Comments/Opinions/Suggestions (Fwd: amending Circular A-110)

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 11:57:56 -0400
From: Paul Kanciruk <pkk@ornl.gov>
Subject: Fwd: amending Circular A-110

****************************************************
ASLA 99-15: Efforts Underway to Block Implementation of Changes to OMB Circular A-110
****************************************************

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is amending Circular A-110 in accordance with a new law, inserted into last year's appropriations omnibus bill by Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL), that could compel scientists to make their federally-funded data available under the Freedom of Information Act (known as FOIA). OMB received a slew of comments about its proposed changes to Circular A-110 (see ASLA 99-05 at http://www.agu.org/cgi-bin/asla/asla-list), and now some lawmakers are moving to block or postpone the new rules before OMB issues their final version. According to congressional aides, Representatives Jim Walsh (R-NY) and David Price (D-NC) plan to offer an amendment to the FY2000 Treasury/Postal appropriations bill that would postpone the implementation of Shelby's provision.

Walsh, Chair of the VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations subcommittee, and committee member Price intend to offer the amendment when the full appropriations committee, chaired by Rep. Bill Young (R-FL), meets this week to markup (discuss and amend in committee) the measure funding the Department of the Treasury and U.S. Postal Service for the next fiscal year. The Walsh-Price Amendment forestalls Shelby's intentions by withholding funding to implement or enforce the law. The amendment reads: "In the item relating to "Office of Management and Budget - Salaries and Expenses," insert before the period at the end the following: Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the fifth and sixth provisos under this heading in title III of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in section 101(h) of division A of Public Law 105-277)."

Capitol Hill observers indicate that Walsh and Price also intend to insert language into the committee report that accompanies the Treasury/Postal bill instructing OMB to direct the National Academy of Public Administration to study how federally-funded research data should be made available to the public. The judicial and executive branches usually view a committee report as a statement of congressional intent. While report language is not law, it is considered an important part of a bill's legislative history. Agencies who ignore report language do so at their peril.

Hill veterans doubt that the Walsh-Price amendment will survive a full appropriations committee vote this week. Even if it does, the amendment still faces opposition on the House floor, and when the Senate takes up the bill. Nonetheless, the amendment could be a signal to committee members in both chambers that rumblings about possible unintended consequences of Shelby's provision should be taken seriously. As is often the case, it is unlikely that the majority of committee members are even aware of the consternation about the new law that many in the scientific community have expressed (to review which lawmakers serve on the appropriations committee see http://www.house.gov/appropriations/).

Stephen J. Gould points out several of the potential unintended consequences of the new law in the May 14 issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education. Gould also chides the scientific community for condemning the law without also making a greater effort to communicate with the public more often and more effectively. Gould encourages open meetings with legislators and members of the public to work out standards for sharing scientific information. The trick will be to strike a balance between a scientist's cautionary approach to sharing preliminary data and the public's right to know.

AGU has not taken a position on the OMB's draft changes to Circular A-110 or the underlying law. The importance of archiving and availability of geophysical data, however, is clearly stated in an AGU position statement adopted in May, 1997 and available at http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/datapos.html. Those wishing to make their views known to Congress are encouraged to review the AGU statement.

--------------------
Sources: AAU, AIP, Congressional Research Service
Questions or comments about ASLA? Contact pfolger@agu.org