NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE (Vol. 12, #38; 29 September 2006)
2. NEH RESPONDS TO CRITICISM OVER DIGITAL INITIATIVE AND PEER REVIEW PROCESS
3. CONGRESS FAILS TO FINISH WORK ON APPROPRIATIONS BILLS -- CONTINUING RESOLUTION PASSED
4. EDUCATION SECRETARY PROMISES ACTION ON COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
5. OPEN GOVERNMENT ACT MOVES OUT OF COMMITTEE
6. CONSTITUTION DAY FEDERAL MANDATE EXPANDED
7. ANNUAL CFC CAMPAIGN BEGINS -- PLEASE CONTRIBUTE!
8. BITS AND BYTES: Hill Salary Info Goes Public; Humanities Alliance Sets Advocacy Day Events
9. ARTICLES OF INTEREST: "British Library Issues Copyright Manifesto" (Ars Technica) CORRECTION! 10-2-06
A correction to last week's posting titled"ATTENTION RESEARCHERS -- NARA ISSUES NEW HOURS FINAL RULE" in which we reported that the shuttle service between Main Archives and Archives II will be terminated at the end of September.
NARA has issued the following statement:"Shuttle services between Archives I and Archives II is not being terminated at the end of September. Although NARA is reviewing and taking action on a number of cost cutting measures, no decision about future shuttle service has been made. The service will, at a minimum, continue through the end of February."
1. ATTENTION RESEARCHERS! -- NARA ISSUES NEW HOURS FINAL RULE After soliciting public comment on proposed changes in the hours of operation for the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) research and museum facilities in Washington D.C. and College Park, Maryland, a final rule was published in the Federal Register on 27 September 2006. New hours for both the museum and research side of the two NARA facilities will go into effect on 2 October 2006. In addition, shuttle service between the Main Archives building and the College Park facility will be terminated at the end of September.
The new research hours are: Monday-Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. To accommodate researchers who work during regular business hours, the National Archives will have extended hours once a month. The monthly extended hours are: Thursday and Friday, 9 a.m. to 8:45 p.m., and Saturday, 8:45 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. The first extended hours will be held 19 through 21 October. The new hours are posted online at: www.archives.gov/research/, including the specific dates for extended hours in FY 2007.
The new hours will affect both researchers and visitors to Washington D.C. who each year flock to visit the NARA Rotunda where the founding documents are on display. The new museum hours are: 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. during the spring and summer (March 15 through Labor Day). Fall and winter hours (the day after Labor Day through March 14) will remain unchanged: 10 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. These changes affect (except for special events) the Rotunda, the Public Vaults, the O'Brien Gallery, the Archives Shop, and the McGowan Theater, when it reopens. The museum will close on Thanksgiving Day, and on Christmas day, 25 December.
The regional centers of the National Archives around the country will continue to operate during core hours, but will modify their extended hours, effective October 2. For more information on these changes, go to www.archives.gov/locations/regional_archives.html. For the final rule, go to: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net To see the interim rule, go to: http://www.archives.gov
2. NEH RESPONDS TO CRITICISM OVER DIGITAL INITIATIVE AND PEER REVIEW PROCESS Several weeks ago we reported on the concerns being raised by the documentary editor community over new National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) guidelines for Scholarly Edition grant proposals (see "Documentary Editors Lodge Protest with NEH Over New Guidelines" NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE; vol. 12 #36; 15 September 2006). The NEH has now vigorously responded to the letter sent by Roger Bruns, president of the Association for Documentary Editing (ADE) to NEH Chair Bruce Cole.
In his letter Bruns raised concerns about what the ADE considers problematic aspects in the programmatic guidelines for the new NEH Digital Humanities Initiative. Bruns's letter also takes the NEH to task for cutting support for documentary editions, and for eliminating specialist peer review panels for Scholarly Edition Grants proposals. A spokesperson for the NEH had initially characterized the ADE letter as "thoughtful," the formal response is scathing.
In a letter signed by the NEH's acting Assistant Chairman for Programs, Michael McDonald, the NEH asserted that the ADE's letter is full of "inaccuracies and distortions" and accuses the organization of spreading "false and misleading information." When a reporter for "Inside Higher Education" contacted Bruns for comment the ADE president characterized the NEH letter as "insulting" and stated "their [NEH] policies are putting our projects in jeopardy and that all we were asking for was a meeting to talk about this."
The ADE voiced its concerns in a 1 September 2006 letter that focused on a small but important NEH grant program -- Scholarly Editions Grants. This program supports the publishing and dissemination of the papers of important figures in history and the humanities. Of key concern is language in the new grant guidelines stating that a "preference" would be made for projects that "employ digital technology" and offer free online access, the latter being a particular concern of not just the ADE but university publishers as well.
In his letter to Bruns, McDonald states that the new guidelines are in keeping with the programmatic goals of the Digital Humanities Initiative. He emphasized that while the NEH is seeking to "encourage online publication (especially for new projects)" it is not a requirement. ADE grant recipients, however, note that with declining resources for documentary editions, that only projects with an online presence would be likely to receive NEH funding inthe future. The ADE's hope was that these concerns could be raised and addressed in the requested meeting with NEH officials.
McDonald also took the ADE to task for "the most troubling allegation" -- that the NEH had eliminated "reviews from outside specialists" in grant-making cycles. McDonald stated that "decisions about funding edition projects are reached by the same rigorous peer review process used for all other NEH competitions" -- that being panels of scholars convened by program staff to advise the Endowment on the merits of applications. McDonald conceded, however, that one element of the review process, "the solicitation of specialist reviews" (the specific concern raised in the ADE letter), indeed had been eliminated, and, according to the NEH, rightly so, as additional costs and staff time "did not yield sufficient improvements in quality of review to justify returning to the previous practice."
In his response McDonald also chided the ADE for raising concerns about the peer review process. He seemed miffed by the ADE raising the concern at this time since they have been in place since 2004. Critics, however, note that the compromised, if not flawed, NEH peer review process has been a concern with historians and scholars for some time, with concerns being voiced both publicly and privately with the Chairman and his key staff since the guidelines were implemented in 2004.
McDonald's letter does not respond to the ADE's primary request in their 1 September letter ˆ that the NEH set up a meeting to resolve the issues raised in their letter. However, an NEH spokesperson states that negotiations are underway to set up a meeting in conjunction with the National Humanities Alliance, since concerns have been raised not only by the ADE but also by the American Association of University Presses (AAUP) and several other Humanities Alliance member organizations.
3. CONGRESS FAILS TO FINISH WORK ON APPROPRIATIONS BILLS -- CONTINUING RESOLUTION PASSED With the end of the fiscal year just around the corner and with lawmakers due to adjourn at the end of this week, Congress has passed a Continuing Resolution (CR) that provides funding for federal departments and programs at the lowest of the House-passed, Senate-passed, or fiscal 2006 level. Congress is scheduled to return to Washington in November for a post-election session. At that time they will continue to work on appropriation bills to fund the government in fiscal year 2007, which begins 1 October. Hill insiders report that it is likely that the bills that have not yet been completed will be combined into an "omnibus" appropriations package, which will be considered after Congress returns in November for its lame-duck session.
4. EDUCATION SECRETARY PROMISES ACTION ON COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Debate and criticism followed Education Secretary Margaret Spellings' response on 26 September to a report from the Commission on the Future of Higher Education -- a group charged by the Secretary to devise a "comprehensive strategy" for the future of higher education. In a National Press Club speech, Spellings focused on five action items that she would like to see implemented, including expanding the "effective principles" of the "No Child Left Behind Act" to high schools. The biggest controversy, however, stemmed from Spellings' endorsement of a "unit record" database to track students' academic progress.
