C&RL News December 2017 620

Kevin Maher is deputy director of the ALA Office of 
Government Relations, email: kmaher@alawash.org

W a s h i n g t o n  H o t l i n eKevin Maher

Congressional appropriations and 
authorization: Two sides of the same 
coin for IMLS
The fight for federal library dollars has 
occupied much of the library news from 
Washington since the administration pro-
posed elimination of IMLS funding in 
March of this year. ALA has led the library 
community’s efforts to ensure IMLS is ful-
ly funded. Though final decisions on ap-
propriations have not been made, our ad-
vocacy has so far proven to be effective.

Both chambers of Congress rejected 
the president’s request to eliminate fund-
ing for IMLS. The House-passed appro-
priations bill provided level funding for 
IMLS at $231 million, while the Senate 
went even further by recommending a $4 
million increase for the library Grants to 
States Program, which is included under 
the LSTA portion of IMLS. 

Congress was unable to pass a final budget 
by October 1 for the federal government and 
opted to approve a temporary “continuing 
resolution” to keep the government running 
at FY2017 levels through at least December 8. 

Appropriations for IMLS is only one 
side of the equation. Equally important 
to funding IMLS or any federal program 
is its authorization. An authorization is, 
essentially, a law passed by Congress that 
says why a program should exist and what 
it should do. The authorization for most 
programs expires. Every time a program 
is up for renewal, Congress has the op-
portunity to reassess, change, or possibly 
eliminate a program. Is the program do-

ing what it was intended to do? Are there 
needed changes or modernizations? Is the 
funding level too high or too low? Should 
the program be sunset? 

While an authorization typically ap-
proves a funding level for the program, an 
authorization is not necessary for a federal 
program to receive funding. Appropriators 
in Congress regularly approve funding for 
unauthorized programs. Having an au-
thorization is a signal that a program has 
“friends” in Congress willing to fight to save 
the program. On the other hand, not having 
an authorization sends a subtle message 
that a program may no longer be useful 
or that its mission has not been reviewed 
in several years. In these times when some 
in Congress are hunting for programs to 
eliminate, not having an authorization is 
dangerous. 

Fortunately, Senator Jack Reed (D-
Rhode Island) is a champion of libraries 
and IMLS funding. Reed introduced an IMLS 
reauthorization bill last year—the Museum 
and Library Services Act (MLSA)—but pas-
sage stalled before the session of Congress 
expired. The Senator is back again this year 
with a new reauthorization that includes 
a few changes that would allow for more 
Native American tribes to participate in 
IMLS grant programs and allow grants for 
disaster preparation and response needs at 
libraries and museums. 

At press time, Reed was working on 
the final details of the reauthorization and 
hoped to introduce the bill before the 
end of the year. ALA’s Washington Office 
continues to work closely with Reed’s of-
fice and other bipartisan supporters in the 
House and Senate to ensure reauthorization 
of MLSA. 

mailto:kmaher%40alawash.org?subject=