Search News
For the Media
For media inquiries, call CWA Communications at 202-434-1168 or email comms@cwa-union.org. To read about CWA Members, Leadership or Industries, visit our About page.
Free Flow of Information At Stake in GPO Fight
Defying three committees of Congress and established federal law, the Bush administration has ordered federal agencies and departments using the Government Printing Office to arrange for their own printing starting Sept. 1, setting up a standoff between the executive branch and Congress that may have to be resolved in the courts.
But with 1,500 federal jobs, $712 million in annual revenue and public access to thousands of government documents in the balance, CWA Printing Sector President Bill Boarman is hoping for a resolution through the court of public opinion.
Office of Management and Budget Director Mitchell Daniels told the congressional Joint Committee on Printing on July 10 that taking away GPO’s responsibility for the procurement of all government printing could save millions of dollars — a claim handily refuted by Michael DiMario, public printer and head of the GPO.
But more is at stake. In addition to printing, the GPO catalogues all federal documents and distributes them to depository libraries. The agency handled 5.9 million copies of 14,700 titles last year, DiMario said.
Taking away the GPO’s responsibility for the documents threatens public access, Boarman said. “CWA believes citizens should have access to the free flow of all government information and that the executive branch has no business trying to make government less transparent,” he said.
Julia Wallace, a librarian at the University of Minnesota, told the committee that already up to half of executive branch documents never make it into the library system. The OMB directive undoubtedly would result in more “fugitive documents,” she said.
The Printing Industries of America opposes the OMB plan and since the hearing several publications have come out against it.
According to the Aug. 5 issue of The Watcher, published by OMB Watch: “The GPO has … acted as a critical point in the dissemination of information to the public and in increasing the accountability of the federal government. No price can be put on the importance of that role.”
Miriam Drake, professor emeritus at the Georgia Institute of Technology Library, in Information Today’s “Newsbreaks” writes, “Without information produced by the executive branch, people are penalized in their work, research, education, general knowledge, and ability to judge the performance of their government.”
Following Boarman’s testimony, the Joint Committee Chairman Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) announced his intention to forestall the new policy and demanded more details from the OMB.
Later, both the Senate and House appropriations committees passed bills calling for full funding of the GPO for fiscal year 2003.
The Senate Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee included language stating, “The Committee strongly opposes the Office of Management and Budget’s plans… to ignore the statutory requirement that the printing and publishing of government publications must be conducted through the Government Printing Office.”
The committee made note of the GPO’s estimate that shifting the procurement function of the GPO to individual agencies could increase the government’s costs for printing to $335.2 million from $231.5 million. Further, senators said that without the GPO to ensure distribution of government documents to 1,300 federal depository libraries, “the public would be deprived of full access to government publications.”
Language in the House Treasury Appropriations bill, introduced by Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), questioned both the economy of the OMB proposal and its effect on public access. It also required the OMB to present details to the committee within 30 days.
However, OMB Director Daniels told reporters in mid-July he intended to go through with the directive as originally outlined in a May 3 memorandum.
But with 1,500 federal jobs, $712 million in annual revenue and public access to thousands of government documents in the balance, CWA Printing Sector President Bill Boarman is hoping for a resolution through the court of public opinion.
Office of Management and Budget Director Mitchell Daniels told the congressional Joint Committee on Printing on July 10 that taking away GPO’s responsibility for the procurement of all government printing could save millions of dollars — a claim handily refuted by Michael DiMario, public printer and head of the GPO.
But more is at stake. In addition to printing, the GPO catalogues all federal documents and distributes them to depository libraries. The agency handled 5.9 million copies of 14,700 titles last year, DiMario said.
Taking away the GPO’s responsibility for the documents threatens public access, Boarman said. “CWA believes citizens should have access to the free flow of all government information and that the executive branch has no business trying to make government less transparent,” he said.
Julia Wallace, a librarian at the University of Minnesota, told the committee that already up to half of executive branch documents never make it into the library system. The OMB directive undoubtedly would result in more “fugitive documents,” she said.
The Printing Industries of America opposes the OMB plan and since the hearing several publications have come out against it.
According to the Aug. 5 issue of The Watcher, published by OMB Watch: “The GPO has … acted as a critical point in the dissemination of information to the public and in increasing the accountability of the federal government. No price can be put on the importance of that role.”
Miriam Drake, professor emeritus at the Georgia Institute of Technology Library, in Information Today’s “Newsbreaks” writes, “Without information produced by the executive branch, people are penalized in their work, research, education, general knowledge, and ability to judge the performance of their government.”
Following Boarman’s testimony, the Joint Committee Chairman Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) announced his intention to forestall the new policy and demanded more details from the OMB.
Later, both the Senate and House appropriations committees passed bills calling for full funding of the GPO for fiscal year 2003.
The Senate Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee included language stating, “The Committee strongly opposes the Office of Management and Budget’s plans… to ignore the statutory requirement that the printing and publishing of government publications must be conducted through the Government Printing Office.”
The committee made note of the GPO’s estimate that shifting the procurement function of the GPO to individual agencies could increase the government’s costs for printing to $335.2 million from $231.5 million. Further, senators said that without the GPO to ensure distribution of government documents to 1,300 federal depository libraries, “the public would be deprived of full access to government publications.”
Language in the House Treasury Appropriations bill, introduced by Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), questioned both the economy of the OMB proposal and its effect on public access. It also required the OMB to present details to the committee within 30 days.
However, OMB Director Daniels told reporters in mid-July he intended to go through with the directive as originally outlined in a May 3 memorandum.