Capitol Commentary

Bruce Craig, Director of the National
Coalition for History

Senate Committee Approves Revisions To Higher Education Act: New History Language Included

On September 6, 2005, Senators Michael B. Enzi (R-WY) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) introduced legislation (S. 1614) to reauthorize programs associated with the Higher Education Act of 1965. Two days later, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions reported the bill out of committee with minor revisions. Among the titles included in the passed bill is one focusing on history related, postsecondary grant programs. Language in Section 851 ("American History for Freedom") authorizes the Secretary of Education to award three-year competitive grants to institutions of higher education for the purpose of strengthening postsecondary academic programs that promote and impart knowledge of "traditional American history; the history, nature, and threats to free institutions; and the history and achievements of Western Civilization."

As was the case during the last Congress when a similar measure was introduced (the bill became stalled in the House shortly before adjournment and never passed), this Congress's bill version includes a definition of "traditional" American history: "the significant constitutional, political, intellectual, economic, and foreign policy trends and issues that have shaped the course of American history; and the key episodes, turning points, and leading figures involved in the constitutional, political, intellectual, diplomatic and economic history of the United States." Notably absent is any mention of "social" history or any notion of "comparative" history.

If this legislation passes, appropriated funds could be used to design and implement programs of study, individual courses, lecture series, seminars, symposia and the like. In addition, funds could be used for the development and publication of instructional materials, research, support for undergraduate and graduate programs, student and teacher fellowships, and teacher preparation programs that stress "content mastery." Not only would grants be made available to traditional educational agencies such as colleges and universities, but also eligible "nonprofit organizations" such as museums and libraries, "whose mission is consistent" with the purposes of this act.

The legislation does not include any specific appropriation authorization but merely states that funds "are authorized to be appropriated . . . as may be necessary for fiscal year 2006 and each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years." Action in the Senate is expected in the coming months; no companion bill has yet been introduced in the House.

NARA Selects Lockheed Martin
To Build ERA

On September 8, 2005, Archivist of the United States Allen Weinstein announced the award of a $308 million, six-year contract to Lockheed Martin to build the Electronic Records Archives (ERA) system for the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). The ERA system seeks to capture and preserve the electronic records of the federal government, regardless of format; ensure hardware and software independence; and provide access for the American public and federal officials. According to NARA officials, after a yearlong design competition, Lockheed Martin was chosen to build the archives of the future "based on the technical merit of the solution it proposed, the excellence of their system and software engineering methodology, and the quality of their project management."

The Electronic Records Archives' goal is clear and simple: a system that accepts, preserves, and makes accessible—far into the future—any type of electronic document. Lockheed Martin was selected based on its ability to design a system which addresses in considerable depth NARA's business needs on the one hand, and on the other hand, a system that entails a modern, service-oriented architecture. NARA's business needs encompass handling rapidly-growing volumes of electronic records, ensuring the authenticity of those records, preserving them for the long term, and providing public access while protecting privacy and sensitive information. The announcement comes at the close of a one-year design competition between Harris Corporation and Lockheed Martin. The announcement marks the beginning of the ERA system development, with the initial operating capability targeted for release during Fiscal Year 2007.

During the same press conference, Kenneth Thibodeau, Director of the Electronic Records Archives Program, announced the formation of a high-level committee to advise and make recommendations to the Archivist of the United States on issues related to the development, implementation, and use of the ERA system. This committee is named the Advisory Committee on the Electronic Records Archives (ACERA).

The advisory committee will provide an ongoing structure for bringing together experts in computer science and information technology, archival science and records management, information science, the law, history, genealogy, and education. The twenty members of the committee are recognized experts and leaders in their field. They include: David Carmichael, state archivist of Georgia; Jerry Handfield, state archivist of Washington State; Richard Pearce-Moses, director of Digital Government Information at the Arizona State Library and Archives; Jonathan Redgrave, partner at Jones Day; Sharon Dawes, director of the Center for Technology in Government and associate professor of Public Administration and Policy, the State University of New York at Albany; Luciana Duranti, chair and professor of Archival Studies, School of Library, Archival and Information Studies, University of British Columbia, and director of the InterPARES Project; Daniel Greenstein, associate vice provost of Scholarly Information and university librarian, California Digital Library, University of California; Andy Maltz, director, Science and Technology Council, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences; David Rencher, director, Records and Information Division, Family and Church History Department, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; and Dr. Kelly Woestman, professor and history education director, Pittsburg State University.

Administration Officials Target National Park Historic Sites

Since the creation of the National Park Service (NPS) in 1916, its primary mission has been to ensure that the nation's parks and historic areas would remain "unimpaired" by human activity for the benefit of "future generations." However, recent proposals by senior Bush administration Interior Department officials and by a powerful Republican member of Congress seek to change all that. Paul Hoffman, the deputy assistant of the Department of the Interior and former state director (1985-1989) for then U.S. Representative Dick Cheney, looks to completely redefine the meaning of "impairment" as it applies to the NPS's 388 natural and historic sites throughout the country, and Representative Richard Pombo (R-CA), the powerful chair of the House Resources Committee (the committee that has jurisdiction over the NPS), seeks to sell off historic areas and commercialize the parks in order to raise revenue.

Hoffman's proposal seeks to revamp the NPS's Organic Act by changing the meaning of "impairment" of national park units from "an impact to any park resource or value [that] may constitute an impairment" to one that proves to "permanently and irreversibly adversely [affect] a resource or value." The controversial redefinition is part of a larger 194-page draft "revision" of the NPS guideline, "Management Policies." The implications of the change on the long-term conservation and historic preservation practices of the NPS are staggering.

Opponents of the change, including the 400-member strong Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, argue that the very face of the national parks could be altered from places of refuge for natural and cultural heritage into sites opened up to developers, mining, logging, and recreational vehicles of every sort imaginable. According to Bill Wade, spokesperson for the coalition, "Regardless of what happens in the redrafting, the Department of the Interior is going to do what it can to get (the Hoffman proposal) in there. It can only be [through a] public outcry and the influence from Congress that can be brought to bear on this" that the proposal can be "turned back."

Proposals by the Chair of the House Resources Committee also have National Park Service (NPS) oversight and history watchdog groups up in arms. In a 260-page draft of a budget reconciliation bill (a tool that is used by Congress to meet budget goals), Representative Richard Pombo has advanced several controversial provisions aimed to help address the current governmental fiscal crisis. Among his ideas that purportedly are designed to save the government $2.4 billion is a proposal to sell no fewer than 15 national parks, including a number of historical sites: the Eugene O'Neill National Historical Site in Danville, California; the Thaddeus Kosciuszko National Memorial in Pennsylvania; the Fort Bowie National Historic Site, Arizona; the Mary McLeod Bethune Council House, Washington D.C.; and the Thomas Stone National Historic Site, Maryland, as well as a number of smaller, less visited natural areas most of which are located in Alaska, including the Bering Land Bridge National Preserve; the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve; and the Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve. If all the parks were sold off as Pombo wants, the total land holdings of the NPS would be reduced by 23 percent, thus saving the government billions over a period of years.

In addition to the proposed park closures, Pombo also seeks to require that the NPS raise $20 million through commercial sponsorships and by granting naming rights for certain national parks facilities. His plan would permit commercial advertisements on national park vehicles and advertising would be mandated to appear in official park service maps and guidebooks; billboards would be placed on in-park buses, trams, and vans.