proceed. 

Ms. PALLANTE [continuing]. I took a lot of cold medicine, so let’s 

see what that does to me. 

I also want to correct a typo in my written statement. It states 

that my predecessor retired on December 31st, 2011, but in fact it 

was 2010. 

At the outset, I would like to say what a tremendous privilege 

it is to serve as the Register of Copyrights at this point in time. 

The registration and the recordation functions of the office have become critically important to the public. At the same time, the legal 

framework by which authors create and disseminate their works 

and libraries and members of the public access them requires updating for the online environment. 

When Dr. Billington appointed me to the position last year, I was 

quite honored by his trust in me and deeply appreciative of the opportunity to serve the Library, the Congress, the copyright community, and the public. I am joined at the office by a very talented 

staff, many of whom have specialized knowledge and training. I respect and admire them for their dedication to the Nation. 

I also have tremendous respect for the position that I hold, and 

I am aware of the legacies of those who have served as Register 

before me. Ms. Peters directed the office for 16 years and served 

on the staff for more than 40. Other Registers have served fewer 

years but during critical periods of policy reform. In fact, every 

Register since 1897 has had to navigate a complex combination of 

policy and operations issues, and this has already proven to be the 

case for me as well. 

Since my appointment in June, my colleagues and I have been 

extremely busy on two fronts: first, meeting the day-to-day demands of our public services and policy duties under the statute; 

and, second, evaluating our core operations in preparation for the 

future. 

The registration and recordation programs of the Copyright Office form the largest public database of copyright information in the 

world—information that is helpful to commerce, to innovation, and 

to licensing. That said, unlike the patent system, registration in 

the copyright context is not required as a condition of legal protection under the law. It is therefore necessary to review the legal incentives that we provide to authors to entice them to participate 

in the system and to analyze and properly calibrate the office’s fees 

for services so as not to dissuade registration. 

Last October, I released a 2-year plan entitled ′′Priorities and 

Special Projects of the U.S. Copyright Office.′′ This document transparently describes our workload, including trade and policy work, 

and reflects our commitment to prepare for future challenges, including in the registration system. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
19 

In addition to our normal workload, we have 10 special committees working on issues that are pertinent to the future, on which 

hundreds of employees from across departments are working collaboratively. I want to underscore what that really means at a staff 

level. In an environment where people are already doing more than 

their share, I have asked them, as the new Register, to do even 

more. And they have responded with enthusiasm and pride. Many 

of the projects will require a multiyear commitment and sustained 

funding if implemented. Others are entrepreneurial and could lead 

to partnerships with the private sector. 

In summary, my vision for the U.S. Copyright Office is to position it to be highly efficient and effective over the next several decades. To do this, we have five challenges. We must first attract and 

retain a skilled and experienced staff, especially in law and information technology. Second, we must make technical improvements 

to the registration and recordation systems, while updating the underlying legal incentives. Third, we must redesign both the presentation and the usability of our public databases and records. 

Fourth, we must fulfill the education and training activities that 

are expected of the office. And, fifth, we must continue to serve the 

Congress and departments in the executive branch through policy 

expertise as required by the Copyright Act. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the subcommittee’s interest in the U.S. Copyright Office, and I would be 

happy to answer any questions. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Ms. Pallante. 

[The statement of Ms. Pallante follows:] 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
20 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 36 here 74234A.011
21 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 37 here 74234A.012
22 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 38 here 74234A.013
23 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 39 here 74234A.014
24 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 40 here 74234A.015
25 

Mr. GINGREY. And, Ms. Shaffer, tell us about Library Services. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERTA I. SHAFFER 

Ms. SHAFFER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will gladly do that. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lofgren, subcommittee members, thank you for the opportunity to discuss my transition to Associate Librarian for Library Services and an overview of my unit. 

I am no stranger to the Library. Preparation for my current position began over 30 years ago when I first came to the Library as 

a law student. At that point, I resolved that I would someday return in a leadership role. Now, as Associate Librarian for Library 

Services, I am humbled by the responsibility of the job I have held 

for just over 100 days and always try to harken back to my own 

experiences as a library customer. 

I am grateful to Dr. Billington, Librarian of Congress, for his 

confidence in my leadership abilities, the Library Services staff for 

their support and commitment to the Library, and my peer group 

here for their collegiality. We all work closely together with the Librarian and Chief of Staff to provide services to the American people, your constituents, and to position the Library for its long-term 

viability. 

Library Services is the largest organizational unit, with a staff 

of approximately 1,500, 40 percent of the total headcount, and 42 

divisions. It is responsible for the Library’s vast collections. Fourpoint-seven million items were just added within the year. As well, 

Library Services selected from copyright receipts, one important 

source of collections, more than 700,000 copies of works with a net 

value of $31 million. 

Some 11,000 new items from all sources come into the Library 

each day. Library Services acquires materials, catalogues them, 

makes them accessible, and preserves them. Staff helps the Library’s users navigate these collections. They answer questions in 

person, over the phone, via the Internet, mail, virtually all means 

of inquiry. 

In 2011, we provided reference services directly to more than half 

a million individuals. The high demand for our resources is also 

underscored by the fact that the Library’s Web site had 512 million 

page views last year. 

Part of planning for the future is anticipating needs of users 

within the context of a rapidly changing technological landscape. 

As the world’s best source of authoritative and authentic information, the Library of Congress can be an integral part of everyday 

life wherever and whenever information is deployed, except when 

driving. 

From my perspective, I see a number of challenges before us. 

