« PreviousContinue »
Service. I must say that having been its director for a brief year and having had something to do with the selection of Dr. Griffith in 1940, I am swelling with pride at what it has done.
Dr. Griffith. May I have about 3 minutes to make a statement on this?
Mr. Horan. Yes, especially bearing upon the fact that about onethird of the time of your staff is devoted to committee service.
Dr. GRIFFITH. By the law and by directive of the House Administration Committee. You recognize we are part of the staffing of Congress along with the committee staffs and the Office of Legislative Counsel. Mr. Horan. And under policymaking of the House Administration Committee. We merely measure out the money here.
Dr. Griffith. We are entrusted with the job of backstopping the committee staffs to make it possible for them in their normal operations to operate on 2, 3, or 4 professional staff members. We are entrusted with the job of being a reserve pool. Then, too, the committees, as you know, from time to time, have additional investigations for which they come to the Committee on Accounts for additional funds. The Committee on Accounts, both in the last Congress and in this Congress, has consistently brought to the attention of committee chairmen the advisability of utilizing our resources prior to or in connection with the requests which they are making of the Congress for additional funds.
For example, if I may give you an example of which many are available, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs requested some tens of thousands last year for their work. In their full presentation they said they could get along with only $6,000 for additional Personnel instead of a greater amount because they could count on the Legislative Reference Service. I could give you an example of another type in the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate, first under Senator Fulbright and now under Senator Hickenlooper, in connection with their investigations of the Voice of America. By contracting with us, at a cost of about one-third of what it would have been otherwise had they gone out to recruit a new staff, they were able to show unexpended funds for personnel of almost 50 percent of what they had originally asked for.
The Committee on Accounts, and I think its chairman and its ranking minority member will indorse this, is able to bring this delicate pressure upon the committees in connection with requests for extra funds only if the Legislative Reference Service is actually in a position to backstop. The committee some years ago in the 80th Congress conducted a study of the economies actually represented by this third of our time given to committee work. They found by canvassing the committee chairmen of both Houses that we were operating at one third of the cost of what the committees would have had to pay had they had to go out and recruit additional staff. But that is, as I pointed out, only possible, if we do have an adequate backstopping staff.
The other point is the use made by individual members, and I think this chart (showing chart) will tell our story in very concise form. We are not out looking for business. The only operation which we have conducted this past year which might possibly come under that heading was an operation which we cleared with the Speaker and obtained his endorsement of it, this consisted in informing new
Members of Congress what services we were in a position to render so they could use our staff intelligently.
We are frankly caught in a very serious squeeze. We have no control over what we are asked to do. We have had an increase since 1947 of 118 percent in the number of inquiries. I am not counting the inquiries which we answer offhand, the minor items. I am counting only the recorded inquiries which require research. We have 51,000 inquiries, but a lot of the inquiries are just asking about spelling a name or a brief citation of law or something like that, a very useful service but it does not figure for practical purposes in our cost. So we deducted those rather than pad our statistics so that you could have confidence in the basic figure of 180 percent increase. Over against this our staff has increased only 21 percent in these 6 years. We have chosen on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee on House Administration to try to restore the level at which we were functioning 2 years ago at which time we had reached fairly nearly an adequate staffing. We have had no increas: in appropriations since then. We have had a slight increase in staff members by increasing the number of low-paid staff as over and against the top group.
We need, gentlemen, $20,121 just to hold the present staff, without reference to any increase to catch up the arrears. This is in part because of the increased costs that the Government Printing Office charges for the Digest of Public General Bills with which you are familiar, but principally because of the operations of the statutory ingrade increases for staff which, as you know, are automatic. We have succeeded in building up a stable staff, and the result is that we pay the price for this stability in these automatic increases.
