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

73–161 PDF 2012

HISTORY MUSEUM OR RECORDS ACCESS AGENCY?

DEFINING AND FULFILLING THE MISSION OF

THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION POLICY,

CENSUS, AND NATIONAL ARCHIVES

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

DECEMBER 16, 2009

Serial No. 111–163

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov

http://www.house.gov/reform
(II)

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York, Chairman

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri

DIANE E. WATSON, California

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts

JIM COOPER, Tennessee

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas

PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut

PETER WELCH, Vermont

BILL FOSTER, Illinois

JACKIE SPEIER, California

STEVE DRIEHAUS, Ohio

JUDY CHU, California

DARRELL E. ISSA, California

DAN BURTON, Indiana

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio

LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California

JIM JORDAN, Ohio

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois

BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri

ANH ‘‘JOSEPH’’ CAO, Louisiana

RON STROMAN, Staff Director

MICHAEL MCCARTHY, Deputy Staff Director

CARLA HULTBERG, Chief Clerk

LARRY BRADY, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION POLICY, CENSUS, AND NATIONAL ARCHIVES

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri, Chairman

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of

Columbia

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois

STEVE DRIEHAUS, Ohio

DIANE E. WATSON, California

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina

LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah

DARRYL PIGGEE, Staff Director
(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Hearing held on December 16, 2009 ...................................................................... 1

Statement of:

Ferriero, David S., Archivist of the United States; G. Wayne Clough,

Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution; and James H. Billington,

Librarian of Congress ................................................................................... 7

Billington, James H. ................................................................................. 27

Clough, G. Wayne ...................................................................................... 19

Ferriero, David S. ...................................................................................... 7

Weismann, Anne L., chief counsel, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics

in Washington; Janet A. Alpert, president, National Genealogical Society; Kevin M. Goldberg, legal counsel, American Society of News Editors; and Carl Malamud, president and founder, Public.Resources.Org .. 46

Alpert, Janet A. ......................................................................................... 53

Goldberg, Kevin M. ................................................................................... 61

Malamud, Carl ........................................................................................... 74

Weismann, Anne L. ................................................................................... 46

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Alpert, Janet A., president, National Genealogical Society, legal counsel,

American Society of News Editors, prepared statement of ....................... 55

Billington, James H., Librarian of Congress, prepared statement of .......... 29

Clay, Hon. Wm. Lacy, a Representative in Congress from the State of

Missouri, prepared statement of .................................................................. 4

Clough, G. Wayne, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 21

Ferriero, David S., Archivist of the United States, prepared statement

of ..................................................................................................................... 10

Goldberg, Kevin M., legal counsel, American Society of News Editors,

prepared statement of ................................................................................... 63

Malamud, Carl, president and founder, Public.Resources.Org, prepared

statement of ................................................................................................... 76

Weismann, Anne L., chief counsel, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics

in Washington, prepared statement of ........................................................ 48

(1)

HISTORY MUSEUM OR RECORDS ACCESS

AGENCY? DEFINING AND FULFILLING THE

MISSION OF THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND

RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2009

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION POLICY, CENSUS, AND

NATIONAL ARCHIVES

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:15 p.m. in room

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Clay, Norton, Driehaus, Cuellar, and

McHenry.

Staff present: Darryl Piggee, staff director/counsel; Jean Gosa,

clerk; Yvette Cravins, counsel; Frank Davis and Anthony Clark,

professional staff members; Charisma Williams, staff assistant;

Adam Hodge, deputy press secretary (full committee); Leneal Scott,

information systems manager (full committee); Adam Fromm, minority chief clerk and Member liaison; Howard Denis, minority senior counsel; Chapin Fay and Jonathan Skladany, minority counsels.

Mr. CLAY. Good afternoon. The Information Policy, Census, and

National Archives Subcommittee of the Oversight and Government

Reform Committee will now come to order.

Without objection, the Chair and ranking minority member will

have 5 minutes to make opening statements, followed by opening

statements not to exceed 3 minutes by any other Member who

seeks recognition.

And without objection, Members and witnesses may have 5 legislative days to submit a written statement or extraneous materials

for the record.

Welcome to today’s hearing on the mission of the National Archives. The purpose of today’s hearing is to examine the National

Archives’ mission and how it is designed and fulfilled. We will consider several important topics, including the views of the new Archivist of the United States on NARA’s mission, learning how the

leaders of similar agencies, The Smithsonian Institution and the

Library of Congress, balance competing needs while fulfilling their

core missions, and hearing opinions of agency stakeholders on

NARA’s performance.

This is a time of rising budget pressures, explosive growth of

Federal, especially electronic records, and mounting urgency to
2

make these records available to the public, the media, the courts

and Congress more rapidly.

The subcommittee has heard from many of NARA’s constituencies that they are concerned the agency’s increasing emphasis on

museum exhibits and related programs may be not only straining

its resources, but diverting its focus from fulfilling its core mission.

As we will hear from several of our witnesses, managing, preserving and providing prompt and proper access to Federal records

has been and must continue to be the primary mission of the National Archives.

It is commendable that NARA wants to expand access programs,

increasing the number and title of records available as well as increasing the number of those who can directly examine those

records and learning from it and interpreting them for themselves.

However, there are questions as to whether a museum exhibit truly

qualifies as a records access program and if public visitors to a museum are actually exploring records.

There is also the question raised by many concerned about the

agency, how NARA’s elevation of its role as a history museum

above that of its core mission may be increasing the agency’s already considerable delays in receiving, preserving and opening Federal records.

The National Archives celebrated its 75th Anniversary this year.

Congratulations to all National Archives employees. The history of

the agency demonstrates that from its founding in 1934, each archivist has shaped the focus of the Archives to meet the unique

challenges they face.

Archivist Connor, starting a new agency, had to invent management procedures for handling Federal records which by then already had grown to more than 10 million cubic feet. Archivist Buck

changed the Archives from a passive records repository to an active

service agency. Archivist Grover developed a plan to acquire and

administer Presidential records that resulted in the Presidential

Libraries Act of 1955.

Archivist Rhoads improved records management declassification

and opened records for the scholarly use. Archivist Warner fought

for and won independence for the National Archives. Acting Archivist Peterson prepared the agency’s first strategic plan. Archivist

Carlin improved communication with NARA’s constituents and established the approach to electronic records management. Archivist

Weinstein emphasized civic literacy and expanded museum education and outreach programs.

We trust that the new Archivist is ready to meet the current

challenges and we offer our strong support for him as he begins his

tenure. It is this subcommittee’s hope that through our hearing

today we can gain a better understanding of NARA’s mission and

issues of stakeholder concern, and provide the National Archives

with some important information and advice they can use in reexamining how best to define and fulfill their mission.

Before we proceed, I would like to recognize the important contributions of several groups who have greatly assisted this subcommittee in preparing for this hearing including the International

Association of Jewish Genealogical Societies, a records preservation
3

and access committee, and 17 other research organizations. We

thank them for their efforts and statements of support.

And I now yield to my good friend from North Carolina, Mr.

McHenry.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay follows:]
4
5
6

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your

leadership across the board with this committee and your dedication and your friendship.

And thank you all for being here today. This is certainly an important matter of effective governance and making sure that we

have records that are accessible to the public, whether across the

three separate agencies we are talking about today.

Mr. Chairman, if I could, with time being short, with these votes

ongoing, if I could submit my statement for the record and just say,

in short, I certainly appreciate you three gentlemen being here. I

certainly appreciate the importance of what you are doing as individuals, and the importance of ensuring that we have records available for future generations, whether it is the challenges of digital

records of keeping the texts that we currently have available.

So, thank you.

Mr. CLAY. Without objection, Mr. McHenry’s statement will be

included in the hearing record.

Any other opening statements? If not, we can proceed to the

panel.

Our first witness will be the Honorable David S. Ferriero, the

10th Archivist of the United States.

Prior to his nomination in July 2009 by President Obama to lead

the National Archives, Mr. Ferriero served as the Andrew W. Mellon Director of the New York Public Libraries, the largest public

library system in the United States. Among his responsibilities was

the development of the library’s digital strategy, which includes a

digital library of more than 750,000 images that may be accessed

fee of charge by any user around the world.

Mr. Ferriero also served in top positions at two of the Nation’s

major academic libraries, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Duke University. He is the first librarian to serve as

Archivist of the United States. We want to congratulate Mr.

Ferriero on his appointment, welcome him and wish him well.

Thank you for being here.

Our next witness is Dr. G. Wayne Clough, the 12th secretary of

the Smithsonian Institution.

Dr. Clough currently leads a plan to digitize much of the

Smithsonian’s 137 million objects. Prior to his becoming secretary

in July 2008, he served as president of the Georgia Institute of

Technology for 14 years.

He received a Doctorate in Civil Engineering from the University

of California Berkeley. Dr. Clough has been a professor at Duke

University, Stanford University and Virginia Tech, and also served

as Provost at the University of Washington.

And after Dr. Clough, we will hear from Dr. James H. Billington,

the 13th Librarian of Congress.