First, space: finding and properly managing space for our constantly expanding collection and format. Second, acquiring material 

that spans the ages and all disciplines in almost all languages— 

over 460 at last count—and collecting from remote but strategic regions, where our six overseas offices play a critical role. Third, retaining a topflight staff with appropriate subject matter, technical, 

and linguistic expertise in sufficient number to meet the ever-growing need for their unique knowledge. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
26 

The Library has always operated in a no-frills environment, 

where the love of learning and its mission are our best recruitment 

and retention levers. But we must be able to give staff the necessary tools to do the best job possible and to keep their knowledge 

and skills at the cutting edge. Fourth, we must be opportunistic 

when unique materials are made available to us and mindful that 

gaps in knowledge are difficult to fill after the fact and even more 

so in a digital age. 

Finally, we must be able to protect the collections from 

vulnerabilities, including threats from environmental degradation 

caused by improper housing conditions and barriers caused by 

changes in technology. Played any eight-track tapes lately? 

Meeting these challenges is crucial to remaining on the visionary 

course Dr. Billington has set for us and the United States Congress 

has encouraged and enabled for over 200 years. The idea of the Library of Congress began with Thomas Jefferson and our other 

Founding Fathers, James Madison and John Adams, who envisioned even in our Nation’s infancy the uniquely American concept 

of a universal collection that embodies the Library of Congress as 

we know it today. 

Thomas Jefferson said, ‘‘There is in fact no subject to which a 

Member of Congress may not have the occasion to refer.’’ At a time 

when this concept is increasingly prophetic, it would be impossible 

to sustain for Congress and the Nation the knowledge base needed 

to be creative and competitive in this information-driven, globalized 

century as budget reductions affect, but we hope only temporarily, 

our ability to acquire, make available, and preserve our collections. 

Thank you. 

Mr. GINGREY. Ms. Shaffer, thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Shaffer follows:] 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
27 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 45 here 74234A.016
28 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 46 here 74234A.017
29 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 47 here 74234A.018
30 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 48 here 74234A.019
31 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 49 here 74234A.020
32 

Mr. GINGREY. And I thank all of the witnesses. 

We now have time for committee members to ask questions of 

the witnesses. Each Member is allotted 5 minutes to question you. 

To help us keep track of time, we will also use the timing device 

on the witness table. We will alternate back and forth between the 

majority and minority. And I will begin and recognize myself for 

5 minutes. 

Excuse me. Ms. Pallante, I think I must have caught the same 

bug that you did. We won’t copyright our voices this morning. 

Thank you. 

Ms. Lofgren has just given me a good little lozenge, so maybe 

that will help me through. 

And I will ask this question to start, and, Ms. Shaffer, with you, 

since you are warmed up and all ready to go. From fiscal year 2011 

to fiscal year 2012, the Library of Congress absorbed a 6.6 percent 

budget reduction. I don’t have to tell you guys that. The Library 

conducted a voluntary separation incentive program to achieve this 

reduction. 

In this fiscal environment, how is your service doing more with 

less? That is a question for each one of the four of you. And have 

you observed from your position that the budget cuts are affecting 

your ability to produce the quality of work required by us, the Congress? 

Ms. Shaffer. 

Ms. SHAFFER. I would say that these budget cuts, at least at this 

time, have had the effect of causing us in a very good way to collaborate more with each other as well as with entities around the 

country and around the world. And so they have enabled us to step 

into more leadership roles within Library of Congress, helping to 

set standards and work in collaborative and cooperative acquisition 

programs. 

One of the things that we have noticed, however, is that the impact could very soon appear in our collections. As I mentioned in 

my testimony, both written and oral, it is very difficult, once you 

are unable to acquire materials, to then fill in those gaps. And this 

is our biggest concern for a short-term, hopefully, reduction that 

could actually have a very long-term impact. 

Mr. GINGREY. Ms. Shaffer, thank you. 

Ms. Pallante. Turn on your mike, please. 

Ms. PALLANTE. We have had a 22.7 reduction over the last couple 

of years and lost about 10 percent of our workforce. So, in some 

ways, that is never a good result. In other ways, because I am new 

and would have undertaken an evaluation regardless, the timing is 

acceptable, in that I need to figure out how to plan for the future. 

So we have kept our heads above water, in that we have kept 

the backlog at bay with registrations. What we are not doing is effectively maintaining our IT system, which underpins the entire 

electronic registration system. And we are not doing a lot of innovative projects that we are expected to do going forward. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Ms. Pallante. 

Dr. Mazanec. 

Dr. MAZANEC. First of all, I am committed to maintaining the 

quality of service to Congress. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
33 

We are taking measures to work through the budget cuts. We are 

maintaining our analytical capacity on all the issues by asking analysts and attorneys and IPs (information professionals) to broaden 

their portfolios, take on new issues. But it does take time to get 

up to speed on those issues. We are also looking to take advantage 

of technology and to use it to create efficiencies and to make our 

service to Congress as effective as what it has been in the past. 

Longer term, we will have to strategically think about how we 

want to reshape the workforce for a 21st-century Congress. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Dr. Mazanec. 

Mr. Mao. 

Mr. MAO. Thank you. 

As Ms. Shaffer mentioned, the collections are of utmost importance to us in the Law Library and Library as a whole. And, yes, 

declining budgets will have an effect on the ability for us to acquire 

materials from around the world. That is one of the last places we 

would look to cut if we had to, because it is so important to keep 

that consistency and maintain the collections. 

The difficulty for us has been in retaining staff in certain areas. 

Last year, as part of the retirement program, for example, we had 

a senior specialist covering the area of Canadian law for us retire. 

And in the meantime, we have not been able to hire behind him 

to fill that position. So we have been relying on others among our 

foreign law specialists who have similar jurisdiction—— 

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Mao, thank you. I don’t mean to cut you off, 

but in my remaining time I did want to ask a question of Dr. 

Mazanec. 

Dr. Mazanec, CRS serves as the research arm of Congress and 

is tasked with providing objective, authoritative, and timely research. You state in your written testimony that one of the core 

values of CRS is nonpartisanship. 

Dr. MAZANEC. Uh-huh. 

Mr. GINGREY. How do you, as head of CRS, attempt to ensure 

that the analysts are preparing reports that are, to the greatest extent possible, objective and free of any bias, any partisanship? 

Dr. MAZANEC. Thank you for this question. 

CRS takes several steps throughout the preparation of our products to ensure objectivity and to be true to our core values. At the 

very start, during the conceptualization phase, we involve analysts 

from across the service so that we get all the issues, all the different options identified. We then seek out and only use authoritative source material, which we draw from the Library. We leverage the Library resources. 

And, finally, we have a very rigorous review process that consists 

of four different levels, starting with peer review, then research 

section review, then division review, and then finally agency review. As an additional check, on some reports we ask experts outside of CRS to look at near-final text to make sure that it is technically accurate. 

We also try to foster a culture of objectivity and balance, both in 

how we train and work with our colleagues but also in some of the 

policies that we have in place. 

Mr. GINGREY. Dr. Mazanec, thank you. I have been a little generous with myself there and went over. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
34 

Before I yield to the ranking member, let me tell my colleagues, 

since there are only three of us here—hopefully more Members who 

had conflicts with other committee hearings and markups going on 

simultaneously to this hearing—if we don’t have any other Members come, we will have a second round. So be thinking about that 

as you frame your questions. 

I now yield to the ranking member, my colleague, Ms. Lofgren, 

for 5 minutes. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Pallante, according to the information provided to the committee by the Library, you took a trip to Los Angeles in November 

of last year, and during that trip you met with motion picture studio lawyers. Now, 1 day after you returned from L.A., you testified 

before the House Judiciary Committee about the Stop Online Piracy Act and essentially endorsed the bill. 

SOPA was an extreme measure which blindly pursued copyright 

enforcement at the expense of many other considerations. And, of 

course, as we are all aware, the bill sparked massive protests from, 

some have said, 14 million Americans, and the bill did not proceed. 

Did you discuss SOPA in your meeting with the motion picture 

studio lawyers? Who attended the meeting? What subjects were 

discussed? What was the substance of the discussion? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Thank you, Ranking Member. 

Yes, in fact, that trip was cut short because of the hearing; I had 

to return early. I was out there for a bar association meeting, and 

whenever I am out anywhere in any city other than Washington, 

I try to do side meetings to maximize my time. 

So, in that case, that was a meeting that we set up—my general 

counsel and my associate register were with me—for the purpose 

of reaching beyond the trade associations that normally visit us in 

Washington. So this is something that I have been advised to do 

in getting advice as a new Register. Make sure you meet with the 

members of associations, not just the associations and the government relations people. 

So, in that meeting, we talked primarily about the Priorities and 

Special Projects document—— 

Ms. LOFGREN. Who attended the meetings? 

Ms. PALLANTE. There were member company business lawyers 

there. So the lawyers of Warner Brothers, the lawyers of Paramount, the lawyers of major studios. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Would you provide later—obviously you don’t recall the names, and that is fine. If you could provide a list of all 

the attendees at that meeting after this hearing, that would be 

helpful. 

Ms. PALLANTE. Yes, certainly. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Now, did you discuss SOPA at that meeting? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Well, again, we discussed the Priorities and Special Projects document and rogue Web sites because it was a priority for the leadership of Judiciary as one of the priorities that I 

have had to make my own. And so, yes, in that context it would 

have been one of many things we discussed. 

Ms. LOFGREN. In recent remarks published by the American Bar 

Association, you said the following: ‘‘Copyright is for the author 

first and the Nation second,’’. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
35 

Now, this comment attracted quite a bit of attention among some 

people, especially my constituents in Silicon Valley. And it seems 

to me, when you look at the Constitution, which empowers Congress to grant exclusive rights in creative works in order, and I 

quote, ‘‘to promote the progress of science and the useful arts,’’ it 

seems to me the Constitution is very clear that copyright does not 

exist inherently for the author but for the benefit of society at 

large. 

Now, I am concerned when any public official, especially one in 

charge of regulation of a particular industry or area of law, seems 

to favor particular stakeholders in that very industry. We would be 

alarmed, for example, if the Chairman of the FCC said the Telecommunications Act was for the telecom companies first and the 

Nation second. And it is not clear to me how your statement, if it 

was accurately reported, is any different. 

So could you tell us what you meant by this statement and how 

this principle guides your work as Register? 

Ms. PALLANTE. I would be delighted to. Thank you. 

So when I took the job, I was required to take an oath to uphold 

the Constitution and the laws of the United States. The constitutional clause to promote the progress of science and the useful arts, 

works in part by, ‘‘securing for limited times to authors their respective writings and discoveries.’’ 

What I was doing in that interview—and you have extracted one 

sentence from a four-page interview—was making the point that 

the Supreme Court has interpreted that clause, including in two recent decisions, Eldred and Golan in the last year, that the limited 

monopoly goes first to authors so that they will produce so that, in 

the end, the public will benefit. 

Ms. LOFGREN. I think that is a real misstatement of the Eldred 

case. The Eldred case basically had to do with the jurisdiction of 

Congress. It didn’t find that the benefit was to authors instead of 

society. It basically was a finding that Congress was not limited by 

the words ‘‘for limited periods’’ for the extreme measure that we 

have done now, life of the author plus 70 years. 

