[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

(FWD) NCC Washington Update, Vol. 7, #35, August 17, 2001



>NCC WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol. 7, #35, August 17, 2001
>by Bruce Craig <rbcraig@nccph.org
>National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of History (NCCPH)
>*****************
>
>NOTE TO READERS!!!!
>Please take notice that the NCCPH has changed Internet servers and now has
>its own domain address for e-mail communications.  From now on, please
>contact NCCPH director and WASHINGTON UPDATE editor, Bruce Craig at:
><rbcraig@nccph.org>.
>
>
>1.   NHPRC Budget Realities - What Needs to be Done
>2.   State Department Gets Access to Kissinger Transcripts
>3.   Legislation Passed: "Peopling of America" Theme Study; Louisiana
>Purchase Bicentennial Commission; Brown v. Board of Education 50th
>Anniversary Commission
>4.   News Bits and Bytes: Teaching American History Web Page;
>HistoryNewsNetwork; FRUS Volume Released
>
>
>1. NHPRC BUDGET REALITIES - WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE
>There appears to be increasing concern over the FY 2002 proposed funding
>levels for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission
>(NHPRC).  The House has passed, and Senate Appropriations Committee has
>recommended different funding levels in their respective versions of the
>Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government appropriations bill (H.R.
>2590).  Once the Senate passes its version of the legislation, both will
>go to conference - probably in mid-September. At that time, House and
>Senate conferees will reconcile the conflicting provisions in the
>differing bills.
>
>As previously reported, (see NCC WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol. 7, # 30, July 20,
>2001 and Vol. 7, #31, July 27, 2001) to its credit, the House of
>Representatives voted to appropriate "full funding" to the NHPRC in FY
>2002 - the amount the Commission has been authorized to receive since
>1991: $10 million. But, the House bill earmarks $2.7 of this amount (about
>20% of the total appropriation) for only two projects: $1.7 million (some
>28 times the typical NHPRC grant) to the Oklahoma Centennial Commission
>"to assist with memorializing the Oklahoma land run as part of the
>Oklahoma Centennial celebration" and a second directed grant for $1
>million - "to the Boston Public Library for preserving and enhancing its
>holdings of materials related to John Adams" (the holdings are largely
>books).
>
>To its credit, in its version of the appropriation bill, the Senate
>Appropriations Committee attached no earmarks, but allocated only $6.436
>million (the funding level for FY 2001) which would increase the amount
>available to the NHPRC for competitive grants in FY 2002 by only about
>$500,000.  Last year (FY 2001), NHPRC competitive grant requests were
>about $18 million which exceeded the NHPRC appropriation by $12 million.
>Clearly requests have outpaced the dollar amounts available to grantees
>and special earmarks do nothing to alleviate the situation.
>
>For better or worse, earmarks are a political reality in our American
>democratic tradition.  In recent years, several directed NHPRC grants have
>been ordered by Congress. Through the efforts of then New York Senator
>Alfonse D'Amato (R-NY), a $4 million directed grant over two years was
>secured ($2 million was later rescinded after the Senator lost his
>reelection bid) for an integrated collection management and access system
>project at the Center for Jewish History in New York City.  Recently,
>Congress has also earmarked a  $78,996 grant ($250,000 is authorized but
>all the funds have yet to be spent) for the  "Native Journies" (sic)
>documentation project at the Heritage Harbor Museum in Providence, Rhode
>Island; this directed grant was secured through the efforts of Senators
>Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) and Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO).  Finally,
>Senator Byron L. Dorgan (D-ND - who chairs the Treasury Appropriation
>subcommittee) has secured two grants in recent years -  $200,000 for the
>cataloging the collections of the Three Tribes Museum in North Dakota
>(these funds have yet to be spent) and $250,000 to document the Lewis and
>Clark expedition in North Dakota.
>
>In the past, members of Congress have responded to critics of  NHPRC
>earmarks by stating that such directed grants are the only way to ensure
>that small projects receive Federal funding.  This is not true.  When
>there is a worthwhile project, the NHPRC is well known for its outreach
>efforts to small and first-time applicants and for the help it gives them
>in developing fundable proposals and successful projects. In reality, the
>central purpose of an earmark is to make a member of Congress look good to
>constituents.  But their well-intended actions all too often have
>inadvertent negative side effects - because they receive a large federal
>grant, it is sometimes more difficult for a benefiting institution to
>raise private funds in the future for the same or other projects.
>
>This year, neither of the two NHPRC proposed earmarks are for small
>institutions.  Together the directed grants total a whopping $2.7 million
>or 20% of the total proposed NHPRC budget (assuming the full $10 is
>authorized as provided by the House). If the House recommendations for
>directed grants are enacted, FY 2002 would be a record-setting year for
>Congressional earmarks - these earmarks would prove detrimental to the
>integrity of the NHPRC and would be made at the expense of  legitimate
>competitive grant seeking institutions.