Dr. Billington has served as Librarian for more than 22 years,

championing, among other important programs, the American

Memory National Digital Library. He earned his Doctorate from

Oxford University where he was a Rhodes Scholar at Balliol College.

Following service with the U.S. Army, he taught history at Harvard University and at Princeton University. Prior to his appoint-
7

ment as Librarian, Dr. Billington was director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars for 14 years.

I thank all of our witnesses for appearing today and look forward

to their testimony.

It is the policy of the subcommittee to swear in all witnesses before they testify and I would ask you now to please stand and raise

your right hands.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. CLAY. Thank you and you may be seated. Let the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative.

I ask that each of the witnesses now give a brief summary of

their testimony. Please limit your summary to 5 minutes. Your

complete written statement will be included in the hearing record.

Mr. Ferriero, you may begin.

STATEMENTS OF DAVID S. FERRIERO, ARCHIVIST OF THE

UNITED STATES; G. WAYNE CLOUGH, SECRETARY OF THE

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION; AND JAMES H. BILLINGTON, LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS

STATEMENT OF DAVID S. FERRIERO

Mr. FERRIERO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the

subcommittee.

I am David S. Ferriero, Archivist of the United States. Thank

you for this opportunity to discuss the mission of the National Archives.

I am pleased to appear here alongside the Librarian of Congress,

Dr. Billington, and the secretary of the Smithsonian, Dr. Clough.

I am looking forward to the benefit of their wisdom as heads of

major national institutions that, like the Archives, preserve and

make the historical and cultural treasures of our country accessible

to millions of people.

It has been just over a month since I was confirmed as the 10th

Archivist of the United States. I come to the job having spent my

entire career in service to people seeking access to information,

first at the libraries of MIT and Duke University, and most recently as the Director of the Libraries of the New York Public Library.

The National Archives exist for access, and I firmly believe that

every component of the agency is in service to that fundamental

mission. We do this in records management by ensuring that agencies create and maintain records of their activities for future access. We do this in preservation by safeguarding the long-term viability of records so that they can be accessed. We do this in reference services by responding to requests for access in specific

records. And we do this in our museum and educational programs

by making records interesting and, indeed, exciting to visitors.

Before I comment on the issues that you have asked me to address, I would first like to say that we, you have my commitment

to an open dialog, from me and my leadership team, as you conduct

your oversight of the Archives.

One concern high on your list and mine is agency security, both

for information technology systems and physical holdings. We abso-
8

lutely must be able to ensure that NARA is able to safeguard the

documentary heritage of our Nation.

I am pleased to tell you that on the 7th of December, I announced the creation of the National Archives Holding Protection

Program. This program will strengthen the protection of original

records, regardless of their format. As a team leader, I have appointed Mr. Eric Peterson who comes to NARA from the Naval Information Operations Command where he was responsible for loss

prevention and classified programs.

Also, I know that this committee is very familiar with the work

of NARA’s Inspector General. I plan to work closely with him and

the security staff on the front lines to improve NARA security

across the board.

Another priority is meeting the challenge of archiving electronic

records. I believe NARA has built a solid foundation of promoting

and ensuring effective records management across the Federal Government. However, the agency faces serious challenges when it

comes to electronic records, including the continuing proliferation

of formats in which Federal records are created and the mixed nature of Federal recordkeeping, where agencies create both paper

and electronic records.

Our responsibility in regard to electronic records it not just to

build the electronic records archives. It is also to ensure that agencies are managing the electronic records they create and identify as

permanently valuable. We can, and we will, do a better job of making sure agencies are taking this responsibility seriously.

The title of this hearing begins with a question about our museum function. We have been inviting the public to see records and

exhibits at the National Archives for our entire 75 year history,

and we have long been leaders in encouraging the use of primary

sources in history and civics education. The last decade has

brought substantial growth in our exhibit and education programs,

thanks to the Foundation for the National Archives and the Presidential Library Foundations which raise millions of dollars to fund

museum and education programs here and across the Nation.

More than a year ago, NARA began to look into ways that we

could better provide visitor services at the National Archives building while retaining the service that we provide to researchers. The

significant drop is microfilm usage made it possible to reduce the

size of the microfilm reading room and expand exhibit space without diminishing researcher services.

I was dismayed, however, that NARA management did a poor job

communicating with both research staff and researchers on this

issue and in recent weeks there has been a great deal of concern

expressed by some of our researchers about the changes under discussion. We will be holding a public forum tomorrow afternoon to

discuss these issues. I am personally participating in the forum,

not only as the Archivist, but as one who has spent four decades

as a research librarian. Those who visit our facilities as researchers

are highly valued stakeholders and they have the ear of this research librarian turned archivist.

As I set out to improve the agency’s communications with stakeholders, I am including Congress. First, I have already met with

some members of this subcommittee and I am looking forward to
9

meeting with all of you as soon as possible. Second, the Archives

have 44 facilities in 19 States, and I intend to reach out to each

Congressperson who represents the women and men who work at

these locations.

Additionally, I want all Members to know that they have an open

invitation to visit any NARA facility, especially the one just a few

blocks away, so that they can get a first-hand look at what we do.

We have a great story to tell with the records we hold which include the records of Congress starting with day 1 of the First Congress. Come and spend 30 minutes with us and I can promise you

a very memorable experience.

Finally, I share this subcommittee’s concerns with NARA’s management culture. As I set about changing that culture, my immediate goal is addressing unacceptably poor survey results on employee job satisfaction. All NARA employees, from those operating

forklifts to the most senior archivists, are equally important to the

success of this mission. I say this with the prospective of one who

began his career shelving books.

In my very short time as Archivist of the United States, I have

become keenly aware of the skill, talent and spirit that have

shaped this unique organization for its first 75 years. I have also

become aware of the many challenges that face this agency and, in

that regard, I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the

members of the subcommittee, for the fair and honest oversight you

provide.

I would be happy to answer any questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ferriero follows:]
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, so much, Mr. Ferriero, for your testimony.

Mr. Clough, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF G. WAYNE CLOUGH

Mr. CLOUGH. Thank you, Chairman Clay, Ranking Member

McHenry and the other members of the subcommittee for this opportunity to testify.

I want to extend my congratulations to my new colleague, the Archivist of the United States, David Ferriero, and I offer the

Smithsonian’s assistance to him in this transition. And it is a

pleasure to be here with my colleague, the Librarian of Congress,

Dr. James Billington.

Our collective mission is extremely important. The National Archives and the Records Administration preserves the records of the

Federal Government. The Library of Congress serves as the largest

library in the world. And the Smithsonian Institution preserves the

history, arts and sciences, and cultural traditions of our country.

We complement each other as we pursue our shared goal of preserving our collections and making them as accessible as possible

as fast as we can to researchers, students, teachers, families and

the American public.

With 19 museums, 20 libraries, numerous research centers, the

National Zoo and more than 137 million objects and specimens in

our collections, the Smithsonian stands out as a unique entity. Our

archival collection includes scientific documents, records and other

media totaling more than 100,000 cubic feet and forms the foundation for research, scholarship, publications, exhibitions and public

programs unique to the Smithsonian. This year, nearly 30 million

visits were made to the Smithsonian. And we had 188 million visitor sessions on our various Web sites.

To ensure that we bring our resources to the world, we recently

embarked on the most inclusive and comprehensive strategic planning exercise in the Smithsonian’s history. I have detailed discussion on this in my written testimony. Briefly, our new vision calls

for us to shape the future by preserving our heritage, discovering

new knowledge and sharing our resources with the world.

Our plan organizes our activities around four focused things, so

we will not be doing everything or everybody. One is unlocking the

mysteries of the universe, two, understanding and sustaining a biodiverse planet, three, valuing world cultures, and four, understanding the American experience. The plan reaffirms our core values of integrity, responsibility and organizational excellence.

The Nation’s growing diversity challenges us to reach new audiences and to use new partners to do to so. And we will do this primarily using digital technology. The newer collections are available

virtually, the less these materials are subject to harmful handling

and damage. And it also saves additional funds for us because we

do not have to process as many applications for use of our materials. But we also want to make sure that our school children, the

teachers, the parents and the scholars have access to these extraordinary collections that we have in Washington.

Our first secretary, Joseph Henry, was legally charged with preserving the records of the Smithsonian Institution. The Smithsonian Institution archive holdings constitute the official memory of
20

the Smithsonian, and document the development of American

sciences, arts, culture and technology.

The United States is one of the most advanced countries in the

world in terms of providing access, public use for public information. U.S. policies of professional ethics are focused on the widest

most equitable openness for archival holdings. However, many of

our collections remain inaccessible for a host of reasons: insufficient

staff, lack of expertise to work on special formats, or special language materials. In addition, some institutions have large backlogs

and uncatalogued or unprocessed material, and we need to work on

that.

I look forward to the Smithsonian Institution’s collaboration with

my colleagues at the Library of Congress and the National Archives. We each play an important role in inspiring the public by

engaging them in an exploration of what it means to be an American in today’s world.

For 163 years, the Smithsonian Institution has built the national

collections, disseminated innovative research, and welcomed millions of visitors to its museums, creating a reputation so strong

that the Smithsonian is known as a symbol of America throughout

the world.