Let me ask you this. According to the information—well, my time 

has expired, Mr. Chairman. I will ask my other questions at the 

second round. 

Mr. GINGREY. I thank the ranking member for yielding back. And 

I will now call on my colleague from Florida, Mr. Nugent, for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. NUGENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I want to thank you all for being here today. What a great 

group that we have, particularly with your background and experiences. 

But CRS, obviously, to Members of Congress—I was first initiated back as a freshman during that training period. And we have 

reached out to CRS on a number of issues, and we have been very 

satisfied with the response from the Library of Congress and CRS 

in particular. 

But my question to you is, as we move forward, your relationship, CRS’s relationship with the executive branch, have you been 

receiving all the information that we request in a timely manner? 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
36 

Dr. MAZANEC. The simplest answer is no. In a month’s period, 

approximately two to four times we have difficulty getting information from executive branch agencies. They either refuse to provide 

us with the information or they give us incomplete or out-of-date 

information. Or they will ask us who the information is for and 

how it is going to be used, and we feel that by revealing that to 

them that would breach our value of confidentiality. 

Right now, the current status of our authority is derived from 

the chair of the committee. We are agents of the committee, and 

that is how it has been interpreted. So that leaves out the ranking 

member and the other members of the committee and Members in 

their own right. 

So there is—Representative Schock has a pending bill that would 

give the Director of CRS the authority to seek information directly 

from the executive branch agencies if it is to respond to a request 

from a Member and if the Member approves. We think that this 

would make us better able to serve the Congress so that we can 

continue to provide a comprehensive, authoritative product to the 

Congress. 

Mr. NUGENT. I would think that it shouldn’t matter what Member it is for or who it is for, because you are really trying to give 

an independent, nonpartisan response. And that is all I ask for. 

And I would think, no matter what side, whether it is majority or 

minority, we want to make sure that we get authoritative, you 

know, in regards to a response, so we can make decisions as we 

move forward on legislation. And that really is a nonpartisan issue. 

And I know this is Mr. Schock’s area, you know, in his wheelhouse right now, and he is not here, so I wanted to make sure to 

ask that question. But I would hope that the legislation that he is 

putting forward would receive bipartisan support because this is a 

bipartisan issue. We depend upon CRS’s objectivity to give us just 

good, solid information. Because we can get information on a partisan side of it, and we don’t want to necessarily make a decision 

based upon that. And so it really is about CRS’s ability. 

The question that was directed to you, Ms. Pallante, it is sort of 

like the chicken and the egg. And my take on it is that if authors 

or folks that provide a document or an idea and put it in writing, 

they want to make sure that there is some protection out there for 

them. Because if it wasn’t for that, all of us, we wouldn’t receive 

the information. It is possible they could do something different to 

keep it secretive, but we want it to be public knowledge. 

So is that kind of where you were leading in regards to trying 

to keep authors and those that—you know, freedom of getting that 

out there and protection for them? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Absolutely. And I think in terms of copyright 

owners, you know, they are not a monolith, right? You have individual creators—the authors, songwriters, artists. And then you 

have big multinational companies who may also acquire copyrights. 

So in the context of the interview that I was questioned about, I 

was talking about authors and how not to lose them in the system. 

And I do believe that that is an important point for the Register 

of Copyrights to keep in mind. 

Mr. NUGENT. I would think so, so we all have the ability to read 

particular information. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
37 

So I want to thank all of you for being here today, and I will 

yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Nugent, thank you. 

You know, we have time for a second round, so why don’t we go 

ahead and get started on that. And let me ask the first question 

of the second round in my 5 minutes allotted to Mr. Mao of the 

Law Library. 

The Law Library, Mr. Mao, appears to be utilized more by the 

other two branches of government than by the Congress. Of all 

those who utilize the Law Library, what community is the greatest 

user? 

Mr. MAO. It depends on the type of questions we receive. For the 

analytical and legal analysis provided by the foreign law specialists, when we serve the government, it is approximately one-third 

to the Congress—I am sorry, one-third to one-half to Congress and 

one-third to one-half to the executive branch, with a small minority 

of that remaining part to the judicial branch. 

Now, for the general reference questions that we receive in the 

Reading Room, a majority of those are for the public. We get a lot 

of questions, whether they be walkup, through the telephone, or 

through electronic means. And we serve the public here in Washington, D.C., across the country, and around the world. 

Mr. GINGREY. So the majority of inquiries are from the general 

public? 

Mr. MAO. From those that are given to the Reading Room, yes. 

Mr. GINGREY. All right. 

Ms. Shaffer, the Technology Policy Directorate of the Library is 

housed within Library Services, right? 

Ms. SHAFFER. It is. 

Mr. GINGREY. In 2010, the LOC acquired the rights to the entire 

Twitter archive. Do you feel like it is necessary to archive all Twitter traffic? And are you concerned that these limited resources that 

we have been talking about will be diverted to this archive that 

could be better used elsewhere? 

Ms. SHAFFER. Mr. Chairman, yes, I do. And I feel rather strongly 

that social media is an emerging media that we need to pay attention to. I believe that if we had forgotten about motion picture at 

the turn of the 20th century, we would deeply regret it today. And 

I don’t want us to be in a position or our legacy to be considered 

that we totally did not think about important resources. 

In Twitter, there are enormous social trends that can be mined 

out that, frankly, might not be derived from any other resources. 

And so I think it would be highly irresponsible for the Nation’s library not to look at social media sources, data sets, and emerging 

new fields of knowledge. 

