users navigate through the complex layers of technology and the confusing maze of government agencies to find the information they require. Recent usage statistics of the Government Printing Office's GPO Access system are impressive, as is its expansion to include more than 70 databases from all three branches of government. In March, over 4 million documents were downloaded from GPO Access. We commend GPO for additional enhancements including the online Monthly Catalog; the electronic Pathway Indexer that links users to information resources at over 1,274 other federal agency Web sites; the centralized database that allows users to search through the Government Information Locator Service (GILS) records of twenty-six federal agencies; and transparent access to materials that reside at its storage facility. These developments underscore the important and pervasive impact electronic technologies have had and will continue to have on how the public accesses government information. It is imperative that the law reflect this present reality and provide for future developments by reaffirming that electronic government information falls within the scope of Title 44. Revisions to Chapter 19 are of paramount importance at this time to provide the flexibility necessary within GPO and the FDLP to continue to expand electronic services and to ensure that the revised Title 44 fulfills the overall goal of improving public access. As part of last year's congressionally-mandated study, the Government Printing Office drafted a proposal to revise Chapter 19 that would replace outdated language and unnecessary detail in the current law to reflect new technologies. The proposed language, which Public Printer Michael DiMario sent to this Committee last summer, was developed as part of a collaborative effort with input from the library community. The GPO proposal would: 1. 2. bring all current and future formats into the FDLP and provide bring flexibility to the program, particularly in the changing role and 3. build upon the positive role of depository libraries in bringing gov- We ask this Committee to consider incorporating the provisions of GPO's proposed Chapter 19 language into this draft legislation to ensure that the Federal Depository Library Program is strengthened to include information in all formats from all three branches of government and that it is given more flexibility in its operation under regulations to be issued by the Public Printer. Mr. Chairman, we would be very willing to assist the Committee by suggesting to you some specific recommendations. Any revision to Title 44 must continue to provide for a central appropriation through the Superintendent of Documents for the Federal Depository Library Program. There are many benefits to agencies, libraries and users alike in the utilization of new information technologies in support of data creation, maintenance, dissemination and preservation. Users can access agency databases in a more timely and effective manner. Yet the dissemination of government information in electronic formats increases the costs and the responsibilities for libraries as well as for government agencies. Libraries are investing substantial funds to provide highly trained staff, adequate space, costly equipment, and Internet connections so that the public has equitable, ready, efficient and no-fee access to government information in both print and electronic formats. The costs to agencies to build the technological infrastructure necessary for the creation and dissemination of online electronic information are also high. However, the dissemination of information to the public should be reflected in every agency's mission and accommodated in every agency's budget. A central appropriation to the Superintendent of Documents for the Federal Depository Library Program is needed especially for the many new costs brought about by electronic technologies. For example, there must be adequate FDLP appropriations to guarantee that citizens have access to information for which some agencies now are required by law to recover their costs; for licensing fees for software without which electronic information may be useless; and for sufficient levels of access, i.e. adequate number of depository library passwords, to electronic products that may replace hundreds or even thousands of print titles. It is also critical that legislation provide appropriations to cover GPO's overhead expenses in order to bring down the costs of publications to the public. One of our key concerns in the discussion of access to electronic government information products is that citizens, whose tax dollars support the creation of government information, have access to it in a form that is meaningful and usable. The notion of providing "plain vanilla" versions or only the raw data sets of public domain information to the American public is troubling as it may not meet their important information needs. The library community has long maintained the belief that electronic products must be usable to the public, and that the public must have access comparable to the usable products developed for the agency itself. GOAL II: To ensure continuous permanent public access to government information in all formats. It is critical that the law recognize the responsibility of the federal government to provide for permanent public access to government information in all formats through a comprehensively coordinated program that includes the Superintendent of Documents, federal agencies, the National Archives and Records Administration, the Library of Congress and other national libraries, depository libraries, and other library partners. This responsibility should be established within the Superintendent of Documents. This is a natural and important extension of the public dissemination role of the Superintendent of Documents as administrator of the Federal Depository Library Program. In the print world, this responsibility is being met successfully by the Regional depository libraries of the Federal Depository Library Program. As cultural institutions dedicated to public access, libraries are proven and effective partners in providing broad public access to physical collections. Whether these materials are printed publications or tangible electronic products like CD-ROMs, there are tremendous advantages to having multiple, geographically