I am extremely proud of our passionate and dedicated staff and

our volunteers, and will continue to work to see that progress is

made, is the same as we go forward.

Again, thanks to the Chair and the ranking member for my opportunity to testify.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Clough follows:]
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for your testimony, Dr. Clough. Thank you

so much for being here.

Dr. Billington, you have 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF JAMES H. BILLINGTON

Mr. BILLINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. McHenry, members of the subcommittee. I appreciate very much being invited to

appear before the subcommittee with two such distinguished leaders as the Smithsonian’s secretary, Wayne Clough, and the new Archivist of the United States, David Ferriero. We wish Mr. Ferriero

well in this new job and look forward to working with him.

The Library of Congress is America’s oldest Federal cultural institution and we have had good relations for many years with the

Smithsonian and the Archives whose different collections and missions generally complement ours. We all face, however, similar

challenges to acquire, preserve and make accessible important primary materials and to serve both researchers and the general public.

Congress, Mr. Chairman, has been the greatest patron of the library in the history of the world, building up for 209 years the

world’s largest, most comprehensive and multi-formatted library

covering some 470 languages stored on more than 650 miles of

shelving and relentlessly adding 10,000 new analog items daily.

Our top priority is to serve the research needs of Congress, which

we do with our Congressional Research Service, providing objective,

comprehensive research and analysis on policy matters, and responding last year to nearly 900,000 research and reference requests from the Congress.

Our law library is the foreign law research arm of Congress. And

we serve Congress in other ways, lending books to Members and

staff, archiving veterans’ oral histories collected through Members’

offices, and providing a special Members’ reading room and the

beautiful Members Room for meetings in the Jefferson Building exclusively for Members’ use.

Since we are also the de facto national library of the United

States, our second major priority is serving the American people.

Last year, we responded to over half a million public reference requests in our 21 reading rooms, circulated 22 million free Braille

and recorded books and magazines to disabled patrons all over the

country through local libraries, and fielded more than 6.5 billion

electronic transactions on the library’s free educational Web site,

which contains nearly 16 million digital files of American history

and culture.

Thousands of researchers visit the library annually to study firsthand our unparalleled collections which include many materials

that cannot be found anywhere else, the Unique Copyright Deposit

of America and the world’s largest collections not just of books and

periodicals, but of maps, music and movies.

We do massive preservation work, notably at the library’s new

Audiovisual Conservation Center in Culpepper, Virginia, and

through the congressionally mandated National Digital Information

Infrastructure and Preservation Program, which we direct and coordinate with 176 partners, including the Archives and the Smithsonian.
28

When the library moved out of the Capital and into the new Jefferson Building in 1897, Congress made it clear that the interior

space was designed to be not only a library, but a public showcase

with exhibitions where visitors could go to be inspired by the quest

for knowledge as an essential part of our knowledge-based democracy.

With a recent renovation by Congress of the Jefferson Building,

our flagship building, our introduction last year of interactive enhancements in the public spaces and popular exhibits, we have

found that important balance, serving both the scholarly community and the general public. The facilities for the scholarly community have actually been expanded with the addition through private

funds of our Kluge Center.

The Library of Congress has also been an innovator in the internet age, superimposing new digital collections and services onto to

traditional analog ones, reaching out to the young generation and

to lifelong learners to stimulate curiosity and creativity wherever

they live.

We featured, beginning in the mid-1990’s, free digital access to

our collections, putting online both our American Memory National

Digital Library and THOMAS, our legislative data base. This year,

we added a world digital library in 7 languages with some material

covering all 192 members of UNESCO. We also provide online resources targeted specifically for K through 12 students and teachers using our primary source documents. Our Web site usage has

increased 6,000 percent since 1996.

The library, Mr. Chairman, like America itself, adds the new

without discarding the old. We continue to maintain the balance in

serving Congress and the scholarly community while welcoming,

thanks to the passageway from the New Capitol Visitors Center,

visitors both onsite as well as online to this unique storehouse both

of the world’s knowledge and of America’s cultural and intellectual

creativity.

Thank you very much for inviting me today and I would be

happy to answer any questions that you may have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Billington follows:]
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

Mr. CLAY. Thank you so much, Dr. Billington. During my college

days, I also remember the Library of Congress having a pretty good

law library. I guess you still do.

Mr. BILLINGTON. Yes, we do.

Mr. CLAY. I thank all of the panel for their testimony.

And now I recognize my friend from Ohio, Mr. Driehaus, to begin

the questioning.

Mr. DRIEHAUS. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and

I want to thank all the witnesses. You represent three of the most

important institutions, obviously, in the United States and we appreciate the tremendous work.

And Mr. Ferriero, welcome. I just add my congratulations to everyone else’s. This question is to you.

Last week, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget

issued an Open Government Directive that requires agencies to

take a number of actions to improve access to Government information. Under the directive, each agency must take steps to reduce

its backlog of Freedom of Information Act requests by 10 percent

each year.

What actions will NARA take to reduce its Freedom of Information Act backlog as required by the Open Government Directive

and what other steps does NARA plan to take to implement the directive?

Mr. FERRIERO. Just before I arrived, the agency established

OGIS, which is the office that is charged with reducing the, this

backlog and working with the agencies, the CIA and the Justice

Department especially, to ensure that we are streamlining the

process. The point person, Miriam Nesbit, who is going to head up

this office, has been in place since the end of September. She is

now building a staff and working very closely, especially with the

CIA, looking at technological solutions to this problem.

Mr. DRIEHAUS. When you referenced streamlining, can you give

specific examples of what is being done to streamline the process?

Mr. FERRIERO. She is in the very beginnings of establishing new

processes for speeding up the, these requests.

Mr. DRIEHAUS. Okay.

Mr. FERRIERO. I would be happy to come back when we have

something concrete to share.

Mr. DRIEHAUS. My other question gets to this balance between

the role of the Archives in collecting information and making that

available to the public, and the display. Mr. Billington, the Librarian, was talking about the role of the Library of Congress and the

design of the Jefferson Building. In your testimony, you talk about

the balance that is struck between storing the materials and also

displaying those materials for the public.

Mr. Ferriero, what do you believe is the balance for the Archives?

Is it the same as what we are trying to achieve in the Library of

Congress or is that balance different? Is the mission significantly

different such that we do not do the same type of, we do not have

the same type of emphasis on sharing and displaying the information as the Library might have?

Mr. FERRIERO. I think we have similar missions. We have different content that we are talking about. My contents are the

records of the United States. And I think we have the same respon-
36

sibility to provide the museum and educational aspects of our mission as the Library of Congress does. This is the way we excite and

interest a whole new generation of people. I am looking especially

at the K through 12 community, about learning firsthand about

this country, about getting a sense of excitement about our history.

And nothing can compare at looking at the physical, the real, original documents. And it is in service of training the next generation

of researchers and scholars.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you. The gentleman yields back and I go to my

friend from North Carolina, Mr. McHenry.

Mr. MCHENRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate your

having this hearing, Mr. Chairman. I think this is an important

discussion for us to have and for the Congress to be aware of these

important documents we have agencies taking care of.

Mr. Ferriero, I certainly appreciate your appointment and the

credibility you bring to a very important agency and an agency in

much need of strong leadership and certainly appreciate your connection to North Carolina as well, even though it is with Duke.

[Laugher.]

But we have discussed in private, discussed my concerns about

some systemic issues with NARA. Now, granted, you have only

been on the job a few days. But in May, before this committee, the

IG, Mr. Brachfeld of NARA, discussed the loss of sensitive data

from your College Park location. And his, what he said then was

that he saw an agency with complete lack of internal controls, to

paraphrase. How are you going to address that?

Mr. FERRIERO. The security of the collections is high on my list

of these issues that I have identified and we have started to work

on. Security is something that every research collection deals with

and it is this tension between providing access to collections and

protecting them.

Security is a state, a culture of vigilance that is not a one-off

kind of operation. We have come up with a set of recommendations.

And you have done security. It is something that you think about

every day, every minute of your control of the collections. And that

is the kind of urgency that I intend to create within the agency.

The Inspector General was correct. The culture has resulted in a

sense of laxity around security.

Mr. MCHENRY. And addressing that culture, it seems to me that

security, when I think of security, it is when I go into the facility

and you see the Constitution under a lot of glass and some serious

security. But the concerns that I have are in a warehouse, and the

disappearance of many terabytes of information. It is interesting

that I learned this year what a terabyte is and the discussions we

have about that massive amount of information. And now the story

today about finding emails from the Bush administration.

And so there have been some losses. There have been some

gains. But I think they show that there is a need of a cultural

change and I appreciate your willingness to address that. But what

are the substantive steps you will take to change the culture?

Mr. FERRIERO. We have established the Holding Security Task

Force. We have hired a person with a security background to head

up that team and he has the authority, working with the Inspector
37

General, to analyze the situation and come up with a whole new

set of security procedures and policies.

And I should say that security is not the responsibility of just a

few in the organization. Everyone who works for NARA has to have

this sense of vigilance around security.

Mr. MCHENRY. Okay, certainly.

Mr. FERRIERO. This is another one of those areas where I would

be happy to come back and report to the subcommittee on exactly

what we have come up with.

