Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA)

Let me start with a definition from my trusty Oxford College Dictionary –

Eliminate: completely remove or get rid of (something)

By that definition, one would expect that the Government Paperwork ELIMINATION Act would be about completely removing or getting rid of (paperwork). Ha ha ha. Yes, it is important that GPEA allows Executive Branch agencies to use and collect electronic signatures and electronic forms. Yes, it is important that GPEA established the legality of these e-sigs and e-forms. But, NO, GPEA does not eliminate anything. It only stipulates that the agencies must provide an alternative method of submission besides paper, when “practicable” (see note below). It does not say these e-forms are replacing, or will ever be completely replacing, paper. So what exactly is being “eliminated” here? Still don’t know.

References

Government Paperwork Elimination Act. (2006). 44 U.S.C. § 3504. Retrieved January 27, 2009 fro Lexis/Nexis Congressional.

Lindberg, C. A. (Sr. Ed.). (2007). The Oxford college dictionary, 2nd ed. New York: Spark Publishing and Oxford: Oxford University.

Note – Defining Practicable

Thanks again to the Oxford College Dictionary: able to be done or put into practice successfully; able to be used; useful. Based on this, I am not sure GPEA really expects any agency to do anything about e-sigs or e-forms since there is NO measure given of success. If there is no measure of success, then you can’t determine if the action can be practiced “successfully,” therefore it is not “practicable.” I don’t even want to think about what “able to be used” or “useful” mean in a government context. Grr.

Legislative tracing

Aargh. Legislative tracing is VERY difficult. I have a new found respect for the CRS and the staffers on Capitol Hill. This is definitely yet another job to cross of the list!

Seriously, though – Margaret Clark was FABULOUS. I had begun the tracing before leaving for ALISE and also worked on it over the weekend when I got back, but like Nicole said, there was a lot of wheel spinning and very little progress. Margaret really helped me know WHERE to look for WHAT, an invaluable bit of information for this assignment. I have used THOMAS before so I already knew it would be cumbersome, and I have used WestLaw and Lexis/Nexis before, but not to this degree. I definitely liked Lexis the best of all the databases. I was especially excited to find the CFR in Lexis/Nexis Academic. Way to go Lexis!

Meanwhile, after doing all that (and some of you know exactly what “all that” was since you were forced to sit next to me or take my phone calls while I worked on it – thank you, BTW), I still have NO CLUE how on Earth GPEA made it into the emergency appropriations bill of 1998 since I could not find any place where the text of GPEA was inserted, not until the bill was already signed into law. Oh, the mysteries of the Federal government.
Not looking forward to doing this again for the final project…just kidding, you know I love a challenge. :)

References

Clark, M. (2009). Federal statutory research and legislative history [PowerPoint presentation]. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University College of Law Research Center.

Government Paperwork Elimination Act. (2006). 44 U.S.C. § 3504. Retrieved January 27, 2009 fro Lexis/Nexis Congressional.

Slightly off-topic library rant

Ok, this is not really an information policy issue, it's more of a library facility policy issue, but that's close enough. I just went to Strozier (to get books for this class, I swear), which seems to be on a quest to provide an endless supply of what-not-to-do stories. They have switched the location of check out to the Information Desk at the entrance. The old check out desk is now just for returns.

That's right, folks. You check OUT books at the entrance and you check IN books at the exit. Perfectly intuitive.

And of course, there are NO signs indicating they have made this switch. Sigh.

We love libraries

I was excited to note that the NY Times' guide to DC for people going to the inauguration included a very-pro-libraries piece on the Library of Congress (See http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/arts/design/16cong.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink). In talking about the construction/architecture of the LOC, author Charles McGrath says "it's gratifying that someone once though books deserved such an impressive home" and also quotes Jefferson's explanation as to why Congress needed to keep his eclectic and comprehensive collection - TJ could not think of any subject to which a Member might never need to refer. This is particularly lovely to remember in a moment when the outgoing Exec. Branch does not seem to think that historical records deserve to be kept at all.

