Association Leaders Prepare to Fight
Censorious Internet Legislation
“I didn’t think there would be anything worse than the Communications Decency Act; I was wrong,” Freedom to Read Foundation President Candace Morgan told the ALA Executive Board at the Association’s Midwinter Meeting in Washington, D.C., as the board prepared to initiate legal action to challenge the constitutionality of the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), passed December 21 by Congress.
Morgan, along with Office for Intellectual Freedom Director Judith Krug and attorney Theresa Chmara of Jenner and Block, advised that the challenge would cost the Association at least as much as the successful suit challenging the CDA, which the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional four years ago (AL, Aug. 1997, p. 11–12). The case cost $1.3 million, of which ALA paid $585,000.
Presided over by ALA President Nancy Kranich, the Executive Board held three sessions in Washington, January 12, 15, and 17, with an agenda that included two closed sessions to discuss CIPA legal strategy. There was no disagreement about the need to file suit; instead, the board discussed whether ALA should sue on its own or file jointly with the American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU attorneys had already met with the FTRF board to discuss who would be the lead plaintiff, who would select lead counsel, and whether or not schools would be included in the suit.
The board had voted earlier, by conference call, to commission a paper by legal counsel that would pave the way for the suit and enable the preparation of the Q&A on CIPA that was circulated at the conference. Later, in closed session, the board decided to file a separate suit.
Kranich’s report to the board (EBD#7.1) led to a discussion of librarians’ generally low salaries, and she decided to form a special committee to examine the issue.
Emily Sheketoff, director of ALA’s Washington Office (EBD#12.20), talked about lobbying for the reauthorization of the Library Services and Technology Act. She said advocates are asking that the base amount be raised from $150 million to $500 million, a recommendation that was later approved by ALA Council.
Sheketoff explained the rationale behind the huge hike: “Programs that libraries are involved in are resonating right now,” she said, such as family-literacy programs and information-literacy training for the public. She said low LSTA funding has resulted in inequities between states and between rural and urban libraries, which an injection of funding would correct.
Committee on Legislation chair Patricia Smith and Office for Information Technology Policy Advisory Committee chair Linda Crowe praised the work of the Washington Office, particularly with regard to the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (EBD#10.1). “UCITA is enormously complex and expensive, and the resources of the Washington Office have been critical,” Smith said.
Committee on Education chair Mary Moore asked for the board’s help in getting Council to authorize the establishment of a separate 501(c)6 organization (EBD#10.2) to administer a proposed post-master’s certification program. She feared that Council would not approve the proposal unless “every jot and tittle” was in place. The board voted 6–5, however, to table the discussion. Moore’s presentation at Council later consumed an hour and a half but led to tentative approval contingent on the receipt of the aforementioned jots and tittles 30 days in advance of Annual Conference in June.
Archivist of the United States John Carlin paid a visit to the board meeting. “I’m tired of being sued by my friends, particularly when I agree with them,” he joked, in a conciliatory reference to a 1997 lawsuit brought by Public Citizen and joined by ALA to force the National Archives to preserve electronic records (AL, Apr. 1997, p. 13).
“In the electronic area,” said Carlin, “we should be working together. Please be proactive in working with us.” He noted that “we can figure out a way to store born-digital records over an extended period of time in some kind of efficient and effective and authentic way.” Carlin emphasized partnerships, saying, “On the electronic records issue, partnership is well beyond one agency; it’s us and the entire world in many respects. When we go to the administration now, and when we go to Congress, we’ll be part of a much bigger, more formal partnership that will put us in a stronger position to be ultimately successful in getting the funds and the support.”
The @ Your Library promotion took center stage as Public Information Office staffers and PR consultants from BSMG Worldwide presented an overview and discussed the results of focus groups (EBD#12.27) that had been conducted before the latest efforts in the Campaign for America’s Libraries (EBD#12.3) were launched. Although the board’s reaction to the campaign materials was generally positive, some board members felt the campaign was too skewed toward public libraries. The consultants also revealed that the Campbell Soup Company, Kellogg’s, General Motors, Hewlett-Packard, AT&T Broadband, the Hearst Corporation, and Major League Baseball were among the corporations that might be courted to partner with ALA for the campaign.
In other actions, the board:
Other board members present were Treasurer Liz Bishoff, Immediate Past President Sarah Ann Long, Camila Alire, Alice Calabrese, Julie Cummins, Mart¡n G¢mez, Ken Haycock, Robert Newlen, Molly Raphael, and Sally Reed. Barbara Stripling joined the board for its last session, replacing Newlen and filling a vacancy created by the election of Bishoff as ALA treasurer, which Newlen had filled temporarily.
—Leonard Kniffel