The database would use personal student identification numbers to link them with their transcripts and would facilitate tracking of academic, enrollment, and financial-aid information for individual students. Spellings plans to seek federal funds for a test study of a prototype that is being developed by the Education Department. Critics of the unit database strongly oppose its formation due to privacy concerns. Members of Congress from both parties soundly rejected the tracking system in 2004 and it may run into the same amount of opposition today. Sarah Flanagan, vice president for government relations at the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, believes the database is not an identity theft issue but a privacy issue, saying "it's about whether or not, in this country, we want to cross a bridge and create registries of students' academic info."
Spellings also commented on numerous other issues that were addressed in the commission report. She called for greater fiscal and academic accountability in higher education. Spellings would like to expand the "effective principles" of "No Child Left Behind" to apply to high schools and then provide matching funds to colleges and universities to collect and report student-learning results. But Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) -- a former Education Secretary himself -- cautioned against these proposed actions. While information is a good thing for consumers, Alexander believes, "higher education does not need a barrage of new regulations so someone in Washington can try to figure out how to improve the Harvard classics department." However, Spellings believes the available information would hold schools to a greater level of accountability and assist parents in judging the quality of a school.
Student aid was another focal point of Spellings' speech and she called for an increase in need-based financial aid for students. The commission recommended increasing the value of Pell Grants to cover 70 percent of the average cost of in-state tuition. Currently, these grants only cover about 48 percent of student tuition. While Spellings pledged to work on financial aid issues, she did not endorse the recommended increase to the Pell Grants. Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) criticized the Education Secretary for her refusal to endorse the commission's suggestion regarding the grants.
It remains to be seen how much change Spellings' will seek to enact and how much support those proposed changes will be able to garner.
5. OPEN GOVERNMENT ACT MOVES OUT OF COMMITTEE Advocates for open government won a small victory on 21 September when the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the "Openness Promotes Effectiveness in our National Government Act (OPEN; S. 394). It is a bi-partisan effort, sponsored by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), to address lingering problems associated with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A companion bill was introduced in the House (H.R. 867) by Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) and referred to the House Government Reform Committee in February 2005.
Among other actions, the Open Government Act seeks to eliminate any loopholes in FOIA that allow the federal government to prolong the process of releasing information to the public. Some agencies have gone so far as to charge unreasonably high fees and then deny fee waivers. OPEN seeks to provide a way for the public to be compensated for their legal costs by the federal government when information is improperly withheld. Additionally, tracking systems would be enacted to allow applicants to check on the status of their requests.
This is the second major legislative effort by Cornyn and Leahy to improve openness in the federal government. Last year, they jointly introduced the "Faster FOIA Act of 2005" (S. 589) in March of 2005. This bill recommended the establishment of a commission to study the processing of FOIA requests, investigate the reason behind the ever-increasing backlog of information, and make recommendations for improvements. Following this bill, President Bush signed Executive Order 13392 that mandated compulsory FOIA improvement plans for government agencies, including strategies for reducing the backlog of requests and increasing public access. Despite the apparent effort by the administration to comply with Cornyn and Leahy's request, critics still maintain that the Executive Order cannot be implemented without new resources for the agencies.
Although OPEN and the Faster FOIA Act have both favorably passed out of committee in the Senate, it is unlikely that either house will complete work on them before this session of Congress ends. However, this year's favorable response to both bills within Congress provides a measure of hope that the legislation will pass during the next Congress.
6. CONSTITUTION DAY FEDERAL MANDATE EXPANDED As regular readers of this newsletter are aware, in 2004 Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) tacked onto federal legislation a requirement that "each federal institution that receives federal funds...must hold an educational program on the U.S. Constitution on 17 September each year (see "Constitution Day Events" in NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE, 15 September 2006; vol. 12 #36). This year there is a new requirement -- federal employees must complete a 25-minute tutorial on the Constitution. The tutorial is 37 pages and provides a general historic overview and summary of the amendments.