Public policy making process

First of all, Duff’s discussion of the barriers to information policy making made me cringe and think of Aaron and the Bureau of Antelope Affairs. Thank you Duff (2004), for reminding us that no one in LIS can agree what “information” means and that this lack of consensus (or some might say spinning of our wheels) causes a multitude of problems, not the least of which is an inability to agree what comes under “information policy.” If we could agree to disagree and just take a working definition, maybe we could get somewhere. Of course, Buckland (1991) tried to do just that, but we (LIS academics) don’t seem eager to embrace his 3-part working definition.

But of course, the inability to agree to the definition of information is only part of the problem. Even if academics could agree, we would have to then get politicians to accept our definition and start organizing/creating information policies. I am not sure I really need to enumerate the further challenges here: the gazillion stakeholder groups, the inherent challenges in the policy making process evident in the aforementioned discussion of the legislative process (see previous post), the changing views from Administration to Administration, Congress to Congress, and throughout American society, yada yada yada.

Chuck asked us to bring definitions of public policy making process. I had found something based on OED definitions of public policy, policy-making, and process, but now I am wondering if this term is simply an oxymoron. Jones (1984) cites a dictionary definition of process as a series of actions aimed at an end. I am not sure I see any of this public policy making as “aimed at an end” so can we really say it is a process? Or is it more of a never-ending Merry-Go-Round with riders jumping on and off?

References

Buckland, M. K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 351-360.

Duff, A. F. (2004). The past, present, and future of information policy. Information, Communication & Society, 7(1), 69-87. Retrieved January 8, 2009, from Informa database.

Jones, C. A. (1984). An introduction to the study of public policy, 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

P.S. I am not saying anything about Reyes (2001) since reading that after reading Jones (1984) gave me an intense feeling of déjà vu, and I am always trying to work on that whole “if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all” thing, although perhaps not always successfully.

Legislative tracing

As I embark on a legislative tracing project for GPEA, all I can really say about the sources on how a bill becomes a law and the pathfinders/resources for tracing legislative history is that I cannot believe how cumbersome the process looks from the outset. I hope it turns out not to be so complicated, but previous experience using Federal sources leads me to believe otherwise. I like the optimistically simple explanation of legislative history from the Syracuse pathfinder: the collection of documents created by the legislative process that cumulatively reveals the history and intent of a statute or law.

I will say this, as simplistic as the Schoolhouse Rock video is, it is surely easier for the average American to understand than the diatribe on THOMAS. I don’t imagine that the majority of Americans are overly familiar with Robert’s Rules of Order, or care to become familiar with them. Even those of us who have some knowledge of these rules (ahem, me) could easily find the THOMAS discussion of how a bill becomes a law too detailed and complicated. From Chuck’s description of the process, though, it almost seems like the description on THOMAS, written by Charles W. Johnson, Parliamentarian, United States House of Representatives, is less complicated than the actual process. One wonders how any bill ever becomes law, sheesh.

References

Federal legislative history pathfinders and guides. (n.d.). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Law Library. Retrieved January 12, 2009, from http://www.law.syr.edu/Pdfs/0Fed%20Legis.pdf

From a Bill to a Law. (n.d.). THOMAS [Electronic resource]. Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress. Retrieved January 13, 2009, from http://thomas.loc.gov/home/laws_made.html

Warburton, T. (1973). I’m just a bill [Video media]. Schoolhouse Rock. Retrieved January 13, 2009, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

Blog appearance

FYI - I changed the template to an easier-to-read color scheme, per Nicole's request. If anyone has trouble reading this color scheme, let me know and I will change it again.

Weeks 1 & 2 Readings

Information policy impacts my ability to do my job and that is why I have always been active in following what is going on in regards to national and state government. I found out early on in my career that, especially in education, it is very important to know what is going on that can impact my profession. I realize through the various historical aspects that we have read about that while staying informed on current events I have neglected the past and we all know what happens when we don’t learn from the past. Relyea (2008), McDermott (2007), and Herndon et al. (2002) present a comprehensive historical look at public policy as it relates to information and access to information. It was interesting to see while they all presented information on some of the same legislation they each had their own slant on the issues. While it seems that there is some agreement on the past, there is no exact agreement as to which constitutes a definition of “information policy.” Duff (2004) goes back to the argument that maybe we first need a definitive idea of what information is before we can define information policy.