Mr. GINGREY. Well, thank you for that honest and forthright answer. It just seems to me that making sure that we preserve ‘‘Mr. 

Smith Goes to Washington’’ rather than a bunch of Twitter gossip 

by teenagers is—you are not comparing apples to apples there. And 

if you want to comment on that, I will give you a little more time 

to respond to my opinion on the issue. 

Ms. SHAFFER. Well, it may be very important as a social trend 

to know what teenagers were speaking about. We are always concerned about the knowledge base in America, and it may help us 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
38 

understand better things about civic education or preparing for a 

future generation of voters. 

So I do believe that these are important resources not to be excluded and—— 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you very much. 

Let me go to Ms. Pallante. The registration system is integral to 

the Copyright Office, is it not? 

Ms. PALLANTE. It is. 

Mr. GINGREY. Right now, around 87 percent of the claims are 

done electronically. Do you feel prepared to adapt to an increase in 

electronic claims? And have you taken steps to prepare for an increase in electronic claims? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Thank you for the question. 

Yes and no. So the answer is, yes, we have taken steps to prepare, but we do not believe that we are in shape to have the kind 

of technology and services that the copyright community expects of 

us. 

So, for example, we can register what comes in. We are not sure 

the legal incentives for registration have kept pace with the law, 

meaning that we are not sure people are sure why they are registering anymore. If people don’t register, the public databases 

won’t be robust, and then the public and users and those who rely 

on the information won’t have the information that they need. 

And the databases need major upgrades in searchability, including through the Web, and the presentation of material that people 

want. 

Mr. GINGREY. Ms. Pallante, thank you. 

Dr. Mazanec, in my remaining few seconds, almost 90 percent— 

you talked about this, actually, in the 5 minutes that you gave us 

of your written testimony—almost 90 percent of your budget is directed toward personnel. Recently, you have not filled several vacancies and had 22 others leave through this voluntary buyout program. 

CRS is currently operating at its lowest staff level in more than 

3 decades. In fact, I think those were your words. How would you 

enact further reductions, given the already low staff level, if that 

be necessary in these tough times? 

Dr. MAZANEC. That is a very good question. 

I think at this point what we are asking—as I said, what we are 

asking staff to do is take on additional issues and responsibilities. 

But we can only expand portfolios so far. 

I think the next, or one of the things we will have to consider 

is our breadth of services and which services or how can we 

prioritize our services to make sure that Congress gets what they 

need or what is most valuable to them. And that is one of the reasons why I have been going around and speaking with Members 

and senior staff. 

We are also looking at our operations, looking for—— 

Mr. GINGREY. Well, let me—and my time has expired. Just real 

quickly, just getting back to the personnel issue, do you think you 

can continue in this environment with the current level of personnel, and thinking maybe for the next couple or 3 years that it 

is not going to get any better, that we can still get the quality of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
39 

work out of CRS that we have become accustomed to, certainly in 

the 9 years that I have been here? 

Dr. MAZANEC. I think we can. Now, I want to caveat that by the 

fact that it really depends on the issues that we are being asked 

to work on. And as the issues get more and more complex, we may 

need additional analytical capacity or we may need to hire people 

that have specific expertise that we need. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you all. 

And I thank my colleagues for indulging me with a little bit of 

overtime there. 

Let me turn to the ranking member, Ms. Lofgren, for her second 

round of 5 minutes. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Pallante, according to the information provided to the committee, you had a meeting with the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers in New York between December 7th 

and December 9th of last year. Can you tell me who attended that 

meeting? What was the substance of the discussion? And was 

SOPA a topic of the meeting? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Yes, thank you. 

I remember the trip, because my family came up to join me in 

New York, and we went to the Empire State Building at midnight 

on Saturday night, and Representative Goodlatte was there with 

his family. And my children said, ‘‘I can’t believe we can’t even go 

to the Empire State Building without you running into people you 

work with.’’ 

At that meeting, I had been asked by the Publishers’ Lawyers 

Committee, the in-house counsel for lawyers, people who work 

every day in copyright transactions and litigation, to come and 

speak. And, again, whenever I take a trip, I try to do additional 

meetings to maximize my time. And so I met again with the 

businesspeople who are in the Association of American Publishers, 

so not the lawyers but the CEOs and businesspeople, to talk again 

about the priorities of the Copyright Office. Then went and met 

with the Authors Guild, again, just to go over my priorities and 

special documents. 

Ms. LOFGREN. And was SOPA a subject of the discussion? 

Ms. PALLANTE. SOPA and PIPA were introduced at that point, so 

it would have been discussed in those terms. But in general, rogue 

Web sites have been a topic for the Copyright Office for a year. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Let me ask you to do this. You haven’t mentioned 

the names of the people you met with. So let me ask you, in addition to the names of the people you met with in Hollywood, that 

you provide the names of the people you met with in New York. 

And if you could, please, a summary of the topics discussed at each 

meeting. 

Ms. PALLANTE. Yes. 

Ms. LOFGREN. You know, like you, I love books, I love reading. 

But I am also mindful that technological changes are evolving the 

dominant forms of creative work throughout—they have throughout our history, and they certainly are today. 

In recent remarks to the American Association of Publishers, you 

said that—and I assume this is correctly quoted—you cannot imagine the future without books and without publishers. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
40 

Now, do you believe that the preservation of a particular form of 

copyright works or a particular industry business model is part of 

your mission as the Register of Copyrights? And if not, what did 

you mean by that comment? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Thank you. I was not discussing a particular format of books; I was talking about books. And in that speech I had 

been asked to trace the history of copyright through books. It was 

the annual meeting of the members of the Association of American 

Publishers. And so I traced it from the time of the first Copyright 

Act in 1790 to the Golan decision, in which Justice Ginsburg repeated that her decision was based, in fact, on the Framers’ intent 

that dissemination of works was part of the copyright bundle. That 

was the point of my remarks. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Let me ask all of the witnesses about discrimination. We are aware, we have seen in the newspaper of an allegation 

of an individual who asserts that he was fired because of his sexual 

orientation. Now, I won’t get into that particular case because it is 

being investigated. 

But we have no tolerance here for discrimination in employment 

in violation of our laws. So I would like to know, what are each of 

you doing to make sure that the employees within your purview 

are not discriminated against based on race, religion, gender, or 

sexual orientation? 

We will start with you, Mr. Mao. 

Mr. MAO. Thank you. 

The Law Library of Congress and, indeed, the Library of Congress believes very firmly that there should not be any discrimination and believes in its mission to provide an environment where 

there is no discrimination. 

Now, specifically in the Law Library, one thing that I have done 

since taking on the position of Law Librarian is to ensure proper 

training for the staff. So I have encouraged the staff to participate 

in the classes that are available through the Library of Congress. 

And, indeed, at one of the first management team meetings I held 

in the Law Library, I invited representatives from our Office of Opportunity, Inclusiveness, and Compliance to come and brief our 

staff about the issue. And we are planning on making that session 

available to the staff, as well. And—— 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. 

Dr. Mazanec. 

And, all of you, if you could be brief, that be would be good because I am running out of time. 

Dr. MAZANEC. Very specifically, we try to address any issues 

around discrimination as rapidly as we can. We also try to educate 

our employees about workplace discrimination and also educate our 

managers. Diversity is highly valued at the Library. It makes us 

do our job better. 

Ms. PALLANTE. I would just repeat everything that my colleagues 

have said. I have also instituted supervisory training. And I have 

an open-door policy, which my staff have taken advantage of. 

Ms. SHAFFER. And I guess I will add a fourth voice to all of that. 

But I will also say that I think it is important that our collections 

are so diverse. And they reflect such diverse cultures that, in a 

sense, we have the environmental underpinning for diversity there. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
41 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time has expired. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Ms. Lofgren. 

Second round for 5 minutes for Mr. Nugent. 

Mr. NUGENT. Dr. Mazanec, you had mentioned that you forecast. 

I would like to hear more about how you forecast in regards to the 

needs of Congress and how do you get that—— 

Dr. MAZANEC. I think you are referring to our legislative planning process. 

Mr. NUGENT. Right. 

Dr. MAZANEC. We do this on an annual basis. We rely on our analysts and attorneys who have been working with the committees 

and with congressional staff to help identify the issues that Congress will be focused on in the upcoming session. We then vet that 

list with leadership offices and with our oversight offices to make 

sure that we have captured all the issues, that we haven’t missed 

anything. 

So that is how we start our planning process for our research 

materials, the products, and the services that we provide. 

Mr. NUGENT. Does that translate into how many folks you are 

going to wind up putting in a particular area based upon the complexity of the issue, or—— 

Dr. MAZANEC. We try do that to the best of our ability, but people 

come in with specific expertise, so they can’t always move very easily from one issue area to another issue area. And some of the expertise has been developed over decades. 

But we are looking at creating more surge capacity, more crosscoverage, so that we can supplement the lead analysts in a given 

issue area that is really hot. 

Mr. NUGENT. And this is to all of you. You know, given the cutbacks that you have all faced in regards to personnel and retirements, how are you growing leaders within specific areas? 

And, you know, Mr. Mao, I don’t know that you have a second 

in command at this point in time, but how are you going to grow 

leaders, particularly in this austere budget time? Yes, sir. 

Mr. MAO. We have various training programs available. One of 

the ones that we have started is, for example, in our Reading 

Room. We have what we are calling our Reading Room Management Training Fellowship, where we are encouraging the Reading 

Room staff to gain supervisory experience. 

We have also encouraged our members to take details. For example, we have one member of the Law Library staff who is working 

with the House Appropriations Committee currently on a detail to 

gain supervisory experience in a context outside of the Library but 

still related to the Library. 

Mr. NUGENT. Dr. Mazanec. 

Dr. MAZANEC. Very quickly, I would echo all of that. We also 

have some recruitment programs where we target bright, young individuals coming out of school—the law recruit, grad recruit, and 

the PMF program, the Presidential Management Fellows program. 

We bring them on board, educate them, train them, give them opportunities to develop their skills. 

Mr. NUGENT. Ms. Pallante. 

Ms. PALLANTE. And I have a lot of cross-departmental projects at 

the moment and am using those to identify leaders. And I have acVerDate Mar 15 2010 22:08 Jun 08, 2012 Jkt 074234 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B234.XXX B234

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
42 

tually had several people retire after many decades at the Copyright Office, and so younger people will be stepping up to fill those 

jobs. 

Mr. NUGENT. Thank you. 

Ms. Shaffer. 

Ms. SHAFFER. We are doing a lot of what our colleagues are doing 

in Library Services, but we are also creating now a very robust 

mentoring and coaching program within the service unit. 

And then we are reaching out to colleges and universities all over 

the country to help us identify people who are graduating from college and might be interested or have knowledge of cultures and 

language skills, because that is a critical issue for Library Services. 

Mr. NUGENT. One more question. As it relates to the Legislative 

Information System, which it is now in its 16th year of existence, 

and THOMAS, which has been around now 18 years, how do they 

fit within Library of Congress information architecture strategies 

as you move forward? Is there talk about merging the two, or is 

there some other way? 

Mr. Mao. 

Mr. MAO. Yes, the data underneath is essentially the same. And 

right now the Library of Congress is working very hard on updating the information architecture for the THOMAS system and is 

looking forward to launching a new system that will integrate all 

of this information in one place. 

Mr. NUGENT. Very good. 

Dr. MAZANEC. I don’t have anything to add except that CRS has 

been actively involved in collaborating with the other service units 

to modernize our Legislative Information System. 

Mr. NUGENT. I would think that would definitely be the way forward, particularly in these times where we have lost personnel. 

Any time we can collect information and then disseminate it in a 

way that is useful would be great. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Mr. Nugent. 

And I will now yield to the gentleman from Indiana. And this is 

his first round. So, Todd, you can go beyond the 5 minutes and 

take up to 10, if you wish. 

Mr. ROKITA. Oh, my. 

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Rokita from Indiana. 

Mr. ROKITA. It is wonderful to be on House Admin and be treated 

this way. 

My apologies for being late, with multiple hearings today that I 

was scheduled to attend. I thank the witnesses for their testimony, 

and my apologies for not being able to hear it all. 

If I ask a question that has already been addressed by another 

Member, would you please tell me so I can move on? And I will go 

back to the transcript to get that answer. That requires a two-way 

street, right? You have to think of that as if being answered in my 

mind, not yours. But I think we can accomplish that today. 

First, to Ms. Pallante, do the Library’s costs to process a claim 

vary depending upon the type of work? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Oh, that is a great question. Meaning does it cost 

more to register a motion picture than it does a song, for example? 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
43 

Mr. ROKITA. Yeah, a book versus a movie or a piece of software 

or something like that. 

Ms. PALLANTE. Yes. So that is one of the focal points of a fee 

study that we are undertaking right now—— 

Mr. ROKITA. Okay. 

Ms. PALLANTE [continuing]. Which is something that I am in the 

middle of in my first year as Register. I would suspect the answer 

is yes. 

Mr. ROKITA. And when is that fee report going to be due then, 

or that analysis going to be done? 

Ms. PALLANTE. It will be done and delivered to Congress this 

summer. 

Mr. ROKITA. Okay. 

Ms. PALLANTE. And then if Congress approves, it would be implemented in fiscal 2013. 

Mr. ROKITA. Okay. Thank you. 

Ms. PALLANTE. You are welcome. 

Mr. ROKITA. Another question. According to your recent fee report notice, in fiscal year 2011 fee receipts covered 59 percent of 

the costs. You said this was insufficient by any standard. Certainly, 

it would be in the private sector. What standard would be sufficient? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Again, that is a really good question. As I understand it, the office fees for services have never covered the entire 

cost. And, in part, that is because, at least in recent decades, copyright registration is a voluntary system, meaning that as an author 

or as a motion picture company you don’t have to register to get 

legal protection under copyright law. It is automatic. 

There are benefits, and we try to entice people to register, but 

we do that because the public database is actually good for other 

industries who may rely on that information for innovation and for 

the public who needs to find a copyright owner. 

So it is a little bit of a circle, and we have to hit the sweet spot, 

essentially, with the fee study. But I do believe that we have not 

been recovering enough of the fees for services. 

Mr. ROKITA. And just so I am clear, do you have a solution for 

that or not? You are saying no. Is there a—I can’t believe I am asking you this. Do you think there would be a legislative solution to 

that? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Well, I rely on the law when I do the fee study. 

I have parameters that are set in the Copyright Act. And they require that I be fair and equitable and give due consideration to the 

objectives of the copyright system, which in the discussion that you 

missed is that in part the copyright system is for authors and in 

part it is for the public. 

So we need to take all of that into account. And, therefore, I 

think one answer is, we probably will never be 100 percent fee recovery, but we need to do better. 

Mr. ROKITA. Okay. I will look at the transcript, as well. Thank 

you. 

According to I think that same fee report notice, you recovered 

64 percent of the cost to process an online claim but only 58 percent of the cost to process paper applications. So with adoption of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
44 

a new fee structure, what percentage of the costs are you anticipating recovering in both those categories? 

Ms. PALLANTE. I am hesitant to give you an answer only because 

we are in the middle of a public fee Federal Register process, and 

I have to wait for the results of that before we do the final analysis 

for Congress. So I don’t want to prejudge what the public’s comments are going to be in terms of what the right result should be. 

Mr. ROKITA. That would imply that you actually weight the comments—— 

Ms. PALLANTE. Yes. 

Mr. ROKITA [continuing]. Which is something that—— 

Ms. PALLANTE. I actually read them and analyze them and—— 

Mr. ROKITA. Wow. 

Ms. PALLANTE [continuing]. Incorporate them. 

Mr. ROKITA. I don’t mean to be flippant, but I am finding—and 

this comes from a guy who used to run a couple agencies in the 

State of Indiana at one time. When I ask other agency heads or decision-makers about their formula or their process for analyzing 

comments, they don’t have one. Which you can come back and say, 

‘‘Well, that is our discretion under the Constitution,’’ but I think 

that is an insufficient answer. So I appreciate that non-answer you 

gave me. 

What planning—I am trying not to just pick on you, but I think 

this will be the last one for you—what planning has the Copyright 

Office engaged in in the event the copyright royalty judges are 

deemed unconstitutional? Something I am just learning about. Do 

you have a plan? What if these judges are found unconstitutional? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Well, I don’t have plan, but there would be implications for the Register for sure. 

Mr. ROKITA. Yeah. Well, do you think you need to start thinking 

of one, or are you pretty confident that they are constitutional? And 

if so, why? 

