The full House Appropriations Committee voted to approve FY2018 funding for libraries. By a 28-22 margin, the committee approved the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (LHHS) funding bill, which proposes roughly $231 million for the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS)—including $183.6 million for Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) programs, and $27 million for the Department of Education’s Innovative Approaches to Literacy (IAL) program—essentially at 2017 funding levels.
In addition to saving the IMLS, the LHHS bill includes level funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. However, it funds the Department of Education (DOE) at $66 billion—a cut of $2.4 billion from 2017, which includes the elimination of some important library-related programs, including the DOE’s Striving Readers program. ALA officials said they would work to restore it.
Meanwhile, on July 18, the House Appropriations Committee approved by a 30-21 margin the FY2018 Interior and Environment Appropriations, which includes $145 million each for the NEH and the NEA, roughly equal to FY 2017 funding levels.
The key votes come after President Trump’s call in May to eliminate IMLS and virtually all federal funding for libraries, as well as a host of other vital programs and agencies, including the NEH and the NEA. And, it comes after Congress, earlier in May, passed a belated 2017 budget that actually upped the IMLS, NEH, and NEA budgets.
In a party-line 50-48 vote Thursday, senators approved a resolution to undo sweeping privacy rules adopted by the Obama-era Federal Communications Commission. If it becomes law, it would also prevent the FCC from setting similar rules again.
The rules have not gone into effect, however ISPs must tell consumers what information is being collected and how it is being used or shared. The rules require ISPs in some cases to get users’ explicit consent, for example to sell information such as geo location or browsing history for advertising.
Republicans in Congress and at the FCC have objected to these rules, passed by the Democratic majority at the FCC in October. They have argued with major cable and telcom companies,that the rules put ISPs on unequal footing with other major data-collecting companies like Google or Facebook, which are overseen instead by the Federal Trade Commission.
This data visualization views the changes to the new U.S. Congress after the 2016 elections.
1.What happened to the Senate?
2.In the People’s House
3.How big is the victory for GOP?
4.Key races contribute to the GOP victory.
5. A GOP Congress
Imagine being at a crowded function , and someone approached you wearing pair of funny looking glasses, one side of which had a thick aluminum frame. Not knowing that someone is wearing Google glasses. This person approaching you would be able to identify you by facial recognition, and by the time he or she has walked up to you, they just done peeped your hole card, your name, your job, where you lived and how much you make? And guess what? your conversation was being recorded and that your photo, or whatever the wearer was looking at, could be posted online? What would you do? Unless you know the full capabilities of Google’s Glass project. How would you know to ask the person wearing the Google Glass headset not to record you? Chances are you wouldn’t. Worse scenario, The Google glass wearer shows up at your residence. Well some members of Congress is finding google glass kind of creepy and want some answers. The Bi-partisan Congressional Privacy Caucus sent a letter to Google CEO Larry Page asking questions about how Google planned to ensure that the privacy of users, and more important, non-users, was being protected. In other words the congressmen want to know what safeguards Google was putting into place to guard against the violation of privacy laws. Google has until June 14 to respond to the inquiries by the caucus. Unless they can ease the fears we can expect some regulations concerning Google Glass.