In reading Jones (1984), Anderson (2006), McDermott (2007) and McClure (1999) we are presented with the question of what is information policy and why should we care about it. I like McClure’s (1999) concise definition of “interrelated principals, laws, guidelines, rules and regulations, directives, procedures, judgments, interpretations, and practices that guide the creation, management, access and use of information” (p. 307). The “creation” part of this definition of information policy really struck me and caused me pause for thought. I guess I am on the other side of the coin, in that I am a librarian and always worried about access issues. Yet in this age of Web 2.0 and the participatory culture that is growing up because of it the “creation” aspect is becoming more and more important. In fact we are already seeing an increase in copyright and intellectual freedom issues coming to light.

I also found interesting the idea that information policy can be considered a sort of “meta” policy in that it affects all other policy systems. This makes sense to me because of the assumed multidisciplinary aspect of information science in general. As for the why we should care question, I have to say I am inspired by McDermott’s (2007) passion and identify with her cynicism! I am coming to realize that I need to be concerned more about the bigger picture of information policy. I tend to focus on my own small world of education and what I see as having a direct impact on my students and me as an educator. For example, when ALAWON sends out briefs or alerts that don’t relate to school libraries, education or children I tend to hit the delete key. Though through these readings it is becoming clear that everything trickles down and does impact me as an information professional.

References
Anderson, J. (2006). Public policy making (6th ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Duff, A. F. (2004). The past, present, and future of information policy.Information, Communication & Society, 7, 69-87.

Jones, C. O. (1984). An introduction to the study of public policy (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Corp.

McClure, Charles R. (1999). United States information policy. In K. Allen (Ed.) Encyclopedia of library and information science [Electronic version] (vol. 65, pp. 306-314). New York: Marcel Dekker.

McDermott, P. (2007). Who needs to know? The state of public access to federal government information. Washington DC: Bernan Press.

Relyea, H. (2008). Federal government information policy and public policy analysis: A brief overview. Library & Information Science Research 30, 2-21. Retrieved January 5, 2009, from ScienceDirect database.

What Is Information Policy and Why Does It Matter?

I like to take classes where I don’t know too much about the subject since that gives me more room to learn something, and that is certainly the case here. I have an idea of what information policy is, and some examples of information policies like FOIA and CIPA, but I am not really too familiar with information policy overall so I am looking forward to this class - and NO I am not brown-nosing. I am serious.

The debate over the definition of information comes into play when trying to define information policy (McClure, 1999), which I am sure is annoying several of my classmates. Personally, I am ok with agreeing that we cannot truly come to a consensus definition, but I think a working definition would be invaluable in this case. How on Earth can we talk about policies about something when we have no working definition of that something? Maybe it would help to have a policy stipulating that information is one or more specific things, like the definition of a retainable record that McDermott (2007) quotes from the Federal Records Act. If we could at least agree on what we are saying “information” is, then we could begin to narrow down the areas of policy that govern it (cf. Duff, 2004).

Ok, forget about defining information. What about the definition of information policy? McClure tells us it “is a term used to describe a set of interrelated principles, laws, guidelines, rules and regulations, directives, procedures, judgments, interpretations, and practices that guide the creation, management, access, and use of information” (1999, p. 306-307). Given that this expert is also our professor, this is obviously a definition we should seriously consider sticking to in class, even if it is based on the term “information” as we still have no consensus definition for that.

Why does this matter to us? There are 7 students and 1 professor in this course, all of whom are part of the College of Information. Obviously, we care about information, trying to define what it is, understand how people access and use it, and improve that access. Therefore, we need to be concerned with government policies that regulate what counts as information (as opposed to a secret which is arguably data and not information since we 1. don’t know it’s there and 2. are unlikely to find out about it), how that information is recorded, saved, stored, and indexed so that we can also worry about how well people can access and use it.