Some federal officials such as Daniel Sutherland, officer for civil rights and civil liberties and George Tanner, chief learning officer, view Constitution Day and all its requirements as an "opportunity to pause and consider the larger purpose behind our professionalism." In an email sent to all Department of Homeland Security employees, the two men quote Secretary Michael Chertoff's words, that "DHS's strategic mission is no less than this: protect America, while fostering the values of liberty, privacy, and opportunity we all hold dear." For many, this new tutorial is a way to review those liberties and values.
However not all federal employees find the tutorial worthwhile. One DHS employee stated the tutorial was a "waste of time...stuff I learned in high school," while another called the training "just more of Byrd's pork." Since the Constitution tutorial does not include a test, the same employee questioned, "How will my supervisor even know I completed the course?"
Byrd's belief in the relevance and importance of the Constitution has been apparent throughout his service in the U.S. Senate. He regularly carries a copy of the Constitution in his coat pocket and often quotes from the document during Senate debates. According to Byrd, the Constitution "embodies the vision of the Framers, their dream of freedom -- but we cannot defend and protect this dream if we are ignorant of the Constitution's history and how it works."
7. ANNUAL CFC CAMPAIGN BEGINS ˆ PLEASE CONTRIBUTE! On 26 September 2006, federal government agencies throughout the country launched this year's Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) -- the once-a-year opportunity for federal employees to donate to causes and charities that are important to them. The CFC remains the largest and most successful employee workplace giving campaign in the world.
As we did last year, the National Coalition for History (NCH) will be participating in this year's CFC campaign. In 2005, over $9,000 was contributed to the history coalition by CFC donors and we hope to exceed that total this year! By making a workplace contribution, readers who are federal employees can support the important activities and programs of the history coalition, including publication and free distribution of the NCH WASHINGTON UPDATE to subscribers throughout the country.
Federal employees who wish to support the NCH with an individual contribution during the CFC campaign this year please note that our FOUR-DIGIT AGENCY CODE FOR DONATION IS #2351. Remember, the campaign ends on 15 December.
Individuals who are not federal employees also can support the history coalition with a contribution. While the history coalition is supported largely by organizational contributions, individuals can support the organization by sending a donation to the National Coalition for History at 400 A Street S.E., Washington D.C. 20003. As an alternative, readers can also make an online donation û please visit our website hosted by CONSERVENOW at: http://www.conservenow.org/detail.asp?ORGID=2032&memflag=true . The history coalition is a (501(c)(3) tax exempt non-profit organization and as such 100% of your contribution to the NCH is tax deductible.
8. BITS AND BYTES: Item #1 -- Hill Salary Info Goes Public: A web site documenting the salaries of some 20,000 Capitol Hill employees was launched last week. The site www.legistorm.com proved so popular that shortly after its arrival on the Internet it came crashing down due to intense use. However, the site quickly went back online. While it is widely known that the president earns $400,000 a year and representatives and senators earn about $160,000, it is less commonly known that on average Hill staffers make about $50-60,000. Some key Senate staffers, however, earn as much as $150,000. With the site going online, some Members and staff are concerned that constituents living in areas where the cost of living is low may consider the salaries outrageously high.
Item #2 -- Humanities Alliance Sets Advocacy Day Events: Mark your calendars! The National Humanities Alliance has announced that the annual Humanities Advocacy Day events will be held 26-27 March 2007. The annual event seeks to put humanities supporters and advocates in direct contact with their Congressional representatives. Each year the event includes advocacy training for participants prior to their making Congressional visits.
9. ARTICLES OF INTEREST One posting this week: In "British Library Issues Copyright Manifesto" (Ars Technica; 25 September 2006) we learn that the British Library has issued a manifesto on intellectual property law, offering six suggestions on how to "strike a proper balance between the rights of creators and consumers of content" The manifesto is something akin to the UK version of 'fair use' in the US. For the article, visit: http://arstechnica.com/