ALAWON v7n48 (May 13, 1998) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/alawon/alawon-v7n48.txt ================================================================= ALAWON Volume 7, Number 48 ISSN 1069-7799 May 13, 1998 American Library Association Washington Office Newsline In this issue: (182 lines) MODEST INCREASE IN LIBRARY RATE RECOMMENDED; USPS REQUEST REJECTED LIBRARIAN FEATURED SPEAKER AT SENATE FORUM ON INTERNET FILTERING ALA, ARL, SLA FILE BRIEF IN JOURNAL PRICING STUDY CASE _________________________________________________________________ MODEST INCREASE IN LIBRARY RATE RECOMMENDED; USPS REQUEST REJECTED The cost of mailing a 1-pound package at the library rate would increase by one cent to $1.13, under the Postal Rate Commission's recommendation of May 11. The independent commission granted about one-third of the U.S. Postal Service's $2.4 billion request for higher postal rates, but it greatly reduced the rates requested by USPS for the library rate. The Alliance of Nonprofit Mailers, a coalition to which ALA belongs, has nominated library rate mailers as big winners in the postal rate case. ALA challenged the proposed increases in the library rate as a participant in the rate case that is close to conclusion. The date the changes go into effect will be set by the Postal Service Board of Governors which meets in June. The new rates could begin as soon as July or as late as 1999. PRC chair Edward Gleiman said there was no need to implement the changes until 1999 because the USPS should make more than $1 billion this year. The PRC recommendations for the library rate are contained in the 2 volumes of a nearly 3-inch thick opinion and recommended decision dated May 11, 1998. If the PRC recommendations are approved by the Board of Governors, a typical 3-pound library rate package would cost $2.03; the cost of mailing the same package would have risen to $2.48, a 26.53 percent increase, if the USPS proposed rates had been adopted. Currently, it takes $1.96 to mail a 3-pound package. PACKAGE CURRENT POSTAGE PRC RECOMMENDATIONS % INCREASE First Pound $ 1.12 $1.13 .89% Each additional lb. through 7 lbs. .42 .45 9.76% Each additional lb. over 7 lbs. .22 .28 27.27% ----------------------------------------------------------------- Typical 3-lb. library rate package $ 1.96 $2.03 3.57% During the rate case proceeding, ALA asked how the library rate, a preferred rate, could exceed the commercial book rate for a piece of the same size, shape and weight. Appearing to agree, the PRC rejected the USPS requested library mail rates "on the basis of highly questionable cost estimates of the Postal Service." The PRC also rejected the use of a cost proxy as suggested by the PRC's Office of Consumer Advocate. Instead, the Commission recommended that the same rates be used for Library Mail and for Special Standard (formerly Special Rate Fourth-Class commercial book rate). But, the Commission said: [the] recommended solution should not be considered a proposal to abolish Library Mail as a recognized mail classification. In the Commission's opinion, because of the legislatively-favored status of Library Mail, abolition is beyond the Commission's authority to recommend and the Board of Governors' power to order. By declining to recommend distinct rates for the [library rate] subclass, the Commission intends to offer the Postal Service an opportunity to focus special scrutiny on Library Mail with a view to developing a permanent solution to the rate anomaly posed in this case. In the interim, the Commission will recommend a rate schedule for Library Mail that directs the attention of mailers to the availability of the rates recommended by the Commission for Special Standard Mail. _________________________________________________________________ LIBRARIAN FEATURED SPEAKER AT SENATE FORUM ON INTERNET FILTERING Karen Schneider, director of the Garfield Library of Brunswick in New York, was a featured speaker on May 7 at a presentation to Senate staffers on the pros and cons of Internet filtering and other issues related to S. 1619, the Internet School Filtering Act. The forum was sponsored by the Internet Free Expression Alliance (IFEA) which includes the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, and the Electronic Privacy Information Center. The IFEA sponsored the forum in anticipation of negotiations presently being conducted on possible modifications to S. 1619. Though S. 1619 was technically passed by the Senate Commerce Committee and would require K-12 schools to have installed filtering on all Internet terminals and at least one terminal in all public libraries, there are now discussions ongoing about how to possibly change S. 1619 language before the bill goes to the Senate floor. ALA and others have argued that, should any such content requirements be applied to the e-rate, requiring local use policies is far preferable to mandating filtering. Schneider discussed some of the different filtering systems and the pros and cons of how they are used, referencing many of the points in her book, A Practical Guide to Internet Filters (order from http://www.neal-schuman.com). She also described The 1997 Internet Filter Assessment Project, for which she was the project leader, and pointed out the major advantages of user education and the development of strong Internet policies as key management options. Schneider has spoken around the country on Internet usage issues and local use policies in particular. Her comments on the practical nature of Internet management in the libraries was appreciated by the Senate participants. Also featured at the IFEA forum was Nancy Willard who is a research associate and adjunct professor in the College of Education at the University of Oregon. As an attorney and researcher, she has worked on Internet policies in the K-12 school environment and emphasizes the development of local use policies and personal responsibilities as the most affective way to manage the Internet. She has consulted extensively on the development of technology plans and Internet management issues in the K-12 school environment. She spoke about both the legal as well as practical issues of Internet use management and the strong need for personal responsibility and user training. Senate staffers had an active discussion and addressed many questions raised by Schneider and Willard. The Senate is considering a technology bills this week when they are trying to pass a number of supposedly non-controversial technology bills such as Internet taxation. Thus, timing of the forum was critical for Senate staffers working on the issue. As it turns out, S. 1619 will probably not appear on the agenda until June. As in so many cases, the situation remains rather fluid so library advocates should be prepared for any option. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Library and school advocates should communicate to Congress, especially their Senators, concerns over requiring filtering as part of the e-rate program. The message to Congress: - Respect local decision making; do not imposed a single solution on libraries and schools nor should filtering or other content controls be included as part of the telecommunications discounts for schools and libraries. - Support a more acceptable approach which would require local Internet use polices; leave the details of these policies to local libraries and schools, their boards, and other appropriate local authorities. _________________________________________________________________ ALA, ARL, SLA FILE BRIEF IN JOURNAL PRICING STUDY CASE The American Library Association joined the Association of Research Libraries and the Special Libraries Association in filing an amicus brief in support of a U.S. District Court finding that physicist Henry Barschall's studies on the cost of scholarly journals constituted protected speech that falls outside the jurisdiction of the Lanham Act on unfair competition. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers is appealing the August 1997 decision in the case of Gordon and Breach v. American Institute of Physics and American Physical Society. Over the last ten years, Gordon and Breach filed a series of legal actions against AIP and APS, claiming that studies of the cost effectiveness of scholarly journals conducted by the late Henry Barschall, then a physicist at the University of Wisconsin, and published by the two physicists' groups, constituted false advertisement. The library groups' brief, filed April 8, concluded that issues of the quality and value of academic journals, and public debate concerning the best way to evaluate these issues, are clearly within the core of the First Amendment. _________________________________________________________________ ALAWON is a free, irregular publication of the American Library Association Washington Office. To subscribe, send the message: subscribe ala-wo [your_firstname] [your_lastname] to listproc @ala.org. To unsubscribe, send the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to listproc@ala.org. ALAWON archives at http://www.ala.org/ washoff/alawon. Visit our Web site at http://www.alawash.org. ALA Washington Office 202.628.8410 (V) 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, #403 202.628.8419 (F) Washington, DC 20004-1701 800.941.8478 (V) Lynne E. Bradley, Editor Deirdre Herman, Managing Editor Contributors: Anne A. Heanue Carol C. Henderson Claudette W. Tennant All materials subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credits. =================================================================