Ms. PALLANTE. Well, I know the Department of Justice is representing the Library in that ongoing litigation. And I probably 

shouldn’t comment on pending litigation. 

Mr. ROKITA. Anyone else want to comment? No? Okay. 

Ms. Shaffer, currently, 17 studio and movie-related entities store 

materials at the Library’s National Audiovisual Conservation Center in Culpeper. You are familiar, obviously. 

Assuming the center had authority to charge depositors for cost 

recovery storage and preservation fees, what do you envision for 

the center? Are there other institutions who have offered to collaborate? Is there available space if more entities want to establish a 

relationship with Culpeper? 

Ms. SHAFFER. Well, let me start by saying that we would be able 

to create the space. We don’t currently have it, but we have some 

fixed shelving in Culpeper, and our plan for this deposit program 

would be to install compact shelving, movable shelving. So that 

would create a significant increase in our available space. We 

have—— 

Mr. ROKITA. Are you promoting this relationship opportunity? 

Ms. SHAFFER. We are trying to. We have a number of registries 

that you created for us. And we have spoken to people who participate in the deliberations on those registries. Often they are conVerDate Mar 15 2010 22:08 Jun 08, 2012 Jkt 074234 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\B234.XXX B234

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
45 

nected to or coming from industry. And so we have been trying to 

explain to them what our plan is in a very objective way, thinking 

that this will provide service not only to them but also assure the 

longevity and preservation of many of the materials that they possess and really don’t have the technical ability to handle. I think 

that is the key issue. 

Mr. ROKITA. Well, and just so I am clear on your answer, if you 

had the authority to charge depositors for cost recovery, how would 

you handle that? 

Ms. SHAFFER. Well, we would use it as—we would institute it 

under a revolving fund so that we could then use the monies that 

we would collect to improve the preservation and conditions of the 

materials that we would be taking in. 

Mr. ROKITA. A hundred percent? 

Ms. SHAFFER. Yes, I believe it would be. We would include in 

that, however, a number of staff positions so that they could be 

dedicated to preserving these materials as well as developing scientific know-how for all other materials. 

Mr. ROKITA. Have you thought about fee structure and fees and 

percentages of recovery, that kind of thing? 

Ms. SHAFFER. We are actually right now in the process of looking 

at what the marketplace might bear. And we expect to have that, 

again, by the summer. So we are looking at it as we speak. 

Mr. ROKITA. I would expect the marketplace would bear a lot. 

Ms. SHAFFER. Well, it would be cost recovery, so—— 

Mr. ROKITA. I am not asking you to profit, but getting to 100 percent would be nice, or closer to. 

Ms. SHAFFER. Oh, it would be lovely, for sure. 

Mr. ROKITA. All right. Thank you very much. 

I yield back. 

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Mr. Rokita. 

Let me say to our witnesses, first of all, thank you. I want to 

thank each and every one of you. And I thank the Members, as 

well. Ms. Lofgren had a conflicting markup, so she had to leave a 

few minutes early. 

Before I adjourn the committee, though, let me just say that it 

is possible the committee members, maybe even some that couldn’t 

attend at all, they may have some follow-up questions for the witnesses. And would you all please respond to these written questions, assuming there are some, in a timely manner? The committee members would greatly appreciate that. 

Mr. GINGREY. But I do thank each and every one of you. The positions that you hold—four of, what is it, seven or nine? But you 

represent 40 percent or more of the budget for the Library of Congress. And certainly we, the Members, understand the importance 

and do realize the constraints that you are under and are very likely to continue to be under in regard to being able to provide the 

same level of service with fewer people and with a tightened budget. I know that is very, very difficult for each and every one of you. 

And what you do is hugely important. And I think that was 

pointed out pretty clearly during the hearing in your testimony and 

the Q&A, two rounds of Q&A. So I feel, as chairman of the Subcommittee of Oversight and Investigation, that we certainly have 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
46 

had a very good hearing in regard to the Library of Congress. And, 

again, thank you all. 

At this point, I will declare that this hearing is adjourned. Thank 

you. 

[Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
47 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 84 here 74234A.021
48 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 85 here 74234A.022
49 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 86 here 74234A.023
50 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 87 here 74234A.024
51 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 88 here 74234A.025
52 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 89 here 74234A.026
53 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 90 here 74234A.027
54 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 91 here 74234A.028
55 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 92 here 74234A.029
56 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 93 here 74234A.030
57 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 94 here 74234A.031
58 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 95 here 74234A.032
59 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 96 here 74234A.033
60 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 97 here 74234A.034
61 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 98 here 74234A.035
62 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 99 here 74234A.036
63 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 100 here 74234A.037
64 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 101 here 74234A.038
65 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 102 here 74234A.039
66 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 103 here 74234A.040
67 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 104 here 74234A.041
68 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 105 here 74234A.042
69 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 106 here 74234A.043
70 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 107 here 74234A.044
71 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 108 here 74234A.045
72 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 109 here 74234A.046
73 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 110 here 74234A.047
74 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 111 here 74234A.048
75 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 112 here 74234A.049
76 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 113 here 74234A.050
77 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 120 here 74234A.057
78 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 121 here 74234A.058
79 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 122 here 74234A.059
80 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 123 here 74234A.060
81 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 124 here 74234A.061
82 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 125 here 74234A.062
83 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 126 here 74234A.063
84 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 127 here 74234A.064
85 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 128 here 74234A.065
86 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 129 here 74234A.066
87 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 130 here 74234A.067
88 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 131 here 74234A.068
89 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 132 here 74234A.069
90 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 133 here 74234A.070
91 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 134 here 74234A.071
92 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 135 here 74234A.072