>
>Here are the facts:  In FY 2001, the NHPRC received requests for help that
>exceeded  the amount appropriated for its competitive grants program by
>over 200%. NHPRC appropriations for competitive grants have hovered at
>about $6 million for the last three years.  In that same period requests
>for NHPRC assistance - always in excess of its appropriations - has
>increased by 60%.  Because of its FY 2001 appropriations shortfall, the
>NHPRC was barely able to maintain the steady core of support it provides
>to the Founding Fathers and other documentary editions, and only then at a
>huge cost to all the others, particularly archivists, who turned to the
>NHPRC for help.  The NHPRC had to suspend its highly regarded Fellowship
>Programs in Archival Management and in Documentary Editing and to impose
>enormous sacrifices on its other programs.
>
>For example, the nation's State Historical Records Advisory Boards asked
>the NHPRC for almost $2 million, but only $985,000 could be
>awarded.  These grants support vital work by state and local government
>archivists and records keepers that ensures the entitlements of each
>citizen, provides for the preservation of and increased access to
>irreplaceable genealogical information, and documents state and local
>history.  In FY 2001, much of this work was cut back or suspended entirely
>in the hope that NHPRC funding would increase in FY 2002.
>
>Also, a variety of electronic records projects requests totaled $2.7
>million, but only $1.2 million could be awarded.  FY 2001 was the first
>year of the NHPRC's initiative to broaden the base of archival expertise
>in the area of electronic records. Requests for that initiative alone more
>than doubled the amount NHPRC had allocated for it.  The NHPRC is a leader
>in supporting basic and applied electronic records research whose primary
>purpose is the long-term preservation of and easy access to authentic
>electronic records .
>
>Perhaps the most dramatic loss was to the NHPRC's Archival Records
>Program, which in FY 2001 was able to award only $435,712, in response to
>$4 million in requests.  This marked a 99% increase in a single year,
>clear testimony to the fact that all the traditional problems in archives
>are increasing.  Many of the records projects that couldn't be funded in
>FY 2001 indicate that they intend to resubmit their proposals in FY
>2002.  These requests will be in addition to those from archivists who
>have been preparing proposals for submission in 2002.
>
>So what can and should be done?  Capitol Hill insiders speculate that when
>the NHPRC budget comes to conference, the conferees will probably settle
>on the Senate number ($6.436 million) plus money for some if not all of
>the special House recommended earmarks (perhaps as much as $2.7 million)
>giving the NHPRC a total budget of perhaps as high as $9.136 million.
>Attempts to zero out the earmarks entirely and still seek "full funding"
>for the agency are not politically realistic given the powerful stature of
>those who are behind the earmarks.
>
>However, there is a chance that, with a sufficient number of expressions
>of concern from their constituents directed to key members of Congress
>(especially the conferees), it may be possible to: 1) cut back the size of
>the earmarks and allocate these funds to competitive grants, or, 2)
>increase the funding level for the agency by accepting that the $2.7 in
>earmarks will receive funding (as in the House bill) but add $870,000 for
>grant funds to the Senate recommendation of $6.436 million thus providing
>$10 million (the NHPRC authorized level) to the agency; this would give
>the NHPRC almost a million dollars more for grants. In either case, the
>goal is "full funding" for the NHPRC.
>
>At this time, it is unclear who will be selected as House and Senate
>conferees - the individuals who will ultimately settle the fate of the
>NHPRC FY 2002 budget. Most likely, because of their influential positions,
>the House conferees will include: Rep. Bill Young (R-FL), Rep. David Obey
>(D-WI), Rep. Ernest Istook (R-OK), Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and the Senate
>will include: Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO), Robert
>Byrd (D-WV), and Ted Stevens (R-AK).  However, several other members of
>Congress could be in a position to influence decision making; they
>include: Rep. Carrie Meek (D-FL), Rep. David Price (D-NC), Rep. Steve Horn
>(R-CA), Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO - the outgoing Congressional member who sits
>on the NHPRC) and Senators Richard Shelby (R-AL), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD),
>Christopher Dodd (D-CT), and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT).
>
>Between now and through early September when Congress reconvenes, NCC
>readers ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO ARE CONSTITUENTS of any of the above listed
>members of Congress, are encouraged to write, call, or e-mail their
>members and let them know your views on the funding needs of the
>NHPRC.  The Capitol switchboard telephone number is (202) 224-3121.
>Letters (communication via letter rather than e-mail is recommended) will
>reach the appropriate office if addressed to: The Honorable XXXX, U.S.
