Rick (and others), I normally refrain from jumping into what I consider a political argument but I'll make an exception in this case. Like yourself, I have been very interested in the Archivist position, probably for different reasons. I for one applaud President Bush's nomination. Mr. Weinstein is as qualified as any individual that I've seen. Besides, NARA is in desperate need of change and the change needs to start at the top. After two frustrating years at NARA, I had enough and decided to leave. I'm not the only one. Now don't get me wrong, Carlin has done some wonderful things for the Agency. Among his accomplishments was the initiation of the Electronic Records Archives (ERA), renovation of Archives I and funding for other important initiatives. But he also created a risk adverse bureaucracy that stifles innovation and punishes those who are willing to take speak their mind. Because of this, the focus by NARA management has not necessarily been on results but on the process. I've read the Washington Post and other editorials; I can tell you like many other stories that come out of the beltway there's more to this than meets the eye. I can't disclose my sources but at least one or two others on the other side of the aisle wanted Carlin to leave as well. What is very ironic is that many of the same individuals from the archival community now crying about Weinstein's nomination were the same group crying about Carlin. Carlin has been in the position for 10 years. He's resigned; its time to move on! Bruce L. White, CRM, PMP -----Original Message----- From: Rick Barry [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 4:50 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: A New Archivist of the US Dear colleages: Please excuse and ignore cross postings. I'm not sure how many of you have been watching the President's nomination of a replacement Archivist of the US. There was some discussion about a year ago but nothing on Monday's Washington Post editorial, apart from Peter K's raindrop and one other posting. While the subject has been posted to this SAA and ARMA lists, there has been no discussion whatever. I hope this isn't a reflection of our general interest in the subject or we shouldn't expect our Senate to take much about recordkeeping very seriously. Yet, there is a great deal at stake for the general public and also for the archives and records management profession. Below is an email letter that I have just sent to my two US Senators. I hope that this posting will generate some interest in this matter. In the meantime, I urge each of you to write to write to your Senators immediately http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm as the nomination has just cleared the Senate. At least by email, Senators will not accept mail from anyone outside of their state. See ARMA Washington Brief Senate Committee Approves Weinstein and Monday's Washingon Post editorial "A New Archivist" at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3596-2005Feb6.html We can expect the full Senate vote any time now. An important part of my own reservations about the nomination are included in the below letter as I wanted to keep it short. I will be publishing a paper shortly on the home page of my website that I co-wrote with Mike Steemson, "Heritage groups challenge George W. Bush nominee for US Archivist: So What?" that is being published in the current issue of the UK Records Management Journal. That paper will discuss the subject more thoroughly. Regards, Rick Barry www.mybestdocs.com Cofounder, Open Reader Consortium www.openreader.org ------------------------------- February 9, 2005 Dear Senator [Warner/Allen]: I am a professional consultant and author in the field of information and records management. I'm writing to you about the President's nomination of Alan Weinstein as Archivist of the US, which has cleared Committee. My concern isn't political in nature. Nor is it about Messrs. Weinstein (nominee) or Carlin (incumbent), but rather about the essential, inviolate nature of our national records and the Archivist responsible for their proper stewardship. This is a position that regrettably is rarely discussed in the media; yet is one that is of vital importance to all Americans. It was the subject of a Post editorial Monday; however, that editorial failed to mention an important point that I raise here. As you know, the incumbent has a critical role in determining what public records will be kept and for how long, including vital Presidential Record, the general level of secrecy with regard to public records that is vital to documenting human rights and the accountability of government officials. As you are also no doubt aware, as part of our protections against politicizing the position, and as part of the wake of the Watergate, The National Archives and Records Administration Act of 1984 (US Public Law 98-497), signed by President Ronald Reagan, clearly states that, "The Archivist shall be appointed without regard to political affiliations and solely on the basis of the professional qualifications required to perform the duties and responsibilities of the office of Archivist." House Report 98-707 required that determining professional qualifications be achieved through consultation with recognized organizations of archivists and historians. This was not done in this case. The law also states that when the Archivist is removed (as happened here), before doing so, the President must inform both Houses of Congress in writing of his reasons. If the President has done so, it has not to my knowledge been made public. It should be. Like a few other key positions, there is no specific time limit on the Archivist's position; nor is the incumbent expected to tender his/her resignation with a change of administration. You have always been a straight shooter. I hope that you will not vote in favor of this nominee or any other nominee until you have been properly informed of the compelling reasons for dismissing the incumbent and feel that they are weighty enough to warrant this unusual action. I also ask that, if reasons have been given for the incumbent's dismissal, you will send me a copy of that explanation, which I hope and trust will also be a matter of public record. The public is entitled to nothing less. Thank you. Sincerely, Rick Barry www.mybestdocs.com Cofounder, Open Reader Consortium www.openreader.org List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance