FY’92 Appropriations
After operating for over a month under a Continuing Resolution, most of the thirteen appropriations bills now have been through House/Senate conference committees and some have become law. On October 28 the President signed the Treasury Appropriations bill which includes $152 million for the National Archives with $5.4 million, the cur rent level, earmarked for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission’s (NHPRC) grants program. The Administration had recommended this amount for the National Archives, a$14 million increase over the FY’91 appropriation of $138 million, but with only $4 million earmarked for the NHPRC. During the summer the House agreed on the President’s re quest, $152 million, but specified $5.4 million, the current level for the NHPRC. The Senate passed a budget for the National Archives of $154 million with $6 million for NHPRC. The Senate recognized the already tight budget of the National Archives and added $2 million to the President’s request to cover the additional amount needed to increase the NHPRC appropriation from $4 million to $6 million. However, in the Conference Committee the House version of $152 million with $5.4 million for NHPRC prevailed.
The Interior Appropriations bill which is now awaiting the President’s signature would give the National Endowment for the Humanities a budget of almost $176 million for FY’92. The President had requested $178 million for NEH, which was the amount budgeted by the Congress; however, the final bill also included a1.2 percent across the board cut of all agencies in the Interior appropriations bill. Thus the NEH budget was reduced to approximately $176 million. This represents an $6 million increase over the current budget. The figures that came out of the House/Senate Conference Committee, however, did earmark funds differently from the Administration, with a $1 million increase for the State Humanities Councils and $1 million for a new dissertation fellowship program.
The House bill, which endorsed the Administration’s amount of $178 million, reallocated funds with additional money for media grants, the Office of Preservation, and State Humanities Councils and reduced funds for challenge grants, educational programs, and ad ministration. The House also introduced a new dissertation fellowship program. “In recognition of the need to increase support for prospective humanities doctorates,” House Report 102-116 states “the Committee has provided $1,000,000 to initiate a dissertation fellowships program.” The report language further stated that “it is anticipated that with this amount, the Endowment could award approximately SO grants to assist humanities doctoral candidates to complete their degrees.” But the Senate passed a $175 million budget for NEH for FY’92, $3 million less than the President’s request and the House bill and with no new dissertation fellowship money. The final compromise bill includes an additional $1million for the state councils and $1 million for the new dissertation fellowships.
NEH is now developing guidelines for the new fellowships. Although most line items in the NEH budget are for one year the FY’92 bill specifies that the $1 million for the new dissertation fellowships could be spent over a two-year period. One pending issue is whether the earlier House report language specifying “approximately 50 grants” is binding or whether NEH could use the $1 million to offer a larger number of fellowships.
The Department of Interior appropriations bills also includes about $29 million for state programs, $5.7 million for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and $950,000 for grants for historic preservation projects to Native American tribes.
President Signs into Law State Department’s Foreign Relations Historical Series and Declassification Legislation
On October 28 after almost a year of discussion, negotiation, drafting, and redrafting of legislative language, the President signed H.R. 1415, the State Department Authorization Act of 1992 and 1993 which includes a section on the Foreign Relations of the United States and the State Department’s policy for declassifying all but the most sensitive historical documents over 30 years old. The new law, P.L. 102-138, marks the first time that the Congress has legislated on the matter of systematic declassification, a policy that has previously been governed by executive orders. The law specifies one year for the establishment of a systematic declassification program for State Department records and three years for bringing the Foreign Relations volumes into compliance with the 30-year timetable. An extension to two years and five years respectively are permitted at the request of the Secretary.
One of the major achievements of the new law is the expanded oversight role given to the advisory committee of outside scholars. The law calls for the establishment of the Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation for the Department of State composed of nine members. “Six of the members of the Advisory Committee,” the law states “shall be appointed from lists of individuals nominated by the American Historical Association, the Organization of American Historians, the American Political Science Association, Society of American Archivists, the American Society of International Law, and the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations, One member shall be ap pointed from each list.” Additionally, the law stresses that members of the Advisory Committee should be distinguished scholars “who have a demonstrable record of substantial research pertaining to the foreign relations of the United States.”
The State Department’s Advisory Committee, established in1957, has had a broad mandate to advise on the Foreign Relations volumes as well as other documentation issues. Public Law 102-138 goes a long way toward assuring the committee the access it needs to classified records and providing a procedure for committee review of the department’s declassification pro gram. For over a decade the State Department’s Historical Office has urged that Advisory Committee members have access to material deleted for classification reasons from the Foreign Relations series. However the State Department’s classification/declassification division had op posed the committee’s access. Many committee members, frustrated over having inadequate in formation to make knowledgeable judgments, had come to view their work as simply a rubber stamping exercise.
The new law states that the “Advisory Committee shall review the State Department’s declassification procedures” and “all guidelines used in declassification.” Additionally the Committee will review samples of documents that remain classified after thirty years and shall “annually submit to the Secretary of State a report setting forth it findings.” The law provides a number of provisions under which records may remain classified beyond thirty years. These include records containing sensitive weapons or cryptologic information important to the national defense, records that would disclose the names or identities of living persons who provided confidential information to the United States, documents that would “demonstrably impede current diplomatic negotiations,” and records closed for personal privacy reasons. These standards provide more access than that of the existing Executive Order 12356 on classification/declassification which states that information shall be classified as long as required by national security considerations” and that “if there is reasonable doubt” records should remain classified. There is no consideration in the current executive order to balancing national security needs with citizens’ right to know or to weighing the harm that results from having a distorted history because of lack of access to historical records. Not only does the new law provide for greater access but it also has a built-in mechanism for the Advisory Committee of outside scholars to review the way in which the declassification guidelines are being implemented. Currently there is no internal nor external oversight of State’s declassification program.
Although the President signed the bill, he complained that several provisions are inconsistent with his constitutional authority to protect “deliberative communications within the executive branch” and “state secrets.” It was the abuse of this executive power, however, that led to the passage of this law. For historians who have worked almost two years to gain passage of P.L.102-138, with its Title IV, “Foreign Relations of the United States Historical Series,” this is a real victory.
National Science Foundation Creates Separate Directorate for Social Science
At the October 11 meeting of the NSF Board, director Walter Massey announced a major restructuring at NSF that includes the creation of a separate directorate for the social, behavioral and economic sciences (SBES). This restructuring breaks up the Biological, Behavioral and Social Science Directorate which had existed since 1976. Although the timetable for putting in place the new office is un clear, indications are that a new Assistant Director will be on board by spring.
General Accounting Office Issues Report on Agency Heads’ Removal of Documents
On September 24 the General Accounting Office (GAO) released the report, “Federal Records: Document Removal by Agency Heads needs Independent Oversight,” (GAO/GGD-91-117) which focused on the records removed by eight Reagan Ad ministration cabinet officers. Although most of the documents removed were copies of federal documents, the GAO did find some original documents and some records with classified and FBI markings. The report concluded with the recommendation that the Federal Records Act of 1950 be amended to prohibit agencies from relinquishing any federal documents to agency heads until the National Archives has determined that the removals are consistent with existing federal laws and regulations.
