Date: Thu, 20 Oct 1994 16:44:29 -0500
From: dmolstad@research.westlaw.com (Dorothy Molstad)
To: com-priv@psi.com
Subject: Letter from Congressmen Conyers and Sabo

This has appeared on the West Issues Page located on the West Gopher.
Since it is relevant, I found it appropriate to cross post it.




Honorable Janet Reno
Attorney General
Department of Justice
Washington, DC  20530

Dear Attorney General Reno:

As Chairman of Committees of relevant jurisdiction, we are
seriously concerned about a statement the Department of Justice
issued on September 2, 1994, regarding the Department's apparent
consideration of a plan to develop a unified comprehensive case
citation system and a public domain database of Federal and state
judicial opinions.

We share the laudable goals of maximizing access to Federal and
state court opinions and making legal research as affordable as
possible and we believe that government has an affirmative
responsibility to ensure public access to government information. 
However, the issues involved in Department of Justice entry into
these areas are exceedingly complex and implicate important
budgetary and policy decisions that are the province of Congress.

Therefore, we would ask that you submit any action the Department
of Justice is contemplating to our Committees for appropriate
review before the Department (or any other agency) takes any steps
or expends any appropriated funds in this regard.

We have a number of specific concerns.  First, the reasons for such
a program have not been persuasively established.  It is our
understanding that Supreme Court opinions and United States Courts
of Appeals opinions are currently available on the Internet or
through electronic court bulletin boards.  We understand that the
Judicial Conference of the United States considered and rejected a
uniform citation proposal after lengthy hearings and an
extended process.  In light of these facts, we question the basis
for the Department's contemplated initiative.

Second, as a practical matter, implementing a new government
program under which the Department of Justice (or some other agency
or branch of government) creates a comprehensive citation system
and/or develops and maintains a public domain database undoubtedly
will involve substantial initial and sustained costs.  While we do
not know the precise amounts involved, we have seen estimates of
more than $100 million for this project.  In a time of shrinking
resources and increased competition among programs for ever scarcer
funding, and decision on the commitment of funds of such a
magnitude must be left to the relevant authorizing and
appropriating Committees of Congress.  We are not sure that
computer assisted legal research is more important than other
department priorities which could suffer as a result of this
budgetary diversion.

Third, budgetary issues aside, we are concerned about the
advisability of the Federal government undertaking an initiative
seemingly already being adequately handling by the private sector. 
Numerous publishers supply legal materials in a variety of formats.
These products vary in sophistication and price, but it would
appear that a wide range of users is adequately served.

Fourth, to the extent a new bureaucracy is required to maintain the
new system the Department proposes, it could be viewed with some
skepticism among our colleagues.  Whether the government could
efficiently and promptly handle its new tasks -- with or without
additional personnel -- is obviously something Congress would need
to consider.  Information developed over the years by the Committee
on Government Operations clearly demonstrates that the Federal
government has experienced substantial inefficiencies and waste
in maning large information systems.

Fifth, we would want to carefully assess the impact of any new
government or officially endorsed system on the private sector.  We
would clearly want to avoid impeding the full development of the
now robust market in legal materials and stifling innovation and
progress.  In this context, we would want to determine whether any
new system would cause unnecessary problems for the users of legal
materials, including the judiciary.  Additionally, there are
complicated intellectual property issues that would also have to be
considered.

Finally, there are several specific legal issues that Congress
would need to address relating to separation or powers concerns.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,


John Conyers, Jr.                               Martin Sabo
Chairman                                        Chairman
Committee on Government                         Committee on the
Operations                                      Budget