The 32nd National Library Legislative Day
| Published date | 01 July 2006 |
| Date | 01 July 2006 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/07419050610692271 |
| Pages | 19-21 |
| Author | G. Arthur Mihram |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science |
The 32nd National Library Legislative Day
G. Arthur Mihram
LIBRARY HITECH NEWS Number 6 2006, pp. 19-21, #Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 0741-9058, DOI 10.1108/07419050610692271 19
This year's meeting of the American
Library Association's (ALA's) National
Library Legislative Day was held on
1-2 May 2006, the second day devoted
to visits, whether individual or, more
typically, as statewide delegations, to
the offices of Representatives and/or
Senators, seeking their support for
libraries and/or national issues
supported by the ALA. The meeting
again was co-sponsored by both the
District of Columbia Library
Association and the Special Libraries
Association, and held at the Holiday Inn
on the Hill.
Approximately 520 persons registered
for attendance at the ``Day''. This year,
a one-day pre-Conference was held on
30 April 2006 in the ALA Washington
Office's new location: 16l5 New
Hampshire Avenue, NW (DC 20009).
The pre-Conference was held not only
to welcome attendees to the new
quarters but also, while there, to provide
tips on how to make an impact during
visits to one's chosen legislators. For
general information on the day, see
www.ala.org/washoff/legislativeday.html
On the first day, the program first
consisted of two back-to-back plenary
sessions: (A) appropriations; and (B)
selling your library to congress.
The Association of College and
Research Libraries (ACRL) held for
its own registrants a Legislative
Luncheon (C), including as speaker
Rodney Peterson, now with
EDUCAUSE's offices in Michigan.
Then, in the afternoon, the program
broke into four theme-oriented
sessions, scheduled into a pair of two
concurrent topics:
D1 Tele-com; plus
D2 Literacy through school libraries;
then,
E1 ALA Washington Office News-
letter (ALAWON) and Legislative
Action Center (LAC); plus
E2 Copyright.
Since the LHTN readership is most
likely concerned more with topics (D1)
and (E2), I attended only these for the
purpose of reporting.
Nonetheless, a note or two with
respect to the sessions (D2) and (E1):
each was chaired by a member of the
ALA-DC's staff (Office of Government
Relations (OGR)), so that further
information can be found at: listproc@
ala1.ala.org and www.onlineadvocacy.
net respectively. Distributed was a one-
page report, ``Network neutralityand the
COPE Bill,'' advising that a ``Network
neutrality amendment'' had been rejected
for inclusion in the Communications
Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhance-
ment Act of 2006 (COPE)
(www.benton.org/index.php?q=node/
1882) , and that registrants should press
House members for the Amendment's
reinstatementin the Bill/Act.
The overall theme of the day was
``Rediscover libraries,'' it being noted
that the ALA's Annual Meeting this
year is to be held 22-29 June 2006 in
New Orleans and the ACRL's next
(13th) National Conference will be held
29 March-1 April 2007 in Baltimore,
MD (www.acrl.org/baltimore).
The plenary sessions
Quite frankly, the ALA could have
done well to have heard the discussions,
surrounding the presentation by Senator
Bill Frist's assistant, G. William (Bill)
Hoagland, at the American Association
for the Advancement of Science's
Forum on Science and Technology (see
report, this LHTN issue), held virtually
next door, ten days earlier on 28 April,
though to have done so might have
deflected the enthusiasm of many
attending the day. At the forum,
similarly oriented to providing
information on (likely) governmental
funding support, Hoagland allowed the
AAAS attendees to appreciate that just
five governmental ``programs'' cost
more than the federal revenue collected
for the year. Since the ``Interest of the
National Debt'' is the fifth of the five
largest annual expenditures, one tends
to recognize that a sense of
responsibility needs to guide any who
seek governmental funding support for
matters that are often placed in the
context of ``another civil right''. One
can perhaps be reminded of the notion
of one's national (not just his/her
personal or family's) fiscal
responsibility.
The Day's Plenary Session on
Appropriations (A) was a panel
composed of: Erik Faterni, Senate
Appropriations Committee: Minority
(Democratic) staff, Labor-HHS;
Candice Ngo, Senate Appropriations
committee: Majority (Republican)
Staff, Labor-HHS; Cheryl Smith,
House Appropriations Committee,
Minority Staff, Labor-HHSl; but, then,
Melanie Anderson, assistant director of
ALA's Washington Office's Office of
Government Relations (Appropriations)
(The ALA maintains a web site on
appropriations: ww.ala.org/ala/washoff/
Woissues/washfundig.htm). Each made
a presentatio n, yet kept comme nts to the
rather general. The session (A) served
more to introduce the leader for each of
the four topics (D1, D2, E1, E2) to be
central to the afternoonsessions.
For example, Miriam Nisbet, the
ALA's Washington Office's Legislative
Counsel for Copyright issues
(mnisbet@alawash.org) promoted
session E2 by noting the ``orphan
issue:'' The ALA attempts to bring the
issue to the Senate and House Judiciary
Committees, yet no bill is as yet
pending to deal with defining copyright
violations (or lack thereof) for copying
material whose copyright owner cannot
be located (or has deceased or is no
longer in business, e.g. she noted also
HR 1201, a bill introduced so as to
amend the copyright Laws w.r.t.
``digital locks'' and their ability to
To continue reading
Request your trial