Mr. MCHENRY. We have also had, before your appointment, a

discussion about the electronic records and the ongoing changes

there. Can you touch on that? It is sort of an open-ended opportunity for you to discuss this because, in terms of these changes in

technology, just in the last 5 year. You know, I have a Kindle from

Amazon.com. You know, that technology was not available 5 years

ago. The BlackBerry today is much more powerful than the BlackBerry was 5 years ago, and on and on and on.

So, how are you going to establish this electronic records system

that we can continually update and it makes sense 20 years from

now?

Mr. FERRIERO. Well, it is, it is another one of those challenges

that is at the top of my list to figure out and get right. This is an

initiative that was started many years ago. In the time that NARA

launched this process, the technology has changed already. The

time line needs to be shortened.

The challenge is that every agency has been allowed to create

their own electronic records management system with varying platforms and software packages and they do not talk to each other.

So, it is a little more complicated that just ingesting all of these

electronic records. It is establishing a set of standards.

But primarily, and philosophically, at heart is the Archives, the

Archivist, reassuming his responsibility for ensuring that the agencies are creating these systems and delivering in a way that we can

deal with them. And that is something that there has been great

laxity in the past. No annual audits.

And, as you and I discussed, in most agencies it is usually a junior person who has responsibility for records, high turnover, not

adequate training, and the Archives has not stepped in to, you

know, exercise their authority.

Mr. MCHENRY. Well, thank you for your straightforwardness on

this and your vigilance and we wish you the best.

Mr. FERRIERO. And I do not want to paint a picture of this is a

piece of cake and it is going to be easy to solve. It is not.

Mr. MCHENRY. Well, we are glad you are in charge and I know

it certainly is not an easy, it certainly is a challenge and a distinct

challenge based on the culture you are walking into and these electronic records, in particular, and what that adds to this whole general challenge.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CLAY. The gentleman’s time has expired. The gentleman

from Texas, Mr. Cuellar, is recognized.

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to welcome all

three of you all. We appreciate what you all do and Mr. Ferriero,

also welcome.
38

Let me ask you one question for all of you all. Do you all have

a strategic plan for each of your agencies, that is, a strategic plan

that has the core mission, that has the goals, that has the indicators, the inputs, and can you all make that available to us? Mr.

Ferriero.

Mr. FERRIERO. The Archives does have one. It was recently, it

was updated just before I arrived. It is not my strategic plan.

Mr. CUELLAR. Okay.

Mr. FERRIERO. But I will be happy to make it available to you.

Mr. CUELLAR. When you say it is not mine, I assume you are

going to make some changes to it?

Mr. FERRIERO. I think a new Archivist needs to establish himself

in the agency. And one of the ways of doing that is creating his

own strategic plan.

Mr. CUELLAR. And is there a way to measure your results?

Mr. FERRIERO. Every strategic plan should have, should include,

evaluative measures. Yes.

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you. Mr. Clough.

Mr. CLOUGH. At the Smithsonian, you have our plan. I’m sorry.

You have our plans and it is in the materials that you have. And

it is a plan that we just developed and it took about a year to develop. We had a cultural problem also at the Smithsonian, and so

we wanted to make it an inclusive process to get people to buy in

to the plan. And we finished that, and we are very pleased with

the way the results have come out.

We do, we are required by our Board of Regents to have very explicit goals, and measurables against those goals. And so we have

goals that we expect to be measured against over the life of the

plan, which is basically 2010 to 2015, but also annual goals. And

of the annuals goals, we actually measure our progress toward

those goals every quarter.

Mr. CUELLAR. Okay. Good.

Mr. BILLINGTON. We are halfway through our current strategic

plan and we are engaged, we have engaged in a virtually year-long

process of revising and extending it to 2016. We are nearly finished

that exercise. We have been conducting a really thorough review,

as well as a review of our management agenda, and it will have

some new emphasis and we will get you a copy of this. It is almost

complete and we will get it to you as soon as you want it.

However, revision of the basic strategic plan that we have been

operating under for 21⁄2 years. That is the normal thing, in midcourse, reexamination of your strategic plan, which is what we

have been doing. And we have decided that the changes should be

fairly significant and last through 2016.

Mr. CUELLAR. Okay. And I would ask you all, because I heard

Mr. Clough what you said. I just got a copy. It was not attached

to your testimony. I just got it right now. But there is no measurements and what percentage. Is that in a different document? Because one of the things that I want to see Federal agencies in doing

is to have the mission, the goals and then what you are trying to

measure, because I am looking at what just got provided to me and

I do not see the performance measures. And why would you put

them apart from the strategic plan?
39

Mr. CLOUGH. The plan, the Executive Summary of the Plan

speaks to what we will measure, but not exactly what we have

measured because we thought it would just be too much detail for

the average person. But that is all available in public records. And

we have, in fact, what we try to do as we develop the plan was to

bring all of our, our stakeholders, meaning not just those of the

Smithsonian but those outside the Smithsonian into the process of

deciding what we should measure. And so that is available, and we

can make that available to you.

Mr. CUELLAR. Yes, sir, thank you. And I appreciate all the work

that you all do. Give me an idea, from each of you all, what you

all measure?

Mr. CLOUGH. What we measure?

Mr. CUELLAR. Yeah.

Mr. FERRIERO. Okay, let us start with [remarks off mic].

Sorry. How many people come through the door, but more interesting and more valuable are qualitative kinds of measurements.

How effective was the visit? Did you get what you need? How

qualified are the staff that you interact with? What did you learn

from the experience? And then there are measures on resources,

use of resources.

Mr. CUELLAR. Right. Mr. Clough.

Mr. CLOUGH. Somewhat similar for us in that, for example, for

a museum visit, we survey our visitors and we have a standard to

which we aspire for visitors saying this was an excellent visit, or

this was a very good visit, or this was informative to me in a particular way. So, we have those kinds of measures. We also look at

the number of people who come to our Web sites, how long they

stay, what they tell us that they are learning. We are looking for

more of a two-way exchange today as opposed to us simply measuring some temperature, but literally letting them tell us what

they think. And we look for management expertise, excellence as

well.

Mr. CUELLAR. My time is up. But let me just say this. I would

ask you all to, one of the things about the measurements is that,

I do not want to get caught up in measuring activity or how many

pencils you have. I mean, that is a very simplistic idea, example.

I would ask your staff that is sitting behind you that we measure

the end results, the goals, to do that. Because it is easy to measure

activity.

But, once you set your mission and your strategic goals, how do

we measure the end results? You know, what are the results? In

other words, you can say, how do you improve education? There are

certain things you look at by just counting how many teachers you

have. So, I would love to sit down with you all because I am a big

believer in having Federal agencies to do a lot more on the deeper

thinking of strategic planning on this.

But first of all, I just want to again say thank you to all three.

We really appreciate the work that you and your staffs are doing.

Thank you.

Mr. CLAY. The gentleman’s time has expired. The gentlewoman

from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, is recognized for 5 minutes.
40

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank

you for bringing all three of these kinship agencies before us. They

are very important to the District of Columbia, but exquisitely important to the Nation of the 20 million people or so who come to

visit the Nation’s capitol every year. Many do, in fact, visit all

three of these institutions.

I have questions. Let me begin with you, Mr. Ferriero. You are

the junior member of the trilogy here, and I welcome you and congratulate you on your appointment. I congratulate you on the work

on the exhibits that are up now and on your coming Civil War exhibition, which is much anticipated.

I strongly endorse the transformation that has been underway

for some time so that the Archives lose that aura. The word archives sends out the message, not to anybody I know, I was a history major so it would have interested me, but it is unfortunate

that it does not fully describe in any sense what the Archives

means to anyone even mildly interested in our country.

So, I very much applaud what you are doing. I see the Archives

much more as a museum like the Smithsonian Museum, frankly,

that if you come here you ought to go to the Archives just the way

you go to the Library of Congress to say, this, I have heard all my

life about, let me see what really happens in here, let me look at

it. The very same thing for the Archives.

Now, I am not suggesting a name change here. But I am suggesting that you are transforming how, and this has been underway for some time. I am not sure Congress has been fully aware

of how that transformation, how you keep up with that transformation, because with everybody else it seems to be we are back

into the old Archives business, making sure that you do the filing,

and that scholars can find what they need. Far be it from me to

say that is not important. But the fact is that you serve the entire

country.

And there was a question asked by one of my colleagues about

the so-called balance. Let me pick out one of the things that you

do to ask you whether or not Congress needs to look more carefully

at a transformation of its own, perhaps.

If you go before an immigration court, you do not have any

rights. I mean, you are not in the country, figuratively speaking,

yet you are challenging some kind of order. So, we have immigration court, and you do not have discovery there.

As I understand it, if you want to find out anything about what

the Government, the other side who is in court with you, has on

you, you have to do a FOIA request. And I understand these requests, which are very important, just as are the kind of requests

we had in mind when we passed FOIA, or enacted FOIA, were important. But somebody, whether somebody stays in the country or

leaves, whether or not there is false information regarding whether

the person has been involved in some activity, terrorist or not, is

what Government is relying on, that also is important.