dispersed collections of government information located around the country for the public to use. In the electronic world as well, libraries again provide an invaluable service by supplying the local infrastructure-including hardware, software, training, expertise, and other services-necessary to effectively connect users to electronic resources. But physical custody of the electronic databases remains with the government agencies, not libraries. In an electronic environment, the only partner in a position to effectively preserve and provide ongoing access to government information is the federal government itself. The federal government should build upon the current Regional depository library program by transforming that program into a more flexible one that best uses the capabilities of the libraries and publishing agencies. Relying on a single storage facility for electronic databases is a dangerous proposition. Note the extensive damage being done this week to North Dakota and Minnesota libraries due to the flooding of the Red River. A system for permanent public access must include adequate redundancy at multiple sites in order to ensure that information will not be lost. There currently exists no comprehensive system for retention and continuous public access for electronic government information. As the Committee heard at last summer's hearings, it is not within the mission or resources of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to fulfill this function; its responsibility focuses on archival preservation of materials, and NARA is not equipped to handle the daily needs of the public to gain ongoing access to older information. Providing permanent public access for electronic data is a new responsibility for government in the electronic environment-and one that will require considerable resources. But it is fundamental to the principles of public access and an informed citizenry, and a responsibility that must be addressed by all three branches of government. Each day that this need goes unresolved, alarming amounts of government information continue to be lost as files come and go from agency Web sites. This denies taxpayers access to information they already have paid for, and undermines the long-term use by the public of government information already collected, compiled, and disseminated. It also makes hollow the promise of any new electronic technologies if the long-term effect is an ever-widening gap in our collected knowledge and information bank. We strongly urge that legislation to revise Title 44 include provisions to establish the ongoing responsibilities of the federal government over the entire life cycle of government information, and specifically, to provide continuous permanent public access to electronic government information. We believe that legislation should empower the Superintendent of Documents to coordinate this responsibility for all three branches of government. GOAL III: To ensure participation and compliance by agencies in all three branches of government. We in the library community share the Committee's deep concern over inadequate agency compliance with Title 44 and the negative impact this has on the public's ability to access government information. We strongly agree that any proposal to revise Title 44 must ensure that information created at taxpayer expense remains in the public domain and is publicly available at no fee through depository libraries. We agree with the intent of the definitions in the draft legislation that attempt to resolve this issue. We believe that the definition of government information should be broad in scope. It should include all government information created at taxpayer expense, in all formats and from all branches of government. Exceptions should be limited to information classified for reasons of national security, or information for strictly administrative or operational purposes which has no public interest or educational value. While the strongest incentive for an agency to disseminate information is to inform the taxpayer of the vital work which the agency performs, dissemination of information is rarely within an agency's mission. The legislation should provide a balance of incentives and enforcement to ensure agency participation and compliance so that information created at taxpayer expense remains in the public domain and permanently available to the public. We are pleased to see that the draft bill vests the Public Printer with regulatory authority and strengthens the Superintendent of Documents' enforcement powers. We question whether the proposed enforcement mechanism of civil penalties will really work. For that reason, we would like to offer an enforcement provision (Attachment 2) that has the advantage of providing oversight within each branch of government. This draft bill proposes establishing the Government Printing Office as an independent executive agency to address the constitutional separation of powers problem. We in the library community are not convinced that the Government Printing Office cannot constitutionally function as an agency located in the legislative branch. Should Congress determine that independent status for the Government Printing Office is desired, however, then the following provisions are necessary, at a minimum, to assure its permanent independence and to help ensure cooperation and compliance by agencies in all three branches of govern ment. Independence of the director through a fixed term and removal only Concurrent submission of the agency budget to Congress and the Independence of the agency's regulatory authority from the Office of Insulation of the agency from reorganization in ways inconsistent All of these provisions would protect the independence of the Government Printing Office and recognize that it, like other “independent" agencies, can function more responsively to Congress while being formally in the executive branch. Regardless of the organizational placement of the Government Printing Office, the library community has always seen great value in having a committee of the Congress oversee and coordinate printing and information dissemination matters. Every American in every congressional district has an interest in the free flow of information from government to the public. The Framers of the Constitution even saw fit to inscribe in that basic charter the