FIGURE I. THE PROPOSED NATIONAL PROGRAM OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICE

In addition to the Executive Branch of the Federal Government, there are three other key components in the proposed national network which are crucial to its success. First, there are the fifty states, all of whom have resources to contribute to the network and requirements to be filled by the network. Second, there is the Library of Congress, which is the keystone of the nation's bibliographic system and is uniquely able to perform centralized services vital to the network. Finally, there is the private sector, which contains a multitude of old and new information services which fulfill a large part of America's daily demand for information.

Responsibilities of State Governments. National goals in the field of library and information service cannot be achieved unless there is careful articulation between local, state, multistate, and national planning. It is the Commission's view that each of these levels in the nationwide program should bear its share of the total financial burden. For example, the Federal Government would fund those aspects of the network which support national objectives, and stimulate statewide and multistate library development needed to support the national

program. The state government would accept the major share of the cost of coordinating and of supporting the intrastate components of the network, as well as a part of the cost of participating in multistate planning operations. Each state must recognize its responsibilty to develop and sustain its own statewide program of library and information service. Such a program must commit the state to provide funding or matching funding for development of resources and services, including special forms of statewide network assistance and specialized services.

If this type of quid pro quo philosophy were adopted, and if incentive formulae were worked out to make local, state, multistate, and national financing mutually reinforcing, then a nationwide network could grow from the bottom up. To achieve this goal, however, requires that the responsibilities of the various levels be well defined, that financial obligations be clearly recognized and that legal commitments be made possible through appropriate statutes. Some states may decide to provide funding for the further development of library and information services within the state, while other states may elect to share funding with local governments.

It would be an important advance if the states would elect to prepare and/or update corresponding legislation setting forth statewide programs of library and information services, and specifically committing individual states to provide direct and matching funding.

Responsibility for fostering the coordination of library resources and services throughout a state has usually been assigned to a state library agency or to another agency with the same legal authority and functions. This agency is the natural focus for statewide planning and coordination of cooperative library and information services and for coordinating statewide plans with those of the Federal Government. Such agencies should solicit the widest possible participation of library, information, and user communities. Several states such as Illinois, New York, and Washington already have operational systems or networks which are in harmony with the Commission's program. The fifty states, however, must make a firm commitment to continuing support and funding of library and information activities at a level commensurate with the needs of their constituents.

State library agencies have a major role to play in the development of a nationwide program of library and information service. Many of these agencies now serve a significant planning and coordinating function in their respective states or in a multistate complex. Therefore, they should be considered partners by the Federal Government in developing and supporting useful patterns of service. Among the benefits which could accrue from such a partnership are greater possibilities for compatible programs and sustained funding through mutually-supportive efforts.

Proposed Federal legislation in support of library and information services must recognize that the states are at varying stages of developing their services; some states have not yet initiated plans, and others are in the early stages of planning, while still others are already implementing sophisticated programs. Some states have networks organized by type of library, others have networks that include all types of libraries, and still others have networks that include information agencies as well as libraries. Federal-state funding formulae must, therefore, be devised which will take into account these differences among the states and provide the means for supporting various levels of development.

Some of the advantages which would accrue to a state through its affiliation with, and participation in, a nationwide network are as follows:

(1) It would enable a state to get more information for its residents than it could possibly afford to amass through its own capital investment by providing them with access to the total information and knowledge resources of the country.

(2) It would enable a state to receive reduced-rate interstate telecommunications services through the Federal Telecommunications System or commercial channels. This asset alone would repay participation because it represents a share in a very sizeable Federal investment.

(3) It would enable a state to receive computer software, computer data bases, technical equipment, and other materials which derive from the Federal Government's library and information science research and development programs. (4) It would ensure that the state's internal network plans are

developed in harmony with Federal plans, and thus reduce the possibility of large-scale modification costs in the future. (5) It would enable a state to receive matching funding from the Federal Government to provide incentives for bringing state and local collections and services up to national standards.

(6) It would enable a state to receive matching funding from the Federal Government to initiate network operations within the state at levels consistent with the time-frame and scope of the national network.

(7) It would enable the state to spend its library dollars optimally by investing mainly for general state and local needs and relying on the nationwide network for additional specialized materials, for interstate services, and for other services of common concern.

Multistate groups are forming in different parts of the country to provide a mechanism for planning a regional network program among several states. Such groups are usually organized when two or more states decide to pool their financial and other resources for a specific purpose, i.e., for developing an all inclusive library and information program. Some multistate groups are created by interstate compact, some are incorporated, and others function less formally. Where a legal entity does exist for a multistate group, the participating states must decide how financial support from the Federal Government can be channeled to the new organization.

Figure II is a table comparing the National Program responsibilities of the Federal Government and state govern

ments.

Responsibilities of the Private Sector. The private sector is defined as organizations (either for-profit or not-for-profit) which are not directly tax supported. Success of a National Program depends on the degree to which the private sector of the nation carries out its responsibilities toward the growth and coordination of libraries and information centers. As a major producer of cultural, scientific, technical, and industrial information, the private sector must take on greater responsibility toward developing the information resources of the nation.

The private sector should recognize its own special libraries and information centers as windows on the nation's information resources. Without support from parent organizations, without establishment of new special libraries where series gaps are apparent, the private sector will not only shirk its responsibilities, but will diminish its credibility as an interested participant in the National Program. Special libraries are a peculiarly American invention; and it is hoped that the leaders of business and industry who employ professional personnel as an investment to put knowledge to work for them will encourage shared resources through the National Program as a reasonable response to a national need. The private sector should work closely with the public sector in order to produce materials and provide services which will make the national network both useful and cost-effective. The private sector is already contributing toward improved products on the basis of competition in the marketplace.

FIGURE II. FEDERAL AND STATE RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE NATIONAL PROGRAM