Sen. Levin on DOJ Legal Procurement

[Michael Ward <mike@tap.org>]

Distributed to TAP-INFO, a free Internet Distribution List
(subscription requests to listserver@essential.org) 

TAXPAYER ASSETS PROJECT - INFORMATION POLICY NOTE
CROWN JEWELS CAMPAIGN - JURIS, LEGAL INFORMATION

August 19, 1994


On Tuesday, August 16th, Sen. Carl Levin, Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, sent a letter
to Attorney General Janet Reno asking the Department of Justice
to accept public comments on the proposed legal procurement. In
his letter, he also expressed support for a public data base of
judicial opinions and a vendor neutral system of citation for
judicial opinions.  The letter follows.


----------------------------------------------------------------

                      United States Senate
                          Committee on
                      Governmental Affairs
                    Washington, DC 20510-6250

                         August 16, 1994

The Honorable Janet Reno
Attorney General of the United States
U.S. Department of Justice
10th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20530

Dear Madam Attorney General:

     I am writing to you about the Department of Justice's
planned release later this month of a Request for Proposal (RFP)
for computer-assisted legal research.  As you may be aware, this
RFP has been the subject of discussion among members of your
staff, the public interest community, legal librarians, legal
publishers, and other interested parties.  I believe that
issuance of the RFP should be delayed in order to permit the
Department to consult further with knowledgeable parties and to
reconsider its requirements.

     My concerns about the planned RFP are two-fold.  First, I
understand that, as currently drafted, only one or two vendors
will be able to bid on the RFP.  This lack of significant
competition, especially in an area of burgeoning innovation and
entrepreneurship such as computer services, is troubling on its
face.  In addition, I am concerned that in attempting to meet the
immediate legal research needs of its staff, the Department is
ignoring other important factors such as the public's interest in
the ownership of and access to the federal statutes and case law
created by the government at taxpayer's expense.

     New computer technologies make it practical for courts, the
Bar, and the public to access legal information efficiently
without the use of traditional sources -- printed books.  Greater
electronic dissemination of federal legal materials is blocked,
however, by the lack of a data base and a citation system in the
public domain.  Under the old JURIS system, the Department
"rented" rather than "owned" its electronic data base of federal
law, and the planned RFP would continue that arrangement. In
contrast, if the Department were to own the data base, it could
make it available to the public, including commercial interests
who could reformat it, develop search technologies, etc., and
compete to sell the enhanced data to legal researchers. 
Moreover, estimates by people knowledgeable about computer
services indicate that ownership of the data base would be cost-
effective for the Department.

     Even if the Department were to own its electronic data base
of federal law, a major hurdle would still remain to making the
material more accessible to the public because the current,
widely-accepted citation system -- relying on volume and page
numbers -- is the copyrighted material of one publisher.  Several
states and the Sixth Circuit have taken steps to establish a
public domain citation system that would be "medium neutral" and
"vendor neutral" -- i.e., that would work with books or computer
technology and would not favor any particular publisher.  The
planned RFP does not take into account the desirability of such a
public domain citation system.

     I believe that, when exercising its considerable purchasing
power, the government should consider not only its immediate
needs as a consumer but also broader issues such as encouraging
competition and increasing public access to government
information.  Accordingly, it would be appropriate for the
Department to delay its planned RFP in order to engage in further
consultation and to consider the issues of public ownership and a
neutral citation system.

     I appreciate your attention to this matter, and I would
appreciate your letting me know how the Department decides to
proceed.  If your staff has any questions with respect to this
letter, please have them contact Barbara Strack of my
Subcommittee staff at 224-3682.

                           Sincerely,

                      Carl Levin, Chairman
       Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management


CL:bls

cc: Eleanor J. Lewis, Director