ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 271 Inside Washington Ja m e s D. L o c k w o o d Assistant D irec to r ALA W ashington O ffice At the Dallas Conference many people asked me questions about what the ALA Washington Office does and how it operates. In essence, what we do is to maintain a constant information ex­ change betw een the federal establishm ent and the library community. On the one hand, we tell the library story to Congress and the Executive B ran ch . On th e o th e r hand, we try to keep m em bers inform ed about federal policies and practices. Our most formal and regular means of com­ m unicating with the library comm unity is the ALA W ash in g ton N ew sletter. T he new sletter is sent to regular subscribers, state library agency heads, state library association presidents and fed eral relatio n s co o rd in ators, lib rary school deans, state trustee association presidents, ALA E xecu tiv e Board m em b ers, and ALA C ouncil m em bers. In all, it has a circu lation of about 2 ,5 0 0 and is pu blished at least tw elve tim es annually. Because of the diverse interests of the readers of the newsletter, the staff must try to stay ab­ reast o f nearly all federal activities that have li­ brary implications. Moreover, in order to main­ tain a sensitive watch on the status and future of library programs, we must also keep up to date on what is happening to nonlibrary programs of a similar character. W e comb the daily issues of the W ashington Post, the New Y ork Tim es, the C o n ­ gre ssio n a l R e c o r d ‚ and the F e d e r a l R egister, look­ ing for changes in the direction of federal policy or in the personnel carrying out policy. W e also peruse co untless o th e r new sletters and d ocu­ ments highlighting activities on the Washington scene. These range from special-interest publica­ tions, perhaps on the needs of the handicapped, to those like the W eek ly C o m p ila tio n o f P res i­ d en tia l D ocu m en ts that cover a department or agency. Like other Washington representatives, we rely heavily upon individual contacts with key con­ gressional staff, agency employees, and colleagues in the education and information fields. Such loosely knit organizations as the Higher Educa­ tion Group, the Inform ation Policy Discussion Group, and others provide a regular forum for discussions o f trends in government activity and policy relating to areas of mutual concern. And, o f course, we m aintain ties with the National Commission on Lib raries and Information Sci­ en ce, the Library o f C ongress, and the many other library associations. All these information sources are brought to bear on one fundamental objective: to understand changes in federal policy or activity and their po­ tential impact on the nation’s libraries. Once we have the information, we can pass it on to you. Up-to-date information is essential if librarians across the country are to make their voices heard in Washington. When a valuable program’s fund­ ing level is threatened, or when a program such as the emergency temperature restriction plan is put into effect, it is important that librarians let the government know in a timely way how such action might affect them. U p-to-date information also helps librarians plan. To the extent that librarians are aware of the status of federal library programs, postage costs, changes in the federal depository library law, or grant opportunities, they can do a better job of charting their future. ■■ C O L L E G E LIBRARIES PROGRAM A H ouse– Se n a te con feren ce co m m ittee has recommended a 50 percent cut in funds for the College Library Resources Program (Title II -A of the Higher Education Act). Last year the pro­ gram , fu n ded at $ 9 ,9 7 5 ,0 0 0 , p rovided b asic grants averaging about $3,900 to nearly every col­ lege and university in the United States. This year, the grants will fall to an amount under $2,000 if, as seems likely, both houses of Con­ gress follow the recommendation of the confer­ ence committee and reduce the appropriation for the program to $4,987,500. The conference com m ittee’s recommendation simply split the difference between the amounts allotted to the program by Senate and House ap­ pro p riatio n s b ills. T h e H ouse b ill co ntain ed $9,9 7 5 ,0 0 0 for the program; the Senate version contained none. F o r th e R esearch L ib ra rie s Program (T itle II-C), the conference committee recommended a full $6,000,000. Both the Senate and House bills had appropriated this amount for the program. ■■ A C R L M em b ersh ip ACRL membership was 8,593 as of June 30, 1979. Membership at the same time last year was 8,214.