I do not know how you prioritize among the FOIA requests or

what, or whether you are in, have any strategy for keeping yourself

from being buried in FOIA requests, whether you have asked for

a different way to handle FOIA requests, perhaps outside of the Archives, whether you have asked for more funding or staff to handle
41

it. Or are you just sitting there letting the FOIA requests come in

and somebody goes and look when she gets ready to, when she gets

down to you?

And of course if they get to the case, and I am not suggesting

that all of these cases are full of content, but obviously they have

the right to the FOIA because the courts do consider them if they

happen to get the information in time. And guess what? If you do

not get it in time, since you have no right to discovery, off with

your head.

What does the Archives do when it sees, I will not even call it

new, but it certainly is not anticipated, use piling in on you? Are

there more FOIA requests of this kind than any other FOIA requests? What are you doing about it?

Mr. FERRIERO. You are asking very good questions. And I said,

this new OGIS operation that has been set up on the Archives is

charged with speeding up and reducing the time to process those

kinds of requests.

I do not have concrete information about the nature of requests,

but I can get that information and supply it. And this is, you know,

we met 31⁄2 weeks ago——

Ms. NORTON. Is it the largest number of FOIA requests?

Mr. FERRIERO. This is the first I have heard about this category

of FOIA requests. So, I, at first blush——

Ms. NORTON. Well, I think it, I am suggesting that, you know,

you can get all the money you want to. There are certain kinds of

things you will never get enough money to handle. I think you

ought to have your staff and your counsel looking at whether or not

you ought to suggest that either some minimal rights be granted

to people before immigration courts, which is in the jurisdiction of

the Congress, or that something else be done. Because I do not see

a way for you to get on top of what is an ever increasing number,

nor do I think that the taxpayers of the United States ought to

keep pouring money into something of a kind if there is another

way to do it.

I notice your budget has doubled with respect to Presidential Libraries. I wonder if that is getting some kind of preference over the

last 10 years, some kind of preference over other kinds of things

because, after all, they are presidents. Is that the case? I mean,

have you had a doubling of your budget in any other part of what

you do?

Mr. FERRIERO. Not that I am aware of. Although the budget has

kept up with the increasing volume of material that the Archives

is responsible for.

Ms. NORTON. Say that again?

Mr. FERRIERO. Every year, the Archives bring in more and more

content and the budget has increased to support that. In terms of

the Presidential Libraries, the staff prepared, just before I arrived,

and submitted a report on the future of the Presidential Libraries

which spells out five different scenarios for investigation. And I

would expect that we would have a hearing on that in the New

Year to talk about the future of the Presidential Libraries.

Ms. NORTON. I think that requires our attention, Mr. Chairman,

because it is another area that can just run away with. After all,

these Presidential Libraries are supposed to be supported by their
42

own foundations as well as the taxpayers here and the Archives do

have some responsibility. But it strikes me, it is interesting to me

that that budget has grown, has doubled.

Mr. FERRIERO. It is a public private partnership. The libraries

are built by private foundations and——

Ms. NORTON. And the foundations have to know that they have

to keep working hard. And if they see the Government taking on

more and more of it, there will be a disincentive there.

I would like to ask Mr. Clough a question. The last time I looked,

70 percent of the funding of the Smithsonian was from the U.S.

Government. Is it about that percentage now?

Mr. CLOUGH. Yes, it is about 65 percent by Federal appropriations and 35 percent by——

Ms. NORTON. I am very concerned with the fund-raising record

of the Smithsonian. Here we have the most unusual, I would call

it a unique collection, of museums, nothing like it in the world. Any

city that had it in its midst would regard it as a treasure trove.

I am struck dumb by why the Smithsonian has not been able to

raise more private funds from across the United States. I need to

know what your fund-raising model is, considering that I do not expect that the U.S. Congress is going to raise the percentage. We

can hardly keep up with your backlog of repairs and alterations.

Mr. CLOUGH. Well, we are working hard on getting the message

out about the Smithsonian and telling the correct story about the

purposes that it serves to the American people and the world. This

past year——

Ms. NORTON. What is the fund-raising strategy?

Mr. CLOUGH. I’m sorry?

Ms. NORTON. What is the, is there, you know, if you go to places

like New York——

Mr. CLOUGH. Yes.

Ms. NORTON. You know, where you have major museums that

have major fund-raising strategies——

Mr. CLOUGH. Yes.

Ms. NORTON. Even though the city of New York supports them.

Is there such a strategy there besides telling people, this is, you

know, let them know the kinds of things they can see? That is not

going to raise funds.

Mr. CLOUGH. We are very close to having all the pieces in place.

The first part was to develop our strategic plan, which we did, and

that is now public. And then from that, we build what we call our

case statement, which is that we have goals that we think that the

American people and Members of Congress support for us. And

then we try to identify the target for people who, corporations,

foundations and so forth, who would support us.

And this past year, we were pleasantly surprised. We had a goal of $120 million in private philanthropy and we raised $127 million.

So, we did better than we expected on that side. We think with the

strategic plan in place and with a definite, concerted effort to reach

out to the American people, we will do better.

And our goal is to have a national campaign. And you all know

from having your university experience that that takes a structure

which we have not had. We are in the process of working with our

Regents to put that in place. And by the end of the year, we should
43

have not only the ideas, but also the structure in place to actually

get this done. So I think you can look for better results from us

shortly.

Mr. CLAY. The gentlewoman’s time has expired and perhaps that

is the subject of another hearing.

Ms. NORTON. I think so, Mr. Chairman. If I may request a fundraising hearing on the private fund-raising on all three, but especially the Smithsonian. And the words national campaign were uttered. And you come from the academic——

Mr. CLAY. Staff will work with you on that.

Ms. NORTON. Exactly, Mr. Chairman, if I may so. Otherwise, the

pressure is going to be on us to do something which we will not

do.

Mr. CLAY. Okay.

Ms. NORTON. We already are charging to get into the so-called

butterfly exhibit. The Congress of the United States, 20 million

people come here are our constituents. We pay for this whole array.

And the notion of charging to get in any part of it is anathema to

us. So, I regard the butterfly exhibit as——

Mr. CLAY. We will examine those issues——

Ms. NORTON [continuing]. As an outrage and ask that we get private funds for that as well.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you. Thank you.

Let me ask Dr. Clough, what can Congress do to support the

work of our three great cultural institutions in fulfilling what you

describe in your testimony as our, as your collective mission? What

can we do to be of help?

Mr. CLOUGH. Well, I think it is a joint effort, a collective partnership between yourselves and us and the American people to fulfill

our missions, which I think are fundamental and very important

to our history and to the generations that will follow.

I think, as was indicated by Dr. Ferriero, that Congress does a

good job in terms of supporting our missions financially. Obviously,

we could use additional funds because it is a struggle to find that

balance between, if you will, the security and the access type of the

equation and we deal with that every day. But we are very appreciative of the support we do get from Congress. This past year, in

fiscal year 2010, for example, we got $2 million in addition to the

funds that we had before to help us with collections care and security of our collections. And we very much appreciated that.

But I think working collectively together, thinking together about

the future of these institutions and making sure we are all headed

in the right direction, is a powerful way to go forward.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response.

Dr. Billington, you write in your statement that the Library of

Congress, the Smithsonian and the National Archives complement

each other. In your opinion, is there room for more cooperation between these three institutions, especially in leveraging each one’s

inherent strengths, but organizationally and in your collections?

Mr. BILLINGTON. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think there is. I think

that there are fundamental, clear, fairly clear lines in the sense

that the official record of the U.S. Government is in the Archives,

the Smithsonian has a vast array of things, but generally speaking,

covering many of the areas that we do but in a different way. I
44

mean, they tend to have three dimensional objects for exhibition.

We tend to have two dimensional records, whether it is films, well,

they have films, too. There is some duplication, but there is room.

There is a fairly distinct division of labor which I think we all more

or less honor.

And so, but I think there is room for more collaboration. We all

report to different committees, of course. I mean, you were mentioning, in terms of private fund-raising, we never even had a development office before I became Librarian. We get donations but

our staff is very small. We have no Board of Governors, so there

is no Board to help us in this regard.

But we have two major donations, one from Mr. Kluge to set up

a Kluge Center that is really a great additional boon to bring major

scholars here for their work. And we also got this unprecedented

gift from the Packard Humanities Institute that has enabled us to

create this Audiovisual Conservation Center which has been able

to bring back the world’s largest collection of recorded sound and

films, all in one place. They have been scattered. But that is a consolidation.

And I think there is additional work that we can do and I would

hope that we will have more conversations among ourselves to see

if we cannot work together even more specifically than we have in

the past.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response.

And Dr. Ferriero, along the same lines as Ms. Norton’s questions,

Presidential Libraries now make up about one-third of NARA’s

budget. And yet the backlog of FOIA requests at the libraries are

years long and growing every year. It is estimated that it will take

100 years to process just the Reagan Library materials and the

Bush and Clinton Libraries are facing similar issues.

NARA continues to renovate not only aging buildings, but relatively young, permanent museum exhibits and educational programs, including using cutting edge technology and design. Is the

Presidential Library System focused on the right priorities?