The $65,479 for additional personnel and consultants which we are requesting is on the basis of the formula or directive given us by the House Committee on Administration and endorsed by them as a matter of principle, not as a matter of the amount because that is the function of this committee, but as the basis for calculating this is less than an 8-percent increase in costs. We propose this to take care not only of a 14-percent increase of workload over the past 2 years which has not been taken care of in the staff—but also an estimated 10-percent further increase for the second session. It is our experience, conservatively stated, of the growth of business of a second session of Congress as compared to its first session. It is familiar to you, that on the whole you transact more business the second session, and on the whole more of the new Members find out our facilities by the second session than know it the first.
Mr. Gary. What is this $85,000?
Dr. GRIFFITH. That is the rate of annual payroll, but we make it & practice not to fill vacancies during the time which Congress is not in session.
Dr. Evans. $85,000 is the total increase; the last figure above that is the new positions.
Dr. GRIFFITH. Of this $85,000 I should mention that $18,300 is not an increase. It is a transfer from one heading in the Library appropriation to another heading. The biggest item transferred is congressional photoduplication. This used to be appropriated for under the heading of “Photoduplication," and has now been transferred to Legislative Reference. It is not an increase.
The actual increase is made up of two items: $20,121, chiefly ingrade increases but in part the increase in the cost of printing over which we have no control; and $65,479 for additional personnel and consultants. Mr. HORAN. With the lapses figured into that total.
Dr. Griffith. Yes, and I may say, Mr. Chairman, that we will pursue our policy of not filling vacancies when Congress is not in session. I do not anticipate that we would come back another year asking for the difference between what we are asking for and the additional lapses, because of this policy.
Dr. Evans. Mr. Chairman, I would like to underline one point. When we develop the budget for Legislative Reference Service, we go to the House Committee on Administration and ask them what changes they would like in our service. Then we estimate the amount of money and we bring the estimate of that amount to you; but we do not ask for anything that is not approved in principle by the Committee on Administration.
Mr. Horan. Our job is to measure out the money in terms of the will of Congress which we assume is the will of the people. Are there any further questions?
Mr. Bow. I wonder whether the Legislative Reference Service could find out for me how I happen to get about 200 letters from various libraries all over the United States, practically identical letters, urging that the funds for the cataloging and the Library should not be reduced?
Dr. Evans. I can explain that.
DISTRIBUTION OF CATALOG CARDS
* Vr. Horan. Before we recessed at noon we had reached the distribution of catalog cards. It is my understanding that this Division of the Library of Congress pays about 80 percent of its own freight. Is there any general statement of justification that need be made on this?
Dr. Evans. Mr. Chairman, we think this is one of the finest things that the Library of Congress does for the people of this country. Your local libraries throughout the country are saved a great deal of money in the cataloging of the books because of the fact that they can buy these cards from us and file them in their catalogs. There is a card for President Eisenhower's inaugural address. Here is one that might interest Members of Congress, "Managing your money.” It is on a personal basis.
Mr. HORAx. I do not need a book on that.
Now, we do the research that shows who the author is, what his dates were. We give the pagination and the subject headings at the botton; the card numbers, both for the Library of Congress classification and for the Dewey decimal classification, which is a great convenience to local libraries. They can buy these cards, all the copies they need for their catalogs for 15¢ or 20¢ or 30é, depending on the given book and they save dollars in cataloging the books. very proud of this service and it is also very fortunate that it pays its
There is some money here for increased postage because we are doing more business. Business is up approximately $50,000 as of right now as against last year. Some is for ingrade increases and so on, but the main item is eight new positions which are requested for a publication called New Serial Titles. Mr. Cronin will show you an issue of this publication. The idea is to get the locations of these new periodicals in other libraries in the country as well as the Library of Congress. This operation is entirely self-sustaining, so that all the money we are asking you for here will come back to the Treasury from the receipts for the sale of New Serial Titles. We make a promise to the Congress on that point.
The cards we print are in thousands of American libraries. They have good subject headings, the authors' names and dates are right and there are explanatory notes. The work has been done for 50 years by a special authorization of Congress and it is largely selfreimbursing to the Treasury. The money goes into the Treasury, does not come to us for reexpenditure.
Mr. HORAN. Are there any questions on the cataloging card distribution? If not, we will pass on to general increase of the Library of Congress.
GENERAL INCREASE OF THE LIBRARY Dr. EVANS. This is our fund, Mr. Chairman, for everything except the lawbooks. The lawbooks are a separate one that we will come to. You will notice that I said this morning that $7,500 travel was transferred out but not shown in the printed budget. That decreases the budget appropriation by that amount. We are not increasing travel bere. We are keeping it at the same figure librarywide. There is $100 here for increase in transportation and $1,800 for communication services and a small amount for vault rentals for the motion-picture collection which Congress told us to put in cold storage in 1947. We are keeping it in cold storage until sometbing is done about the whole Government policy on that subject.
Then there is an increase here, the breakdown of which is given on page 48, to adjust largely, Mr. Chairman, for price increases. I think we can explain this whole thing on price increases except that we are asking for some money to microfilm some materials that we cannot get otherwise. This would mean a considerable enlargement of our program in getting books in microfilm form that relate to the Soviet Union, Eastern European countries, certain parts of Africa and southeast Asia and the Far East, Korea, Burma, the Philippine Islands, Chinese gazetteers and periodicals that are in Japanese libraries and unpublished lists of materials in European archives and so on. So that part of this is for price increases; the other part is to fill in back gaps in our collections which cannot be filled by the original material but must be filled if at all by microfilming.
Dr. Evans. We give some examples of how prices have increased here, just as samples.
Mr. Horan. Where are those examples?
Dr. Evans. Top of page 49, sir. We do not have to buy the American Political Science Review, because we get it by copyright but we give that as a sample of the price increase which has hit us recently.
Mr. Horan. Does the Library of Congress have to buy much of this material?
Dr. Evans. It has to buy some American material, sir, but most of the material we have to buy is foreign.
Mr. Busbey. How many daily newspapers did you get in the Library every day?
Dr. Evans. We get several hundred, I do not know the exact number.
Mr. CLAPP. It is several hundred including American and foreign. We do not keep, we do not bind all of those but we get them. We then reduce the list further for preservation. Some of them we do not keep in their original form. We get microfilms in place of the originals. In other words, we do not keep some of them in any form at all especially this is true if we know that other libraries are keeping them. For example, we have just had a discussion with a library in the Midwest to see who will keep a certain Polish newspaper. We have the best file but they have the desire to keep it.
Dr. Evans. We get out a list of the American and also the foreign newspapers that we do actually keep and I will be glad to send that to you.
Mr. Busbey. It is several hundred newspapers?
Mr. Horan. Before we pass on to law library, I want to encourage that exchange of responsibility wi h other libraries.
Mr. CLAPP. Do you want to speak of the Farmington plan? Dr. Evans. Mr. Chairman, I think that is very sound. Ten years ago or so the Library of Congress really took the lead in getting the great research libraries of this country to agree that we were wasting our money. Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, were all collecting about the same thing in many fields. The Library of Congress, too, so we said, “Look, boys, let us get together, let us say that library A will not collect French literature except what it has to have and that library B will collect French literature and everybody can count on library B to have French literature" and we went around the whole circle of the whole field of knowledge. We called this the Farmington plan merely because the idea was agreed to at the home of an eminent book collector at Farmington, Conn., where we happened to meet.
Today we are saving the people of this country, in some cases taxpayers, local and Federal, and in some cases donors of private libraries and trustees of universities but nevertheless we are saving money by having put this kind of an agreement into effect. And today, we are making our money go much further. We have perhaps 250 subject fields on the list, every cooperating library knows the list, and hence which library has responsibility for each field. The fact that Harvard takes responsibility for a given subject reduces the requirement on the Library of Congress, so that we as well as others are actually making savings.
Mr. Clapp. The Department of Agriculture Dr. Evans. The Department of Agriculture and Armed Forces Medical Library are on the list. They are making some savings by this
. The planı results in increased efficiency and makes the money go further.
Mr. Wagman. One interesting aspect of this is that we keep the record of where the books are.
Dr. Evans. The records are sent to the Union Catalog of the Library of Congress so that one can find a work by writing there and asking about it by author.