>House of Representatives (or U.S. Senate), Washington D.C. 20515 (or 20515
>for the Senate). Remember to request a written response to your indication
>of concern.
>
>2.  STATE DEPARTMENT GETS ACCESS TO KISSINGER TRANSCRIPTS
>Thanks to the National Security Archives (NSA), a foreign policy
>documentation center based at George Washington University, the State
>Department has finally gained access to the transcripts of former
>Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger.  Some 10,000 pages of transcripts
>that include Kissinger's telephone conversations with presidents, heads of
>states, and others from 1973 through January 1977 are expected to be made
>public within a few months. The NSA threatened to sue the government if it
>did not retrieve the papers.
>
>In 1976, Kissinger donated the transcripts to the Library of Congress but
>placed restrictions on them so that the papers could not be released until
>five years after his death. Select portions of the transcripts were made
>available to State Department historians, but on a very limited basis.  A
>federal district judge and a U.S. court of appeals panel both ruled in the
>late 1970s that the transcripts were government records, improperly
>removed from the State Department, but these decisions were vacated in
>1980 by the Supreme Court in Reporters' Committee v. Kissinger for lack of
>standing by the plaintiffs, rather than on the merits of the case.
>
>The NSA first wrote the Archivist of the United States on January 15,
>1999, requesting government action to recover the Kissinger
>telcons.  After receiving the draft legal complaint in January 2001, the
>government entered extended negotiations with the NSA and its lawyers. The
>State Department's Legal Adviser, William H. Taft IV, took the lead in
>corresponding with Mr. Kissinger, and obtained the affirmative response
>that produced the document release.  Kissinger, reportedly "happily
>consented" to the request for copies of the documents.
>
>"These telcons are a minute-by-minute, hour-by-hour verbatim record of the
>highest-level foreign policy deliberations of the U.S. government during
>Mr. Kissinger's tenure at State," commented Thomas Blanton, director of
>the National Security Archive.  "We  applaud the State Department for
>taking action to recover these unique and invaluable historical documents,
>and we commend Mr. Kissinger's decision to do the right thing."  Still
>untouched, however, are 20,000 pages of Kissinger's phone calls from
>1969-1973 when he served as President Nixon's National Security Advisor.
>Blanton said these are next on the list.  A sampling of the documents may
>be viewed at the following URL: http://www.nsarchive.org/news/20010809
>
>3.  LEGISLATION PASSED:"PEOPLING OF AMERICA" THEME STUDY; LOUISIANA
>PURCHASE BICENTENNIAL COMMISSION: BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION 50th
>ANNIVERSARY COMMISSION
>On August 3, 2001, the last day before Congress began their summer recess,
>the Senate acted on a number of bills pending action.  Three bills of
>interest to the historical/archival community were passed: Senator Daniel
>K. Akaka's (D-Hawaii) legislation (S. 329) requiring the Secretary of the
>Interior to conduct a theme study on the "Peopling of America,"
>legislation (S. 1046 and H.R. 2133) establishing a commission for the
>purpose of encouraging and providing for commemorations of the 50th
>anniversary of the Supreme Court decision, Brown v. Board of Education,
>and a bill (S. 356) establishing a national commission on the Bicentennial
>of the Louisiana Purchase.
>
>"PEOPLING" THEME STUDY:
>The "Peopling" theme study directs the Secretary of the Interior to foster
>an understanding of the diversity and contribution of the breadth of
>groups that have "peopled" (migrated, immigrated or settled) the United
>States. The bill authorizes appropriations for the National Park Service
>to produce a National Landmark theme study that would  identify and assess
>regions, areas, trails, districts, communities, sites, buildings,
>structures, objects, organizations, societies and cultures that best
>illustrate and commemorate key events or decisions affecting the peopling
>of America.
>
>The study would provide a basis for evaluating and possibly creating new
>national park units, designating national landmarks, and identifying new
>listings for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.  In
>crafting the study, the Secretary "may enter into cooperative agreements
>with educational institutions, professional associations, or other
>entities" knowledgeable about peopling and who could author the study
>and/or insure that it is prepared in accordance with scholarly standards.
>
>Once the theme study is completed, the Secretary is directed to enter into
>"cooperative arrangements" with State and local governments, educational
>institutions, local historical associations, communities and other
>appropriate entities, to preserve and interpret key sites and to "maximize
>opportunities for public education and scholarly research on the peopling
>of America."
>Rep. Mark E. Souder's ( R-IN ) companion bill ( H.R. 2420) - legislation
>that was introduced in the House on July 6, 2001 -  is still pending
>action by the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public
>Lands.
>
>BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION COMMISSION:
>The Senate also passed two versions of legislation establishing a
>commission to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the landmark 1954 Brown
>v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision that provided a definitive
>interpretation of the 14th amendment and found the doctrine of "separate
>but equal" unconstitutional.  The legislation authorizes some $300,000 in
>both FY 2002 and FY 2003 for the commission's activities.  The bill
>provides for a commission that includes agency and Congressionally
>appointed representatives and individuals representing the states that
>were originally involved in the Brown case.  The body is charged to work
>with the Brown Foundation for Educational Equality, Excellence and
>Research in planning and coordinating public education projects and
>initiatives throughout the nation.  The Senate passed their own clean bill
>and a modified House version. Both bills will be returned to the House for
>their consideration and action.
>
>LOUISIANA PURCHASE COMMISSION:
>Finally, the Senate passed Senator Mary L. Landrieu's (D-LA) bill (S. 356)
>that creates a 20-person commission to plan and develop activities
>appropriate to commemorate the bicentennial of the purchase of the
>Louisiana Territory.  The bill seeks "to harmonize and balance the
>important goals of ceremony and celebration with the equally important
>goals of scholarship and education."
>To this end, the commission is to consult with appropriate Federal
>departments and agencies, tribal governments, as will as schools, colleges
>and universities, and other entities.  The commission's report is to
>include specific recommendations on appropriate commemorative events,
>programs, conferences, publications and other activities that focus on the
>history of the Louisiana Purchase "and its benefits to the United States
>and mankind." The Senate passed bill will be referred to a House
>committee; no companion legislation has been introduced in the House.
>
>4.  BITS AND BYTES:
>Item #1 - DOE Web Page:  The Department of Education (DOE) has created a
>web page for the Teaching American History initiative.  Tap into<
>http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/TAH/>.  The DOE also informs us the peer
>review assessment for the FY 2001 round of grant applications is taking
>place this week (August 13-17) and that award announcements will be made
>in late September or early October, 2001.
>
>Item #2 - HistoryNewsNetwork: HistoryNewsNetwork is a history related
>Internet publication that may be of interest to NCC readers.  The site was
>created in June 2001 and features articles by historians about current
>events.  According to editor Rick Shenkman, the publication "is the
>brainchild of historians and journalists who were fed up with the
>superficiality of sound bite, what-happens-today-is-all-that-counts
>journalism."  The aim is to give journalists and the public a
>one-stop-shopping website where current events are constantly being put
>into perspective by historians.  HNN is the only website on the Internet
>wholly devoted to this task.  In its first two months the site has drawn
>three quarters of a million hits.  The publication has an advisory panel
>that includes:  Pauline Maier, Gil Troy, Joyce Appleby, James Banner,
>Walter Nugent, Leonard Steinhorn and Liz Cohen.  The magazine features
>articles by historians on both the left and the right.  Submissions from
>historians about the news events are welcomed and authors are encouraged
>to inform the editors about new books that bear on public events.  To
>access the site tap into:< http://HistoryNewsNetwork.org>.
>
>Item #3 - FRUS Volume: The Department of State has officially released
>Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964-1968, Volume XXVI, Indonesia;
>Malaysia-Singapore; Philippines. This volume (which has generated some
>controversy with respect to its release; see NCC WASHINGTON UPDATE, Vol.
>7, #32, August 2, 2001 and Vol. 7, #34, August 9, 2001) part of the
>ongoing official record of American foreign policy, presents the record of
>the policy of the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson toward
>these three nations during a period of transition in Southeast Asia. The
>volume documents one of the most turbulent eras of Indonesia's history
>since it gained its independence from the Netherlands. Of particular
>interest are the documents printed in the volume that reveal the role that
>the United States played in encouraging the anti-Communist elements in
>Indonesia during the difficult transition from Sukarno to Suharto. The
>Office of the Historian has prepared a summary of the volume. For further
>information, contact David S. Patterson, General Editor of the Foreign
>Relations series, at (202) 663-1127; fax: (202) 663-1289; E-mail:
>history@state.gov. The texts of the volume and this press release are
>available on the Office's Web site: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/.
>Copies of volume XXVI can be purchased from the U.S. Government Printing
>Office (GPO Stock No. 044-000-02512-4) at
>http://bookstore.gpo.gov/sb/sb-210.html.
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  * * * * *
>NCC invites you to redistribute the NCC Washington Updates.  A complete
>backfile of these reports is maintained by H-Net on the NCC web page at
><http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~ncc>.  To subscribe to the "NCC Washington
>Update," send an e-mail message to listserv@h-net.msu.edu according to the
>following model: SUBSCRIBE H-NCC firstname lastname, institution.

A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List!

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to listserv@listserv.muohio.edu
      In body of message:  SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
                    *or*:  UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to archives@listserv.muohio.edu

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems?  Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <rschmidt@lib.muohio.edu>