I have your letter of April 2 requesting that the Library of Congress be authorized to reprogram $590,000 in the "Salaries and Expenses" appropriation for occupying the James Madison Memorial Building. Your letter indicates these funds are available because of a slower-thanplanned hiring rate in the Processing Department. You indicate there will be a delay in Madison occupancy, which will allow a lower level of security, custodial, and administrative personnel than had been originally estimated in your request for supplemental fiscal year 1979 funding. The $590,000 will finance 121 positions instead of the 257 justified in the request for 1979 supplemental funds. Our Committee offers no objection to your request. However, we do feel that you should thoroughly examine the costs and benefits of contract custodial care. The Library should apply the guidance provided in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, Policies for Acquiring Commercial or Industrial Products and Services for Government Use. We would be pleased to review the results of your analysis. You are authorized to reprogram the necessary funds with the caveat that funding for custodial care may be utilized for either contract services or permanent positions, depending upon the outcome of your analysis of the most cost-effective method of providing building management services for the Madison Building. This authorization, of course, carries no implicit guarantees regarding the additional positions and non-personal items requested in the 1980 budget or the release of Section 311 funds for Madison furniture. LETTER FROM SENATE SERGEANT AT ARMS NORDY HOFFMAN March 12, 1979 Honorable Jim Sasser Chairman Subcommittee on Legislative Branch Appropriations United States Senate Dear Mr. Chairman: In order to meet the responsibility of assuring the safety and security of the Members of the Senate, Senate officials and employees, and visitors to the United States Capitol buildings and grounds, and to protect the property of the United States during the recent extended demonstration by the American Agriculture Movement farm group, the Capitol Police Board in consideration of the reports and information made available to it, felt obliged to authorize necessary overtime by the United States Capitol Police. Although we are pleased that the sufficient display of police personnel around the clock was instrumental in avoiding a single incident or injury within the United States Capitol grounds during the entire period of the demonstration, it will be necessary to request a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $600,000 to cover the cost of overtime for the members of the Capitol Police who are borne on the Senate payroll. It is anticipated that this will be a one time non-recurring request for fiscal year 1979, and every effort will be made to reduce this cost between now and the end of the fiscal year. For your information and consideration, I am enclosing a copy of a letter from Chief James M. Powell in support of this request. With warmest regards, Due to the intensity and duration of the American Agricultural Movement demonstration (farm group), excessively large amounts of overtime have been worked by members of the Capitol Police on the Senate Roll. It is anticipated that supplemental funds of $600,000.00 will be needed to cover overtime expenditures for the remainder of Fiscal Year 1979. Although we feel that we would be derelict in our responsibility to request any lesser amount, every effort will be made to reduce overtime as appears consistent with our committment to adequate security. Your assistance in this matter will be greatly appreicated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. LETTER FROM COMPTROLLER GENERAL ELMER STAATS March 15, 1979 The Honorable James R. Sasser United States Senate Dear Jim: I have read the press accounts of your hearing on Monday, March 12, at which Alice Rivlin testified on the Congressional Budget Office appropriation request. I was particularly interested in your line of questioning concerning Government travel, since this is a matter with which the General Accounting Office has long been concerned. I understand that some reference was made to prior GAO reports on this subject during the hearings, and I am glad you and your staff have been finding GAO studies to be useful in highlighting these important issues. I know that your staff has been working closely with our staff regarding your proposal for a statutory cut-back of Federal travel funds during this coming fiscal year. I believe that it is highly appropriate that we should be cooperating in this type of endeavor. As you know, several years ago there was an amendment which cut back travel in all Federal departments and agencies on a flat percentage basis. We understand that you will propose that a $500 million reduction be apportioned among executive branch agencies by the Office of Management and Budget. We firmly believe that a statutory provision should permit the exercise of discretion in the allocation of dollar reductions among the various executive branch agencies. Otherwise, some agencies might suffer serious impact on their ability to fulfill their missions while others may be able to absorb even larger cut-backs without any adverse effect. Your proposal would do this. We believe that our mutual objectives with regard to Government travel will be achieved through our continued cooperation. Since your hearing, the staff of our Federal Personnel and Compensation Division has contacted the Congressional Budget Office staff to discuss Government travel issues. Two LETTERS FROM EILEEN D. COOKE, AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION March 13, 1979 The Honorable James R. Sasser, Chairman Subcommittee on Legislative Appropriations United States Senate Dear Senator Sasser: On behalf of the American Library Association, I would like to request that this letter be made part of the hearing record on FY 1930 appropriations for the Library of Congress. The American Library Association, founded in 1876, is the oldest and largest national library association in the world. A nonprofit educational organization of over 35,000 librarians, library trustees and public-spirited citizens, the Association is dedicated to the development of library and information service for all the American people. The American Library Association strongly endorses the request of the Library of Congress for an appropriation of $192,900,000 for FY 1980, an increase of $9,349,700 over last year's level including the FY 1979 supplemental request. The growing workload of the library alone accounts for $5,853,244 of this requested increase. In supporting this request, however, we wish to stress that we do so only in recognition of the fact that the Library has taken great pains to limit its proposal to a minimum level on a temporary basis. Members of the Association have always maintained a strong interest in the Library of Congress, which provides essential services for libraries and scholars throughout the country as well as critical information for members of Congress. The nation's libraries look to the Library of Congress to perform not only in national and international capacities, but also to serve as a leader, both in terms of preserving the human record and in the adaptation of expanding technologies to the library and information needs of the world's most advanced society. Unlike many countries, the United States does not have a general library designated as or designed to serve as a "national" library. While it is recognized that the primary function of the Library of Congress is to provide expert service to the decision makers of our nation, there is every reason for purposes of economy, efficiency and effectiveness to fully utilize that initial investment in a manner that is a benefit for all libraries throughout our nation. In order that we might highlight the importance of many of the services provided by the Library of Congress to the nation's libraries, we have attached a fact sheet comprising a sampling of comments from librarians across the country who have briefly stated this importance from their own perspective. The assurance of equality of access to information, which is essential in a democratic society, is the combined responsibility of all levels of government. Some functions such as the establishment of nationwide standards, can only be accomplished by a body with a national base, while certain other functions are simply beyond the capabilities and resources of many state and local governments. It has been suggested that although many services must indeed take place at a national level, local libraries should contribute to the effort or the financing of these endeavors. We feel that libraries have been making significant contributions to many of the Library of Congress programs. We fear that any significant increases in cost of the programs discussed below might lead to a curtailment of participation by libraries which would no longer have much to gain through these cooperative efforts, thereby causing even greater sacrifices by those libraries relying to a substantial degree on a particular program. This is a period of severe strain on our nation's libraries. The price of periodical subscriptions alone climbed 207 percent between 1967 and 1977, while the Consumer Price Index went up 81 percent. Increasing personnel and energy costs further deplete local government and college budgets. In the face of these tight budgets libraries have had to reduce their purchases of new materials with the hope of borrowing items which are in lower demand. In the case of periodicals, |