Mr. FERRIERO. Well, as I said, this is the subject of, I think, a

future hearing. I can tell you in terms of resources the museum aspect of Presidential Libraries is about 4 percent of the budgets of

the Presidential Libraries. So, in terms of resource allocation, it is

the appropriate balance.

The issue around maintenance and upkeep is one of the big

issues in terms of the long-term future of the Presidential Library

System. These are facilities that, with any decentralized system,

over time require maintenance and upkeep. And there are soon to

be 13 of more than 40 facilities that I am responsible for around

the country.

Mr. CLAY. Let me ask you about the FOIA requests. Last week,

the Director of the Office of Management and Budget issued an

Open Government Directive that requires agencies to take a number of actions to improve access to Government information.

Under the directive, each agency must take steps to reduce its

backlog of FOIA requests by 10 percent each year. What actions

will NARA take to reduce its FOIA backlog as required by the

Open Government Directive? And what other steps does NARA

plan to take to implement the directive?
45

Mr. FERRIERO. Well, as I said, this new office that we have set

up is charged with specifically looking at that and making a set of

recommendations about how we can reduce that backlog.

Mr. CLAY. Okay. All right. Well, I look forward to working with

you in that capacity and all of the responsibilities of NARA. Welcome aboard.

Mr. FERRIERO. Thank you.

Mr. CLAY. Let me thank the entire panel for their testimony and

you are dismissed. And we will call forward the second panel.

Thank you.

It is the policy of the subcommittee to swear in all witnesses.

Would you please stand and raise your right hands.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. CLAY. Thank you and you may be seated. Let the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative.

Let me find my page. I would now like to introduce our second

panel. Our first witness will be Anne L. Weismann, Chief Counsel

for Citizens for Responsibility in Ethics in Washington [CREW], a

non-profit organization dedicated to promoting transparency and

accountability in government and public life.

Ms. Weismann earlier served as Deputy Chief of the Enforcement Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission and

prior to that as Assistant Branch Director of the Civil Division of

the Department of Justice. She has supervisory responsibility over

litigation on the FOIA, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and statutes governing Federal and Presidential

records.

Ms. Weismann received her B.A., magna cum laude, from Brown

University and a J.D. from George Washington University’s National Law Center.

Welcome to the subcommittee.

Our next witness is Janet A. Alpert, president of the National

Genealogical Society, a service organization that leads and educates the national genealogical community and promotes access to,

and preservation of, genealogical records. Ms. Alpert is an amateur

genealogist who has been researching her family for almost 30

years. In 2004, she retired from a 35 year career in the title insurance industry.

She received a B.A. degree in political science from the University of California at Santa Barbara and an MBA from the University of Connecticut.

Thank you for being here.

Our next witness will be Kevin Goldberg, legal counsel, American

Society of News Editors. Mr. Goldberg’s expertise is in First

Amendment, copyright and trademark issues and he regularly advocates issues involving freedom of speech on behalf of press organizations. In 2006, he was inducted into the National Freedom of

Information Hall of Fame for his continued and superlative service

in pursuit of open government.

Mr. Goldberg earned a B.A. degree from James Madison University and graduated with high honors from George Washington University Law School.

Thank you for being here, Mr. Goldberg.
46

And our final witness will be Mr. Carl Malamud, president and

founder of Public.Resource.Org, a non-profit corporation that makes

government information more broadly available on the Internet, including over 90 million pages of documents and 1,000 videos. The

organization has been leading a national effort called Law.Gov to

make America’s primary legal material more broadly available.

Mr. Malamud previously served as Chief Technology Officer at

the Center for American Progress. In the 1990’s, he ran the first

radio station on the internet and was responsible for putting the

SEC, EDGAR and Patented data bases online. He is the author of

eight professional reference books and numerous articles and has

been a visiting professor at the MIT Media Lab and Keele University.

And I thank all of our witnesses for appearing today and look

forward to the testimony.

Ms. Weismann, we will start with you.

STATEMENTS OF ANNE L. WEISMANN, CHIEF COUNSEL, CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON;

JANET A. ALPERT, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL GENEALOGICAL

SOCIETY; KEVIN M. GOLDBERG, LEGAL COUNSEL, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEWS EDITORS; AND CARL MALAMUD,

PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, PUBLIC.RESOURCES.ORG

STATEMENT OF ANNE L. WEISMANN

Ms. WEISMANN. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member McHenry and members of the

subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about

the mission of the National Archives and Records Administration

at this critical juncture.

As Chief Counsel for CREW, we have been pushing NARA for

years to assume the leadership role Congress envisioned for the

agency through the Federal Records Act. Today, NARA must make

some key decisions. The appointment of Dr. Ferriero as the new

Archivist and the administration’s dedication to a transparent and

accountable government present NARA with unique opportunities

to reexamine its mission and priorities and establish a new roadmap for how to achieve them.

Most importantly, the Archivist must decide whether NARA will

continue to elevate its role as the museum of the Nation’s history

over its role as a records access agency, the question this committee has posed. This juncture also affords Congress an opportunity to reexamine the laws that govern recordkeeping in the executive branch.

First, the dismal state of electronic recordkeeping across nearly

all agencies in the Federal Government cries out for a new direction from NARA. As documented in a report we issued in April

2008, and the periodic reports from the GAO, to date NARA has

failed to affirmatively and effectively assist agencies in developing

and implementing effective records management policies.

The GAO’s June 2008 report notes specifically that NARA’s failure to conduct inspections of agency record management programs

since 2000 leaves us with limited assurances that agencies are ap-
47

propriately managing the records in their custody and that important records are not lost.

We at CREW are confronted with this problem all the time as

agencies tell us repeatedly in response to our FOIA requests that

they simply have no way to access and search their electronic email

records. Although this failure has now reached a crisis point,

NARA continues to abdicate its statutory responsibilities and fails

to recognize the urgency of the situation, opting instead, time and

again, for a more passive role that avoids any direct conflict with

the agencies it oversees.

NARA justifies its failure to take on a more active role as resulting from the limited enforcement authority that the FRA confers on

it. But we strenuously disagree and urge Mr. Ferriero to reevaluate

the need for additional legislative authority only after NARA exercises the full authority it already has.

Second, we urge NARA to conduct an independent audit of the

Electronic Records Archive or ERA, including an analysis of its status, functionality and feasibility. Launched in 2001, the ERA has

been promised as the answer to the long-term preservation of electronic records. But, in the intervening years, we have seen huge

cost overruns, multiple instances of contractor mismanagement,

and growing doubt about whether the ERA is capable of delivering

on this promise. And just as critically, NARA has yet to tackle the

issue of public access to records once they make their way into the

system.

Such an audit also has to consider the actions of the contractor

Lockheed Martin and answer questions about its conduct. Why, for

example, has Lockheed Martin applied for numerous patents related to the ERA despite the fact that the project is entirely federally funded?

Even more fundamentally, should NARA even continue with the

ERA given its problem to date? We ask the new Archivist to take

a clear-eyed look at this question and, if necessary, have the courage to abandon the project if it cannot deliver on its promises.

Third, NARA suffers from a culture of passivity that has prevented it from becoming an effective leader in the management and

preservation of our Nation’s history. And I am pleased that Dr.

Ferriero recognizes these problems. With each day, month and year

that goes by without effective management, we lose another slice

of our history.

President Obama has promised an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability. But this promise cannot be fulfilled if

agencies fail to preserve agency records.

In short, the status quo is unacceptable. We ask NARA now to

reinvigorate and redefine itself as part of the solution, not the

problem. We also ask that Congress consider legislative amendments that I have outlined in my written testimony that would add

a measure of accountability and provisions that would better ensure compliance.

We welcome the opportunity to work with this committee and the

new leadership at NARA. I am happy to answer your questions.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Weismann follows:]
48
49
50
51
52
53

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Ms. Weismann. We look forward to working with CREW.

Ms. Alpert, you may proceed for 5 minutes.

STAEMENT OF JANET A. ALPERT

Ms. ALPERT. Good afternoon Chairman Clay and members of the

subcommittee. Thank you for the invitation to testify before the

subcommittee today.

My name is Janet A. Alpert and I am the president of the National Genealogical Society. Our members range from family history researchers to professional genealogists. The genealogical community is well represented in this room today.

The following points are more fully described in my written

statement which has been presented to the subcommittee. Additional statements of support and concern from other genealogy

groups are available on our Web site at www.ngsgenealogy.com.

The National Archives and Records Administration is a very important source of original records for the genealogical community.

As a result, we are their largest research user group. The National

Genealogical Society supports the mission of NARA, but we are

concerned that the two most important priorities, to safeguard and

preserve the records of our government and to ensure the continuing access to the essential documentation, are becoming secondary to the third tenant of the mission, to promote civic education and historical understanding of our national experience.

Several examples support our position. NARA has a backlog of

documents which have not been processed and many more records

which will be coming to NARA for processing and safeguarding

over the next few years. We are not aware of any plans to accommodate the increasing volume of records. It is important for the

major collections to stay at the National Archives Building in

Washington, DC, because people who travel here to do research

need easy access to the other collections at the Library of Congress,

the Smithsonian and the DAR Library.