requirement that Congress keep a public journal of its proceedings. If it is determined by constitutional experts that the current congressional oversight structure should not perform essentially regulatory functions pertaining to other branches of government, removing those functions still does not alleviate the need for central guidance and coordination of the information dissemination activities of the legislative branch itself. Nor does it alleviate the need for close and continuing oversight of the information production and dissemination activities of the executive and judicial branches. To help address all three goals, we suggest that the Committee consider better equipping the Government Printing Office to deal with the rapid pace of technological change and the stresses that change puts on traditional arrangements and structures for producing and disseminating government information. Attachment 3 to this testimony provides some thoughts on "Implications of Technological Change; Consider a Chief Technology Officer." CONCLUSION We appreciate the Committee's resolve for completing this task and we share your sense of urgency in developing the necessary national information policies that will guarantee citizen access to government information in the changing electronic environment. The process that you have undertaken to develop legislation to amend Title 44 is an important culmination to last year's study by the Government Printing Office on the transition to a more electronic library program. The seven library associations that I am representing consider the problems of access to government information so pressing that in January we formed an Inter-Association Working Group on Government Information Policy. This group has begun identifying key issues that need to be addressed by legislation. These include the issues that I have highlighted today, in addition to others that must be considered as well. For example, what would be the impact of the draft bill on the relationship between the Government Printing Office and the Library of Congress regarding cooperative cataloging? Would this draft bill facilitate a better relationship between the Government Printing Office and those agencies engaged in conducting cost recovery services? And how would separate appropriations to the House and Senate for printing and binding needs affect congressional printing and dissemination? We support this Committee's commitment to addressing the growing crisis in public access to government information through the revision of Title 44. We appreciate the opportunity provided by these hearings to comment on this draft bill, and we hope that the concerns raised in our testimony today will be incorporated into the legislative proposal to strengthen and improve citizen access to public information. We are also pleased with the provision of this draft legislation that provides opportunity for wide participation through advisory councils to the Public Printer. The Depository Library Council has played a vital role in advising the Public Printer on matters relating to the Federal Depository Library Program. The Council recently concluded its 50th meeting here in Washington that was attended by over 500 librarians and government information specialists. We recommend a specific provision to establish an advisory council comparable to the current Depository Library Council since the library program is specified in law. Finally, we would like to express our appreciation to Eric Peterson, Staff Director of the Joint Committee on Printing, for the cooperative approach that he has taken to this endeavor and for his willingness to engage the library community in this on-going dialogue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, for the opportunity to provide comments to you today. We look forward to continuing to participate in this important discussion. Attachments: 1. Goals for Revising U.S.C. Title 44 to Enhance Public Access to Federal Government Information, Draft Working Document prepared by the Inter-Association Working Group on Government Information Policy (April 1997). 2. Accountability Section (To be added to JCP Discussion Draft), Draft Working Document prepared by the Inter-Association Working Group on Government Information Policy (April 1997). 3. Implications of Technological Change; Consider a Chief Technical Officer, Draft Working Document prepared by the Inter-Association Working Group on Government Information Policy (April 1997). 4. Organizational Biographies. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Buckley. TESTIMONY OF BEN COOPER, VICE PRESIDENT, OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA, ALEXANDRIA, VA Mr. COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Printing Industries of America welcomes this opportunity to provide comment on proposed legislation to transfer the Government Printing office from the legislative to the executive branch as an independent agency. We recognize the primary goal of the legislation is to resolve the separation of powers issue which has been the subject of discussion in this committee for several years. The legislation seems to satisfy that purpose. While we believe it is important to resolve this issue, the location of the GPO in the executive or legislative branch is not central to the concerns of the Printing Industries of America. What is relevant is whether the Federal Government operates a procurement system which is fair and open to as many companies to participate as possible and whether or not the Government continues to compete with our industry. The proposed legislation does not address these issues. If this legislation is enacted, the issue of whether or not the Federal Government will continue to compete with the private sector for the manufacture of printed and other information products will be left to a regulatory process. It would also appear that the decision regarding contracting out will be left to the regulatory process. Since there is no direction in the legislation on these topics, we would assume the status quo would apply. Unfortunately, status quo means continued uncertainty. For a number of years, Federal agencies have bypassed the GPO procurement system and continued to expand their own printing facilities. While we have had numerous meetings with these agencies and representatives of the Office of Management and |