acquired by the Library of Congress is best accomplished using automated methods. Improved access to these materials cannot be provided without the application of computer processing to a machine-readable cataloging record. (4) Distribution of bibliographic data through on-line communication. With the promise of acquisition and cataloging of most of the significant publications of the world, including serials, the potential of a complete machine-readable data base can be fulfilled if a central organization speeds the products of these services to the user through his library and information service network. Full utilization of the technology of on-line access and distribution networks must be accomplished as early as the technology makes this economically possible. Some of the products expected are automatic creation of local machine-stored catalogs of local or remote collections, custom-made bibliographies from large data bases, intercoupling of user requests with current cataloging to eliminate delay in availability of recently acquired items, and remote instantaneous delivery of very recent cataloging production.

(5) Development of an expanded general reference program to support the national system for bibliographic service. This would include faster means of communication with other libraries, particularly when the Library of Congress may be the sole source in the nation for the needed information. It would also include an expanded, rapidresponse, referral service to other sources of information. (6) Operation of a comprehensive National Serials Service that will integrate and expand the present serials activities of the Library and provide an organized set of serial services for the nation. Serials constitute the greatest number of individual items in many libraries. Their ordering, receipt, cataloging, indexing, servicing, and preservation consume a sizeable portion of the budget and considerable staff time. National efforts can substantially benefit all libraries, make their work with serials more effective and less costly, and improve the accessibility of serial literature to users. (7) Establishment of a technical services center to provide training in, and information about, Library of Congress techniques and processes, with emphasis on automation. The center's training program would answer the demand for a more detailed knowledge of the Library of Congress's

technical services than can be otherwise gained. It would be developed gradually, would be flexible, and would offer specialized instruction to meet particular needs. It would permit librarians in the field to be brought to the Library of Congress for training, and enable the Library of Congress staff to go out to libraries. The center's information program would be two-way, seeking information from other libraries as to their needs and, concurrently, providing them with up-to-date information about the Library of Congress's technical services. Its staff would make possible expansion of present programs involving communication, consultation, technical institutes, and publication.

(8) Development of improved access to state and local publications and cooperation with state and local agencies to standardize cataloging and other techniques of organization. Potentially useful information in state and local governmental publications is not now widely accessible to users, because it is not uniformly printed, collected, announced, organized, preserved, and publicized.

(9) Further implementation of the national preservation program. The physical deterioration of library materials, particularly those printed on paper produced since the middle of the Nineteenth Century, poses increasingly critical problems for libraries. The solution to this problem lies partly in increased research in preservation methods. Inasmuch as the Library of Congress has already mounted an important effort in this area, a further modest increase would speed the time at which viable solutions are available. Additional funds for filming vital materials, for restoring rare materials, and for transferring deteriorated materials into microform are equally important. Funds are also essential to train the added conservators and preservation specialists needed to retain the record of civilization housed in the nation's libraries.

Proposed Legislation

Future legislation will have as its objective the nationwide network and will outline the role of the Federal Government, the national libraries, and the states in its development and implementation. It will also specify the functions which should be performed centrally; it will establish the basis for appropri

ate Federal-state and state-local matching funding to guarantee a continuing Federal and state investment; it will establish a locus of Federal responsibility for implementing the policies and programs of the National Commission; and it will provide a framework for active private sector participation. Finally, legislation must safeguard the various aspects of privacy, confidentiality, and freedom of expression. The Commission's intent is to create a program that is going to enforce, enliven, and enspirit this country's creative powers, so that more can be achieved with our total intellectual and knowledge capacities. The Commission sees the National Program as a force for productivity and creativity, and not as an authoritative and inhibitive constraint which would control the behavior of people.

Funding

Beginning in 1956, with the passage of the Library Services Act by the Congress, the Federal Government has gradually assumed responsibility for programs of financial assistance to libraries. There are some who view the continued financial support of libraries by the Federal Government with alarm, because of the inferred fear that the bureaucracy will, sooner or later, stifle intellectual freedom. Certainly, the availability of government money for libraries during the past twenty years disproves this theory. The Commission believes that the American public not only accepts the principle of Federal funding for libraries, but also equates it with the Federal responsibility for public education.