Second, the extensive record groups at NARA require skilled experts to assist researchers. Due to budget cutbacks, staff reductions

and retirements, we believe the skill level of the staff is diminishing rather than increasing.

Three, plans are underway to reduce the research area so the

museum and exhibit area can be expanded. Continued access to

microfilm and adequate research space is necessary until more of

the records are digitized and available online.

Four, NARA has shown leadership in developing partnerships

with third parties to digitize many records which are very valuable

to genealogists. However, we are not aware of plans to make these

digitized records available to the public for free over the NARA

Web site at the end of the 5-year contract period.

So, as to the question, history museum or records access agency,

from what we have heard, some of the planned exhibits will duplicate records already available on line through local libraries and

they may misrepresent the complexity of the research process.

We support civic education and we think it can best be accomplished at the national and regional archives through hands-on

workshops with student groups and teacher training on using docu-
54

mentary sources in the classroom. We believe it would be more cost

effective to spend the money building interactive learning and exhibits online which would reach the broader public, not just people

who visit the National Archives in Washington, DC.

There are already many wonderful museums among the Capitol

Mall. Yet, there is only unique collection of original records at the

National Archives.

In summary, we recommend that the new U.S. Archivist, David

Ferriero, take both appropriate short-term action and establish

long-term strategies that support the priorities of records preservation and access.

We also hope you will include genealogists in the planning process. The genealogical community stands ready to support the Archivist in building a world class research facility and model for emerging democracies around the world.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Alpert follows:]
55
56
57
58
59
60
61

Mr. CLAY. Thank you so much, Ms. Alpert, for that testimony.

Mr. Goldberg, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF KEVIN M. GOLDBERG

Mr. GOLDBERG. Thank you.

Chairman Clay, Ranking Member McHenry and members of the

subcommittee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify

today on behalf of the Sunshine in Government Initiative, a coalition of nine media organizations that includes the American Society of News Editors.

Mr. Chairman, as you know, SGI and ASNE have a long history

of working with this subcommittee on issues relating to the proper

management and distribution of government information. We are

here today to define the challenges facing the National Archives

and Records Administration in fulfilling its mission in this area.

NARA’s mission mandates that the agency ensures that the people can discover, use and learn from America’s documentary heritage. The democracy, civic education and historical understanding

functions of the agency’s mission statement are impossible without

public access to records created not just decades ago but on a continuing basis.

Now, a much-quoted visionary for government transparency,

former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, saw an active and

informed public as critical to a healthy democracy. Those who won

our independence, Brandeis wrote, believed that public discussion

is a political duty and that this should be a fundamental principle

of American government.

Having previously declared that sunlight is said to be the best

of disinfectants, Justice Brandeis also clearly saw access to government information as democracy’s oxygen. You cut off its supply, democracy dies.

Ensuring access to information is central to SGI’s mission. It is

one of ASNE’s core values. But 43 years after FOIA’s passage, obtaining government information in a speedy or low-cost fashion can

still be difficult, if not impossible, for a reporter from a major daily

newspaper, let alone the average citizen.

That is why today’s hearing is so important. Ensuring NARA’s

dedication to distributing its own records and its newly vested ability to assess other executive branch agencies’ disclosure decisions

is vital to our democracy.

First, NARA must perfect its own access policies and activities.

The agency, like so many others, has significant processing backlogs. NARA issued a FOIA Improvement Plan on October 16, 2006

in which it claimed it responded to 76 percent of all FOIA requests

within the statutorily mandated 20 day response period. Well, Mr.

Chairman, that falls into the C range on a 100 point rating scale.

That is satisfactory, but I was not treated too kindly by my parents

when I brought home Cs.

NARA rightly notes that resources to address FOIA were reduced

as FOIA requests increased. But part of the problem is that the

agency does not appear to have fully implemented its own recommendations made in 2006. There are several links to NARA reference guides and to archival research catalogs. But the legally
62

mandated access to actual records via NARA’s electronic reading

room appears limited and unimproved since 2006.

The need for NARA to get its own house in order is more significant now that Congress has entrusted the agency with a new office

designed to deal with the public and other agencies to make FOIA

work better. NARA must lead by example as the Office of Government Information Services becomes a key contact point for the public on FOIA and reviews other agencies’ compliance with FOIA.

For this hearing, I want to emphasize that for OGIS to be effective, the Archivist must embrace OGIS’ active engagement with

other agencies and the public. OGIS can first help unburden agencies from their FOIA requests by pushing agencies to put more information online without waiting for a request. More information

online means fewer burdensome requests.

As requesters understand that they have an ally in this new office, they will reach out to OGIS for assistance and education. This

should result in faster processing as OGIS quickly resolves imprecise or misconstrued requests.

Finally, OGIS intervention should be able to head off litigation

when parties are simply at an impasse.

But OGIS effectiveness in making FOIA work better for Federal

agencies and the public will ultimately hinge on whether the office

receives the proper support from the National Archives as a whole.

This support rests on two key components: funding and independence.

OGIS was appropriated $1 million in fiscal year 2009 and a budget of $1.4 million for fiscal year 2010. That money has allowed

the office to hire a total of six employees. The office will eventually

need more staff to accomplish its goals. This is why the Congressional Budget Office estimated OGIS would require a budget of $3

million in its first year and about $6 million each thereafter to be

fully functional.

As important as proper funding is a commitment to OGIS independence. The combination of independence and recordkeeping acumen is the main reason Congress has the office within the National

Archives. We hope that OGIS Director Miriam Nesbit and her staff

will be given the trust and leeway needed to develop OGIS.

We thank you for the opportunity to present our views on the future of the National Archives and the importance of this new OGIS

office to the agency’s mission.

I welcome your questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Goldberg follows:]
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74

Mr. CLAY. Thank you so much, Mr. Goldberg.

Mr. Malamud, you are up for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF CARL MALAMUD

Mr. MALAMUD. Thank you Chairman Clay and members of the

subcommittee. I am particularly honored to be here today, following not only our dynamic new Archivist but also the secretary

of the Smithsonian and the Librarian of Congress.

Your invitation to testify asked me to discuss NARA’s mission to

preserve and ensure access to records, and asked if I believe the

agency’s efforts in exhibits and other programs influence that performance.

When President Hoover laid the cornerstone for the National Archives Building, he stated there will be aggregated here the most

sacred documents of our history, the originals of the Declaration of

Independence and of the Constitution of the United States. The display of the Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution are

certainly a visible symbol of our National Archives. But they are

merely a symbol. It is the preservation of records and the corollary

processes of gathering those records from the agencies and making

them available to the public that are the core challenges of this

unique institution.

The Electronic Records Archives are certainly the biggest chal- lenge facing the Archivist. This $551 million computer system has

had a long history of false starts. Just last month, both the GAO

and NARA’s own Inspector General testified to this committee they

have no idea what the system does, how it works, and where the

money went. We do know that after $237 million spent to date, the system has

no back-up and restore capabilities. We do know that public access

to ERA is an afterthought. And we do know that the contractor,

Lockheed Martin, has taken out 15 patent applications on the system. With a half a billion dollars in taxpayer money on the line,

it goes without saying that the software should be open source so

that any State archivist could run the same system.

The ERA system is so complex because of the incoming deluge

of electronic records. When the National Archives was being created, Archivist Connor faced a similar situation. At first, the Archives were simply unable to keep up. Archivist Connor instituted

a series of changes, moving examiners closer to the source and providing better guidance and standardized forms and schedules to the

agencies.

For many years now, records management has been sorely neglected. Guidance has been limited to telling agencies to print and

save, and a recent survey shows no agency-wide policies for important archives such as electronic mail. It was heartening to hear Archivist Ferriero list this area as one of his key concerns, stating

that he would reinstitute agency inspections and that NARA

should play a leadership role.

In addition to electronic records, one of the key challenges facing

NARA is digitization of older materials. Looking back again at Archivist Connor, we see that NARA dealt with an incoming deluge

of paper records by pioneering an important set of technical advances, including the development of microfilm. Digitization of
75

paper and other materials should be a key priority for NARA, as

well as the Smithsonian, the Library of Congress and the Government Printing Office.

In 1935, NARA secured President Roosevelt’s support to get WPA

funding to employ white collar workers to survey Federal archives.

Recovery.gov shows no stimulus funding for NARA and, in the

midst of the current depression, there is a tremendous opportunity

to put people to work by creating public works for the digital age,

an opportunity France seized just this Monday, announcing $1.1

billion in stimulus funding to scan their national library.

Instead of viewing digitization of materials as an opportunity,

the Archives has declared the task to be out of scope and has created as an alternative a series of public-private partnerships with

organizations such as Amazon.com. It is my understanding from

NARA officials that a similar arrangement may be in the works in

which a large number of congressional hearings would be scanned

by LexisNexis and made available on that retail information system.

In his opening statement at his confirmation, Archivist Ferriero

also quoted Archivist Connor and his observation that 45 percent

of the records he surveyed were infested with vermin and insects

and that records mingled higgledy-piggledy with empty whiskey

bottles. This was a defining moment for the new institution and I

think the National Archives faces another defining moment today.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Malamud follows:]
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89

Mr. CLAY. Thank you so much for that testimony.

Let me start with Ms. Weismann. In your testimony, Mr.

Malamud mentioned it also, you bring up the fact that NARA’s

ERA contractor, Lockheed Martin, has applied for 15 patents related to the program, which is taxpayer-funded. Now, can you

please explain your concern that you have with the contractor applying for patents?

Ms. WEISMAN. Well, I share Mr. Malamud’s concern that this

should be open source material. It is just inexplicable to me why

it is that it is the subject of private patents. And if it were patentable, why the Government does not hold those patents and not a

contractor. We are not talking about a system that has been built

with commercial off-the-shelf software. It is being developed and

built entirely with Federal funds.

And I think it speaks to the larger concern I alluded to, which

is NARA’s failure to effectively oversee the contractor. And I know

that the Inspector General at NARA, who I guess has testified before this committee, has also written some reports. And I think

they detail his concerns as well.

It is hard to really get to the bottom of it except that, at a minimum, it appears, at least to CREW, that NARA just does not have

the technical and other know-how to effectively and adequately supervise this contract. And I think that is why here we are, these

many years later and these many, many millions of dollars later,

raising a question about whether we should even continue or abandon this project.

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Malamud, did you have anything to add?

Mr. MALAMUD. Very quickly. I think the National Archives has

a role to play in managing not only its own archives but in leadership to the archives in the 50 States and throughout the world.

When they invented the microfilm and lamination and the airbrush in the 1930’s, they did not patent those and their contractors

did not and it spread throughout our archival science. The ERA

system is something that any State archive should be able to run.

And most importantly, by making it open source, we can see how

the system functions, make sure it is secure, and make sure that

it does the job that it is supposed to do. After all, it is our money

as taxpayers that helped pay for this.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you. Thank you for that response.

Going back to Ms. Weismann. In your written testimony, you

urged the new Archivist to reevaluate the need for additional legislative authority only after exercising the full authority NARA currently has. Can you briefly explain what you meant by that statement?

Ms. WEISMANN. Yes. Time and again, when we have gone to

NARA and urged it to take a stronger leadership role, they have

suggested that they are limited because they have very limited

statutory authority. One of the provisions of the Federal Records

Act that we have had an ongoing dispute with them about on this

issue is the obligation to conduct inspections. They do not do that.

And agencies know that they are not going to be inspected for

records compliance and we have massive non-compliance.

And NARA has suggested, time and again, that it does not have

the statutory authority to do anything more than it is already
90

doing. If you look at the law, I think it is very clear. Congress envisioned, not only envisioned but commanded the Archivist to conduct inspections. And I think this is yet one of any number of examples where they have taken a very narrow view of their statutory authority.

It is kind of remarkable really because sometimes we are dealing

with runaway agencies that have a very expansive view. But

NARA seemingly does not want to take on these responsibilities.

And, frankly, it has seemed very risk adverse. It does not want to

be in conflict.

But we really welcome the new Archivist because it is our understanding that he shares the view that the problem is not a lack of

statutory authority, it is a lack of will in exercising the authority

they already have.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response.

Ms. Alpert, how has the practice of genealogical research

changed and has NARA kept up with the needs of researchers in

terms of resources, staffing and records processing?

Ms. ALPERT. Well, I think it is a continuation of this discussion

about electronic records. NARA was a leader, as one of the other

panelists said, in the 1930’s. And now, so many of the records are

going to be electronic. The new records are coming in electronically.

And there are many, many records behind the scenes that are

still in paper format and they are actually, if you are talking about

pension records, they are actually in folders that are hundreds of

years old.

So, I think the real challenge for the Archivist is how he takes

NARA to the next generation and how he keeps up with this electronic challenge that he has.

Mr. CLAY. And I think Mr. Malamud made a great suggestion as

far as directing some of the stimulus money toward modernizing

archivists’ records.

Ms. ALPERT. As genealogists, the WPA work that was done exists

on every county in the United States and we use it often because

they characterized a lot of the records that existed. So, the work

that was done in the 1930’s is still being used today. It was extremely valuable.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response. And let me say that, before I ask Mr. Goldberg a question, is that we asked for the stakeholder community to let you offer suggestions to Dr. Ferriero and

his staff so that there can be a better working relationship between

the two entities, I mean, between several entities. And so, I do not

want this to appear to be adversarial in any way, but suggestions

to the new Archivist as he enters his first phase in his new position.

Mr. Goldberg, in your testimony, you discussed the challenges

facing the new Office of Government Information Services or OGIS.

What actions do you believe the new Archivist can take immediately and in the long run for OGIS to help meet its goals?

Mr. GOLDBERG. Well, actually this is a particularly apt question

coming on your previous comments about an adversarial role. I actually think we have had, our members of SGI, have had a wonderful relationship, not only with the new OGIS office, but with the

National Archives as a whole. We worked very well with the prior
91

Archivist and hope that that continues. We have every reason to

expect that it will continue.

In the short term, I think that the Archivist must place his trust

in this new office. There are some very talented people there. We

know Miriam, both from her work in Government and out of Government. We know she is going to do the job. She is extremely

knowledgeable about these issues. So, one of the things he can actually do is let her do that job.

In terms of supporting her in that job, and her staff, I think that

comes in two areas. One, they really have to be championing the

funding. This office is drastically under-funded. Even State offices

have more money and more employees allocated to them than this

office has. Pennsylvania has about 10 full-time employees, Connecticut about 20, to accomplish the same tasks on a much smaller

scale.

I also think it is going to be important, if they can do it, to get

this office back downtown. It is a wonderful facility in College

Park. But these folks are going to have to meet with other agencies. There was just discussion in the prior panel about meetings

with the CIA. Well, that means you have to get from College Park

to Langley. Anyone who has ever done that in rush hour traffic

knows that it is almost impossible to get things done. You waste

half your day doing it. So, I think that could really help them accomplish the mission if they have more accessibility to their agencies.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that answer.

Mr. Goldberg, why is it important that NARA immediately address their processing backlog? What is the practical impact of the

backlog on transparency in open government?

Mr. GOLDBERG. Well, for our members, primarily journalists and

authors, it simply means that information does not get out to the

public. It means that waiting for necessary information will either

result in the short-cutting of deadlines, or the short-cutting of publication, or the missing of deadlines outright. In either case, the

public is the one that loses out as they lose viable information that

they would be reading in stories.

I have another more indirect effect and that is that for journalists and authors, they are going to now need to go more often to

secondary sources to obtain information. Some of those people may

not want to talk on the record. That really does our members a disservice in not being able to put the most credible publication forward, but also, of course, has led to other problems that we have

seen in other areas, you know, needing the passage of a Federal

shield law, things like that, to protect journalists that are covering

Government.

I think that we could help all of these problems out by ensuring

that more of the direct, primary source information gets out to the

public immediately.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response.

Mr. Malamud, a key item in several of these partnerships is that

while NARA may not provide free online access to the digitized

records for a period of several years, they may provide free access

to their NARA facilities. We have heard from researchers that
92

NARA may not be providing enough space and resources within

their facility. But is there a larger problem here?

Mr. MALAMUD. Well, Mr. Chairman, let me first reiterate your

thoughts about working with NARA. There are no criticisms here.

I have been very impressed by the new Archivist’s openness and

frankness.

When you think about the NARA facilities, I think there is one

every 10,000 square miles in the United States if you look at the

total area. And if you look at the internet, NARA is everywhere on

the internet. And today, public means online.

If we are going to make materials available, we have to make

them available on the internet. And that is the problem I have

when we put a 5-year lien on the public domain materials, such as

the deal with Amazon.

Mr. CLAY. You wrote in your testimony that the cost of scanning

paper records would decrease dramatically on a larger scale. What

are your thoughts on establishing such large scanning projects and

what would be the costs and benefits?

Mr. MALAMUD. Well, scanning is something that has several effects. First of all, it does provide public access. It also means that

the storage requirements are significantly less. The state-of-the-art

today is about 10 cents a page for paper documents to scan them,

run through a CR and make them available. I believe if NARA and

the Library of Congress and others were to engage in large scale

scanning, that cost per page could get down to a nickel, maybe

even lower.

And it is something that would have a tremendous benefit and

it would be, as I said before in my testimony, an enduring public

work for our digital age. It is something that needs to be done and

I hope that the new Archivist will embrace that challenge rather

than looking at it as something that just cannot be done.

Mr. CLAY. In your comments you talk about there is one NARA

facility for every 10,000 square miles in the United States. You

really concern me because both of them, both facilities that were

mentioned today, I have an attachment to one, being a Maryland

Terrapin and having the facility in College Park I am very fond of

that; and two, St. Louis houses the Personnel Records Center, so

we also founded that. So, I guess it is just the nature of the beast.

But you, Mr. Goldberg, really raise concerns there to talk about

eliminating those.

Let me thank the panel for their testimony today. And when

staff initially proposed this hearing, I figured it would just be another boring hearing, especially with the subject matter. But having a new Archivist on board, we certainly welcomed him and we

are all inspired by the future of the Archives because of who is

heading it now.

And also, this panel raised some very interesting issues that you

made me aware of and educated this committee on. So, we are appreciative of that.

And on that note, this hearing is concluded.

[Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

Æ