I find it dangerous and scary that the majority of information professionals seem to take little interest in information policies until those policies are in place (like libraries and the USA PATRIOT Act). Wouldn’t it make more sense if those information policies were written by people who know something about information, its collection, storage, indexing, retrieval, use, et al.? Then we could have some say in the policies governing our discipline so those policies help rather than hinder the field, both academics and practitioners. Of course, in order to do this, we would first have to follow Relyea’s advice and learn how to analyze existing policies to understand how them came into being, how they are now, and how to alter them in the future (2008).

NOTE: I could only access 2/3 of Chuck’s article in the Encyclopedia of Library & Information Science since pages 308 and 310 are missing from the Google Books preview. If anyone knows where to get the whole article, please let me know.

References

Duff, Alistair F. (2004). The past, present, and future of information policy. Information, Communication & Society, 7(1), 69-87. Retrieved January 8, 2009, from Informa database.

McClure, Charles R. (1999). United States information policy. In Allen Kent (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science [Electronic resource], vol. 65 (pp. 306-314). New York: Marcel Dekker.

McDermott, Patrice. (2007). Who needs to know? The state of public access to federal government information. Lanham, MD: Bernan.

Relyea, Harold C. (2008). Federal government information policy and public policy analysis: a brief overview. Library and Information Science Research, 30, 2-21. Retrieved from ScienceDirect database January 7, 2009.

Lawmakers Behaving Badly

Not actually policy related, but a comment on our policy makers that sounds exactly like what we were talking about in class on Tuesday - a lack of civility. From the Washington Post: When the results from the election were officially read in a joint session of Congress on the House floor most rose to applaud. A notable exception was Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader of the Senate, on the front row. This comment from columnist Dana Milbank rings true: "There's nothing quite like public petulance by our leaders to make the current age seem small. And McConnell had company in his bad manners. McCain, the vanquished Republican presidential nominee, skipped the ceremony entirely, along with two-thirds of the Senate. On the Republican side of the aisle, 41 seats were empty."

Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2009

Well looks like here we go again withe the issue of the presidential records. The House voted on and passed H.R. 35, Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2009 and H.R. 36, Presidential Library Donation Reform Act of 2009.

H.R. 35 revokes President Bush’s executive order (E.O. 13233). This ruling invalidates part of E.O. 13233 that allows former Presidents and Vice Presidents to review executive records before they are released under the Freedom of Information Act.

Presidential Library Donation Reform Act of 2009 makes it mandatory to disclose all donations to charities set up to build presidential libraries. It passed the House (388-31).

Obama Links Ed Tech to Economic Growth

When catching up on reading some educational journals this week, I ran across this article: Obama Links Ed Tech to Economic Growth. This economic stimulus plan could mean funding coming to the schools for broadband internet access and computers.

"From the integral role that technology played in his campaign to indications that he will create a chief technology officer in the federal government for the first time, Obama has led many ed-tech experts to believe that the new administration will revolutionize the way technology is viewed and used in the United States, and, it is hoped, in K-12 education."

There were a few items that made me think of information policy. The Relyea article described and gave a brief history of the Presidential Records Act which requires that all presidential correspondence be made part of the public record. This article explains that Obama's favorite means of communication is his blackberry and unless a solution is found he may have to stop using it to send and receive emails. Also mentioned in reference to Obama's commitment to technology is his move to appoint a chief technology officer for the government.

Another item to watch for in regards to policy will be Obama's appointment of Arne Duncan as U. S. Secretary of Education and his attempts to lead the new administration’s effort to improve the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act and to work with Congress to rewrite the law for reauthorization.

Keeping tack of each student's blogs

Hi all -

If you want to keep track of your posts (and to make things easier for Chuck), tag your posts with your name. Then each of us will be able to find all of our posts.

To do this, after you write a post but before you publish it, add LABELS (below the text box) and make sure one is your name. I did it for this post so you can see what it will look like.