Federal assistance programs for libraries have been for the acquisition of materials, the provision of new services, library training and research, new building construction, aid to special groups, and so forth. They have affected public libraries, school libraries, college and university libraries. A small portion of the funds under Title III of LSCA have also been available for interlibrary cooperation. At the close of 1972, the total sum in the annual Federal budget for library grant programs amounted to $140 million. In addition, the National Science Foundation and other government agencies have funded specific projects involving libraries, indexing and abstracting services, and other organizations in the information community. The Federal Government also supports three

major libraries: the Library of Congress; the National Library of Medicine; and the National Agricultural Library. As a result, these institutions are able to perform many important national library functions that benefit the people of the United States.

In 1973, the Administration recommended the elimination of Federal grant programs for libraries. It recommended revenue sharing as an alternative method of supporting libraries, and the General Revenue Sharing Act qualified libraries to receive appropriations for operating expenses. The preponderance of testimony to the Commission indicates that the revenue sharing mechanism does not work well for libraries. The revenue sharing mechanism is unsatisfactory for libraries because it forces them to compete for funds with local governments and their utilitarian agencies, such as the police and fire departments. As educational agents in the community, libraries provide long-range services to all people, but, unfortunately, it is difficult to justify this as a local priority when conspicuous utilitarian problems need immediate correction. As a result, city officials in some cities are reluctant to share some revenue with libraries. Indications received by the Commission thus far reveal that, in some localities, revenue sharing money is offsetting normal operating budgets of libraries, rather than providing them with funds for new programs and services. In such circumstances, it is unlikely that revenue sharing funds will have any impact at all on cooperative action programs or intersystem planning.

Recent actions by the Congress have restored appropriations for many of the categorical aid programs which were eliminated, but the policy of the Administration continues to favor their eventual termination. The President's budget for fiscal year 1975, released for information and Congressional action in January 1974, mentioned a new Federal initiative in the area of library services. It outlines the provisions of new legislation, called the Library Partnership Act. This proposed bill calls for the improvement of library services through a system of grants fostering interlibrary cooperation and through demonstrations of basic library services where these are nonexistent or marginal. The general purposes of the bill are akin to those of Title III of the LSCA with the objectives more closely specified and the eligible community broadened.

While the Commission endorses individual activities which benefit libraries and users of libraries, it is even more strongly disposed to support a well-planned, comprehensive program for library and information services, one that will benefit the entire nation. Categorical aid available to libraries under an array of authorizations has resulted in improved library services in all types of libraries. However, many of the worthy goals are yet to be achieved. The Commission believes that categorical aid must be continued and strengthened until a comprehensive new program is authorized and adequately funded.

States and local governments vary greatly in the amount of financial assistance they give to libraries. Moreover, the way Federal funds are used within the states varies widely. Some have used the money for state-level direction and coordination, while others have spent it on new or improved local services. The Federal principle of requiring matching funds from the state and/or local governments has, itself, had varied effects. In some instances, it has led states to originate state programs that didn't exist before. In other cases, it has not yet achieved matching state aid for libraries. However, in general, wealthy states have been able to take greater advantage of the opportunity than poor states, even though the real need may have been greater among the latter.

Past Federal funding has succeeded in fulfilling part of the original objectives of Federal legislation, but by no means all of them. An enlightened public policy of support for libraries and other information activities, and continuing financial assistance, are dual objectives which the Commission considers vital to the National Program. If the nation is to look forward to constructive development and utilization of knowledge resources throughout the country, an infusion of financial assistance on a large scale is mandatory, and the United States must also revise its philosophy on how Federal and state funding should be allocated to support this nationwide purpose. What is needed is a program of balanced intergovernmental funding.

It is premature to stipulate the criteria for requesting financial assistance from the Federal Government under the National Program, but some suggestions are here put forward for consideration. For example, each recipient would be asked in advance to: