Comments about the NARA Proposal to Increase Fees

WARNING: This article contains personal opinions.

I've been thinking a bit about the article posted here yesterday about the National Archives and Records Administration's proposal to increase fees. To be sure, I reacted negatively to the news at first. So did many other people who posted comments to the end of the article on the newsletter's web site.

The more I think about it, I wonder if perhaps the personnel at the National Archives have the right idea. In fact, maybe all of us should follow their example.

Here are a few thoughts:

What if the subscription price for this newsletter jumped from $19.95 to $67.43?

What if a membership in the National Genealogical Society jumped from $55.00 to $185.00?

What if a room at the Plaza Hotel next door to the Family History Library in Salt Lake City jumped from $68.00 a night to $230.00 a night?

What if the rental for a roll of microfilm at your local Family History Center jumped from $5.50 to $18.60?

The above questions will be troubling to genealogists. Now, in turn, let's address a few questions to the decision makers at the National Archives and Records Administration, most of who reside in the Washington, D.C., area. Let's ask these people, what would be the impact to your pocketbooks of these actions?

What if the price of a loaf of bread jumped from $2.00 to $6.76?

What if the price of a restaurant dinner jumped from $25.00 to $85?

What if the average price for a home in the Washington, DC area jumped from $450,000 to $ 1,521,000?

What if the price of a gallon of regular gas in the Washington, DC area jumped from $2.50 a gallon to $8.45?

What if? What if? What if? I'll tell you what if: reckless price gouging policies like this by government officials would drive this country into the biggest recession ever seen!

All of the above examples show price increases to 338% of the original prices.

If the government expenses go up a bit, we all expect the fees to go up a similar amount. However, six and a half years ago the National Archives and Records Administration instituted huge price increases, going from $10.00 to $37.00 for a NATF Form 85. (See the October 14, 2000 edition of this newsletter at http://www.eogn.com/archives/news0042.htm for details.) Now we are expected to pony up even more money only seven years later. NARA is now proposing $125 for photocopies that cost $10 only seven years ago. Let's see, if I can do the math, that's a 1,150% price increase over what we paid seven years ago!

I don't think the level of inflation in this country justifies increases of this magnitude.

If your local bank increased its fees this much in a seven-year period, you'd ask the various government agencies to investigate the bank for possible illegal prices. Who do we ask to investigate this price gouging that is being attempted BY a government agency?

From where I sit, it sure seems that NARA is holding our records hostage. Maybe they should change the name of NATF Form 85 to "NATF - Ransom Note." They could even redesign the form to use fonts that look like letters cut from newspapers.

Comments

[Betty Clay]

Good comments, Dick. I cannot believe a hike of this magnitude is justified. I don't know about NARA in Washington, D. C., but when I was a volunteer at the branch in Fort Worth, much of the copying for mail orders was done by the volunteers, taking very little of the archivists' time. I suspect the same is done in D. C., don't you? And postage hasn't gone up that much, nor has the cost of paper. Gee, they could send most of them as email attachments and save the postage altogether!

[Betty Clay]

On a different, but related, topic - I find those letters I must type in order to post to be very hard to read. Many of them were not designed for old eyes.

[Joan McIlmoyl Cleghorn, U.E.]

Beautifully put Dick! What an unbelievable nerve they have at NARA. To think I was considering obtaining the Civil War Pension file of one of my few relatively close ancestors who fought in that war......I'm trying to visualize what the end price will be by the time I also add exchange to Canadian funds. My guess is they will lose money in the end - those who don' 'have' to have those records now won't bother and those that do may reduce the number of file requests significantly. Not a very smart business move as far as I can see.

Keep up the pressure and encourage others to as well - it is possible that they could roll it back somewhat.

8-)
Joan

[Ron Bestrom]

You're comments have no reason or reality. The increase in charges is based on cost. It costs a lot of money to have an archivist attempt to locate a particular file, in a particular box in a particular warehouse to satisfy a particular person asking about great-grandpa's civil war record. There are BILLIONS of files in storage. They are NOT on microfilm, cataloged or transcribed. Let's say that you wanted the census image of grandpa in the 1930 census before it was microfilmed or transcribed. How long would it take you to go through EVERY census page for a State, to get to the right County, to get to the right precinct to find this person...only to not find them because they had moved into another precinct? These civil war files. They are NOT an established loaf of bread. They are not on an established microfilm. What would your secretary say if you suddenly asked her to go to the county courthouse and start looking at property transfers for every sale of property whenever someone asked you? She would probably say she has enough work just doing what she was HIRED, without having to do all these other tasks. Soon, you'd have to hire several other people to do this research. My God, haven't you thought this out? There are thousands of people writing to NARA every year looking for Grandpa. Who is going to pay for this genealogy research? Maybe you can get the LDS or Ancestry to put all those records on microfilm, then image every page, then transcribe, then take all the complaints that whoever transcribed them couldn't spell. NARA was NOT empowered by Congress to do genealogy. NOW, because of all the budget cutbacks, they don't even have the funds to do what they were empowered to do.

[Paul Cooper]

It's a shame the average wage in this country doesn't keep pace with the increase in our expenses.
It seems to me that our taxes are supposed to offset some of these huge increases.
Unfortunately the government takes and keeps on taking.
Get on the mailing list for Citizens Against Government Waste http://cagw.org to keep up to date on where your money goes.

[soccermom]

Seems really excessive to me. NARA should be able to recover their costs, but I think Ron's comments are not accurate. The records aren't just piled up somewhere. They are cataloged. Research fees are different from photocopy fees, for example. Research fees are higher because they take more time. If you order an Indian Wars pension file or a Revolutionary War pension file, it's in a specific place, cataloged, and easily accessed. An increase of over 1,000% for photocopies is absurd. By the way, they are supposed to serve the public. I'm still upset that they have reduced their hours.

[kelly]

There are many interesting points that have been brought up. One thing I am really interested in knowing is if the research and copying is done by volunteers? If so, the argument for an increase is costs is very questionable. Regardless, probably all who are doing this research and copying are trained to use the NARA catalogue and can get the copies made relatively efficiently.
I think for a long time, the government has not had an accounting system in place to truly know how much it costs to 'get the job done' since they were not set up to be a profit making business. I have received copies of files for several relatives. Some of them have been a really good 'deal' for me and I am certain it cost the government more than what I paid. Others have been a bit pricey since I only received a couple pages of information. There pricing structure has probably been flawed for years.
The increases they are proposing do seem out of line though and are going to make in it just to expensive for many people. It seems to me that they should charge a flat fee for the file (or record) requested and this will include up to "x" copied pages. After "x" pages, then the costs are __ per page. The ordering process is on line and they do not charge until the item is ready to be mailed. They would then know how much the fee is. For years, they have encouraged payment by credit card. It seems they are set up now to have a more flexible system to pay for the items. They need to have a billing system that coincides with the actual costs. And none of my files cost $125 in copies. I wasn't asking for Robert E Lee's file ! !
Do they just not want us to use the archive?
More discussion is necessary.

[Jo Kilbourn]

I have already written to them asking that they charge per page. The $125 is based on 200 pages or $.625 per page. Now if someone gets a file that is 300 pages - they have made out like a bandit. BUT..... the pension file I received contained 84 pages or $1.49 a page! I am paying for the person who received the 300 pages!!!! If they charged by the page - $.63 for 75 years or more and in particular the Civil War pension files, then everyone would be paying fairly. I don't think that $.63 is too much per page. That includes getting the file, copying it and mailing it to me.

Also, I question whether it was the complete file because I had someone look it up for me and they sent me pages that the NARA personnel did not send me.

Go to the website and send them your comments. It is the only way they will know that the genealogy people are unhappy.

[bz]

I am surprised that these records are not on microfilm or digital!!! Knowing the LDS church, I am sure they would have offered to do all the microfilming or now the digitizing, but they will not (I believe) accept restrictions any longer on the material they digitize. Their goal is to get the information out to the public the cheapest they can. I would guess that the NARA was offered in the past to have this done FOR FREE and rejected them. Who is in charge of making that decision in NARA?? My two cents worth.~~BZ

[Terri Sturgill]

I thought the record keeping, as well as the records kept at the NARA belonged to us as citizens of the USA. Haven't we have already built their buildings, paid their wages and supported their entire existence.

Should we really be asked to pay more than 2 days wages [min wage] for something which if we had access directly would probably take us only a couple of hours to accomplish ourselves.

Why are they not being transcribed or scanned to the internet, or is that already done? This could be accomplished with a one time workforce, the cost of which would then forever after be a moneymaker. Upkeep of new records from that time on shouldn't require more an one employee's time.

I hope these ideas are clear . . . it seems all genealogical resources; city, county, state and federal seem to be holding our records at ransom pricing. Are they not actually bought and paid for by us already? Only a "real" search and mailing charge is warranted.

[karen helfert]

Perhaps complaints are directed in the wrong direction. Who cut funds to NARA that resulted in reduced hours? Who limits their budget? Complaints and outrage should be directed to your local congressional delegation: Senators and Congressman....that's where the purse strings are controlled.

[Michele]

Just a quick one - Genealogy is big business now - so why shouldn't the government try to gauge more money out
of us - CRAP - I am one of those possibly lucky people who even knowning I have ancestors in the USA have not found out who they are and will probably now not bother either - It is cheaper to look for my ancestors in other countries - so until the US government realise they cannot treat people this way - THEY WILL LOOSE IN THE LONG RUN!

[Karl]

Here is the mission statement of the archives (from their web site):

Our Mission Statement
The National Archives and Records Administration serves American democracy by safeguarding and preserving the records of our Government, ensuring that the people can discover, use, and learn from this documentary heritage. We ensure continuing access to the essential documentation of the rights of American citizens and the actions of their government. We support democracy, promote civic education, and facilitate historical understanding of our national experience.

I would say $125 for a pension file puts that out of reach, and access, for many Americans. Access to government records is the purpose of the archives; regardless of whether its for genealogy or some other purpose.

[Charles Paige]

PROPOSED NEW Mission Statement
The National Archives and Records Administration serves American democracy by safeguarding, preserving, and PROFITING BY the records of our Government, ensuring that the people can discover, use, and learn from this documentary heritage AS LONG AS THEY ARE WILLING TO MAKE ANY AND ALL REQUIRED FINANCIAL SACRIFICES. We ensure continuing access to the essential documentation of the rights of American citizens and the actions of their government AS LONG AS THEY ARE WILLING TO MAKE ANY AND ALL REQUIRED FINANCIAL SACRIFICES. We support democracy, promote civic education, and facilitate historical understanding of our national experience BUT ONLY WITH THE CITIZENS' WILLINGNESS TO MAKE ANY AND ALL REQUIRED FINANCIAL SACRIFICES. FURTHERMORE, WE BELIEVE THAT OUR FOREFATHERS AND FOREMOTHERS CAME TO THIS LAND AND SERVED THIS COUNTRY SO THAT ONE DAY THE GOVERNMENT COULD USE THE RECORDS THUS CREATED TO RAISE REVENUES AT THE EXPENSE OF ANYONE ATTEMPTING TO USE THEIR SAID RIGHTS TO RECORDS AS AMERICAN CITIZENS.

[Trish Lewis]

I hate getting political folks, but it all goes back to who we elect from the President on down. Their policies trickle down to situations like these. When you have a warmongering President, the defense budget eats up everything else. I'm a federal employee and we are short on employees, supplies and time. It's a disgrace...

[Carol Brennan Moss]

This proposed increase of rates is dishearting to genealogists and to those wanting to have that deeply personal experience of touching base with past ancestors. I would like to point out that it should still be possible to walk into the NARA in D.C. and make the request, receive the packet and make the copies in person for a small fee per page [$.20 I believe]. That's after you've made it through security and complied with their rules while working there.
This proposed rate, if it were to go into effect, almost makes the airplane trip to D.C. and the personal experience of doing it yourself worth considering. It's a deeply rewarding experience but not one to be taken lightly considering the cost in time and resources. Let's hope the government can find a way for NARA to remain a truly servible branch of the government.
I would appreciate any further information on who we should petition to stop this proposed rate hike.

[Arlene P. Gabbligatz]

Anything the government does during this administration is bound to be wrong-headed and anti-humane. this is just another example of the rapaciousness of unchecked power.

[Nancy]

I think we need to stick to the subject at hand and not go off on political tangents. There are other web sites where that can be done.

A previous poster clearly defines the genealogists' and historians' aim in this matter: Direct the complaints and concerns to those who originated the proposal and insist on learning how they arrived at this decision and how they are justifying it. Use power as citizens in a constructive manner rather than as peasants at the gate waving flaming torches.

Personally, I'm in favor of proportional rate increases as necessary rather than waiting several years and then springing one tremendous increase out of the blue. In the case of the latter, all people see is the increased price versus the one they paid x number of years ago. Perhaps the "shock and awe" of this proposed increase could have been avoided if the price had gone up proportionately as needed.

[Elizabeth M Korves]

If this proposed increase in fees is open for public comment...how do we actually make comment on it? I don't see anything obvious on the NARA website nor the Federal Register. It would be helpful to be able to comment to the folks who are making these rules..or is it our congressional representatives and senators that we should make public comment to?

[Brenda]

So, Mr. Eastman
In filling out the form that NARA has for comments on this change in cost of obtaining the record, just what would you say? Many of us are commenting on why cannot LDS microfilm these records. Why can't volunteers extract this data in some way? Scanning or ?

Your comments above are very accurate. Is this something that could be in the form we fill out? Do we send letters to our congressmen? How do you think this could be approached?
Thanks in advance!~

[Dick Eastman]

---> Many of us are commenting on why cannot LDS microfilm these records. Why can't volunteers extract this data in some way? Scanning or ?

I am sure that could be done... eventually. Keep in mind that we are talking tens of millions of pages, maybe hundreds of millions, just for the Civil War records alone. One person could scan or microfilm those in five or ten years, sending in a crew of people could get it accomplished in fewer years. In any case, that would cost significant money for salaries, scanning equipment, etc. In any case, even if the project were to start today, it wouldn't be completed for years.

That's for the Civil War personnel files alone. Then there are all the millions of other collections. Scanning or microfilming everything at the National Archives with today's technology might require a century or so.

For the next decade or more, I expect that obtaining copies means that a human has to retrieve the documents, make photocopies and then send them to the person who requests them. (I wish they would scan electronically and send 'em by e-mail but I guess that's wishful thinking.) I fully expect to pay a fee that reflects the true labor costs involved and also pays a bit for the photocopiers, toner, envelope, etc.

However, I cannot believe the TRUE total cost to NARA is anywhere near $125 for a task that is repeated many times a day. I know the photocopy/toner/envelope costs are a tiny fraction of that. If NARA's labor costs are anywhere near those prices then NARA has a huge management problem.

NARA's proposal insinuates that $125 reflects NARA's costs. That claim must be embarrassing to NARA management. If true, it shows that NARA's costs are out of control. I bet there are thousands of private companies that would love to supply the same service on a contract basis for a fraction of that much money.

Next, NARA had roughly a 250% price increase less than seven years ago. Today they are asking for another 238% increase. Does this mean that we can expect similar increases roughly every seven years or so? Seven years from now, will we see an increase to about $415? Will we see still another increase seven years after that to $1450 to retrieve a single pension set of documents? The present trend is in that direction.

Even allowing for inflation, that's a lot of money.

- Dick Eastman

[Debbie Halley]

It has been my experience that when an organization does not like doing something (ex. search for records, make copies, mail documents) they increase the price to reduce the workload (demand). It is unfortunate that they are going to price services out of reach and this may result in them having to lay off staff members. Maybe there is another motive to the price increase. By the way, We, the people, pay the salaries of the NARA staff members....we should have a right to dictate what is "fair and reasonable." Also, political views should be left out of this subject and this forum.

[Sharon Swope]

The NARA file announcement came while I was in DC. I spent one afternoon pulling a civil war pension file. It was in a manila envelope a full 2 inches thick... I didn't count the pages & many had data on both sides. Much of the file consisted of affidavits as to the disability. The petitioner's request was at first denied (some things never change). I copied three pages from the file myself at I think .15 cents a page. Frankly that's about all the genealogical information the file contained. I did take a few notes concerning who gave affidavits as well as the type of afflictions which could potentially be of health interest. I would suggest you hire a professional researcher (I'm NOT one)to cull a file and retrieve pertinent information. I volunteer at other facilities and frankly I wouldn't have copied that file in it's entirety for $125.00 if offered. Get real! I don't want my tax dollars to pay for your research and/or copies. The object is to preserve the records not lay them in your hands at government expense. Even Footnote is only copying the pension indexes (see NARA-Footnote agreement January 10, 2007 this newsletter), but then a Footnote subscription is $99.99/year. I tire of genealogists who think everything must be free and if it is not, it is because the President of the United States spent money on something with which you do not agree and this somehow equates into your entitlement to a free ride being violated. My observation is that those doing the complaining are frequently not the ones volunteering time either. I'm with you Ron Bestrom.

[Tim Agazio]

How many other prices have stayed the same over the last 7 years?...if I understand your post correctly... How much was this newsletter 7 years ago? How much was an Ancestry subscription 7 years ago. How much was real estate in the DC area 7 years ago? I can answer that one...the house I live in cost just under $200,000 7 years ago...its now worth close to $700,000. Prices go up over time. Maybe the cost to do the same work was a lot less 7 years ago...and the public has been getting their stuff on the cheap over that time. I don't know...I always thought the price was pretty cheap before...$25 or so to get a 40 page military record?...I thought I was always getting over on the government compared to the wealth of info I received in return. I'm not happy with the increase - but it's not the end of the world.

Tim Agazio
www.genealogyreviewsonline.typepad.com

[Ron Bestrom]

Mr. Eastman needs to contact NARA...or even visit the St. Louis archives, the DC Archives or even the Seattle Archives to see just how MUCH they are receiving DAILY. To see how much they need to catalog. The Civil War "files" are not just a box or two, but probably more than a lot of "Walmart" stores in size. The NARA staff aren't just sitting around waiting for someone to ask for a file. They are constantly being tasked to fulfill Congressional, Presidential/Cabinet/, Supreme court Reguests. Every Federal Agency has investigators that need to access federal court records/Bankruptcy records. Every Federal Agency is SENDING millions of documents to be filed DAILY. AGAIN, NARA is NOT just an agency to be written to find Grandpa's Civil Service Records. It is a TAXPAYER funded FEDERAL agency empowered and financed by CONGRESS to store our nations records. If a PRIVATE person wants to find Grandpa, they must put aside their normal OFFICAL duties to try to find the potential series and classification that might, again MIGHT, hold some of his records. It is a timely and expensive search. As a Federal Agent, I sometimes needed to access federal court records, bankruptcy records. I HAD to put in a request, same as ANY Federal Agency/Agent, to pull such records...IF I new the assention number, file number, etc., down to the box the record was found...and had to wait until called that the file was found. This included RECENT files at the Seattle NARA. I then went to NARA, obtained the report for review. I had to identify what particular pages I wanted copied and the Agency HAD to pay $0.50 for EACH page copied. Even Federal Agencies had to pay for the copies out of their budgets.
So, if you don't like the costs being accessed...contact NARA and LEARN why. If NARA had to employ an additional 200 people to look for Grandpa, then someone would be complaining over that. It's called a User Fee. If you use a service...ANY service, YOU should pay for it. NOT me, or everyone else.

[Katherine Foster]

Let's be honest, the government subsidizes many "services" and I don't agree with all of them. Rather than get into a debate about the "subsidizing" of someone else's research, let think about the NARA's mission. Maintain the paperwork created by federal agencies. It's the cornerstone of an open government and the proposed price for the Civil War Pension records is quite expensive. I've gotten copies of three of these records myself. Honestly, only one reached the 200 page realm, and that was due to the numerous requirements placed on my ancestor by the Federal government. I think it rather ironic that I find myself paying to get copies, but that's another story. The other two have been more like 20 to 50 pages. There should be a more equitable way to handle the requests. Maybe setting out a fee for for a set number of pages and then charging more for pages after that.

As for comments, you can e-mail your comments at http://www.regulations.gov, following the instructions for submitting comments. You can fax comments to 301-837-0319 or mail comments to the following address:

Regulations Comments Desk (NPOL)
Room 4100
Policy and Planning Staff
National Archives and Records Administration
8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, MD 20740-6001

[Bart Hansen]

I was at main NARA last fall and was on the second floor where you ask for original docs, etc. It was quite busy there. You make a request and wait for some person to go down to another part of the building with a push cart to dig around for what you want. It certainly is labor intensive.

However, I do question the size of this increase. It would have been so much better had they gradually increased the prices over the years.

Without getting too political, we are running a large deficit due to the war, tax cuts, and hefty spending. I'll bet that all less critical government agencies are being asked to cut services and/or raise prices where possible. You can see this in the current attention being given problems at the Walter Reed annex in D.C. I suspect it all gets back to money.

[Dino (All Dino, All the Time)]

I recently ordered and copies of 2 land patent files.

Let's see:
someone had to read the request I sent
look up the location where the file was stored
tromp down to wherever it was (and it is a huge facility!)
take the file to a copier
make copies
replace the file in its proper place
put all my stuff in an envelope
mail it to me

How long do people think this takes?

And from the time I made my request to the time I got the copies it only took 3 weeks. And it only cost $25 each. That would be a deal even at $45 per file.

Sure, I could hire a local researcher and pay by the hour, plus copy and travel expenses and time, but I doubt I could get the copies any cheaper.

[soccermom]

I'm wondering why, in a large metropolitan area like D.C., they don't use volunteers to retrieve and photocopy documents? My large genealogy library makes extensive use of volunteers. There are lots of DAR members in the area and I bet if they were asked to provide volunteers, the local chapters would do so.

[Roxie]

I have read through every comment on both articles posted in this newsletter this week. Here's my take on it all:

"NARA should be able to recover its costs." At first blush, this seems like something we can all readily agree with. However . . . Do you think the national parks system recovers the costs of maintaining millions of acres and thousands of buildings through user fees alone? Does the Department of Agriculture cover its costs through user fees to farmers? (Their services to farmers are free.) Does the Department of Education charge you for using their ERIC database to read documents or find useful information? (not a penny) There are many examples of government services that benefit a select few, but which are paid for by the entire taxpaying population. That's because the costs and benefits balance each other out. Someone who never visits national parks, but whose taxes support them, may use a lot of some other government service. If every government service tried to recoup its operating expenses through user fees, we'd find that the entrance fee to a national park would jump to $500, and viewing the ERIC database would be by subscripton only.

Having said that, I still think it's reasonable that NARA should try to recover a greater portion of its expenses through user fees. A serious question, though, is what are NARA's true expenses? As has been pointed out by others, Ron's ideas of how NARA retrieval and copying services operate are way off the mark. The records, though voluminous, are catalogued and well-organized. Moreover, archivists aren't employed to do the scut work involved in document retrieval and photocopying. Nor do they search the census page by page to find someone. At the same time, volunteers are probably not doing the bulk of the work in D.C. In the Federal Register, NARA says they employ contractors to do the work. So what's the truth about what their actual costs are? A lot has been made of the $125 fee for Civil War pension files, with much conjecture about how much work and time is entailed, but it's mostly speculation. Let's focus on some items that are less speculative: copying costs.

Proposed rates:
Copy made by customer on self- service copier in DC: $0.25
Copy made by NARA: $0.75
Microfilm copy made by customer: $0.50

How do we know the actual costs of these services? By looking at what other repositories and businesses charge. Staples, Kinko's, and OfficeMax charge $0.07 for self-service copies, and make a profit. I have been to major libraries and archives around the country and never paid more than $0.15 for a self-service copy or $0.30 for a microfilm copy. So why are NARA's copying costs so much higher than any other place in the country?

Lastly, comments have been made about NARA's pricing structure, i.e., the same price for copyng a small pension file as for copying a large one. In the Federal Register, NARA claims it costs them the same to copy a few pages as to copy many pages. That's only true up to a point. Although it would be too burdensome to calculate fees for large files on a per page basis, in all fairness, they shouldn't charge the same for large and small files. The suggestion to implement a lower base rate, with a surcharge for large files seems a reasonable compromise.

[Patsy Finley]

I find the proposed increase on the NARA records nothing short of highway robbery. For something that is supposed to be open to the public for access to research that nraise is rediculous. Patsy

[Gwen Skelton]

Why are any of you surprised?
Is this not the same governmental agency that had all of its
'eggs in one basket' thus allowing the only copies of some census to be destroyed by fire?
The government is not efficient! Their expenses are unfathomable because of long-term,
personnel with higher than average wages and benefits packages. Government cannot compete
in anything. Maybe this agency would be better off 'farmed out' to private industry.
Never think for a minute that you can boycott the services and cause any sort of change.
The employees are there and will be there until retirement whether they have work to do or
not. Just as in many county courthouses,genealogist are seen as a nuisance.
After all, either due to lack of hours and/or increase of fees,the records that are
OF the people and BY the people and FOR the people are being kept FROM the people!
This is just another blatant display of government serving itelf rather than the people.
Maybe Dick Eastman should copy all of the responses to the newsletter and send them to
each and every person he can find that is nvolved in any way with this self-serving,
poorly thought out decision.

[Rochelle Gereg]

Many people that are retired now, and on SSI are the ones doing research on their ancestors. We finally have time to do it. The government gives us a whopping 3% uncrease on our benefits. Yes I know we should have put money away for our old age, but when we sell a house or building that we were going to use for our retirement and the government takes away all the profit, in taxes. Well we are left without funds to eat or pay bills. Then the goverment lets utilities increase at a high rate, Of cource this trickles down to all Senior Citizens going into debt furthur and furthur every year. Now they want to take our past times away from us, as we will be unabel to afford to send for any records that we may need. When does it STOP!
As my Husband says, The Movie "Soilent Green" is making more and more sence every day!

[Alvie L. Davidson CG]

Good morning Dick and others,
It has been many years since I have used any of the services at NARA as I find private researchers can provide much quicker service and service at a much lower fee. I suspect now a lot more people will begin to rely on private researchers as I have been doing. This is the old story of pricing yourself out of a market on the part of NARA.
I have been using records of NARA for many years and each time they propose a rise in fees they simply do the formality and go forward with a price increase. We dont know if they got an overabundance of objections or none at all; all we know is that the proposed price goes into effect.
I will be in DC on for the NIGR program and plan to express my dissatisfaction with the fees but we all know that will do no good.
All we can hope is that NARA does not begin to input a fee on the local researchers for simply accessing the files.

[Theresa Emig]

I find it interesting that NARA charges fees only when they find a record. Other places I've requested information from have charged the same fee whether they locate the requested record or not. I'm new to genealogical research so I can't say whether that's common nationwide, but it seems logical to me because I assume that the bulk of the expense comes from the personnel who must do the research. While it does cost money to copy and mail records, those costs are probably minimal relative to the cost of the search itself. Price increases are never easy pills to swallow, but I wonder if it might be easier to take if NARA charged for the search regardless of the result rather than having such a steep increase for those with positive search results. I don't have data regarding the percentage of searches with positive and negative results, so I don't know if this idea would generate enough money to cover NARA's shortfall, but I thought I'd throw it out there for discussion.

[Marcia Holstrom]

Wait! You're only paying $68/night at the Plaza?!? You're only paying $5.50 for a FHL microfilm roll at the local FH Center?!? Wow! I must be talking to the wrong people!

[Elizabeth Rohaly Smoot]

Hi Dick and everyone,

I know NARA does not get enough money in the budget to do everything they would like to do. Combine this fact with the fact that Congress has yet to pass a budget for FY 2007 (and probably won't as they voted a continuing resolution to cover costs through the end of September), I suspect NARA is having a hard time and has to increase fees to keep some money rolling in. I believe that continuing resolutions only allow activities to continue at the budgeted cost for the previous year and does not cover anything budgeted as a new program for FY07 (I'm not a budget expert, but this is how it was explained to me). Suspect we should really be blaming our elected representatives!

Elizabeth

[Thomas Brokop]

I have been sitting here reading all of your comments about the Increase in fees, And was thinking that there should be a Pricing structure put into place.
It is INSANE that there is a the SAME Fee for a file that is 50 pages and a file that is 300 pages.
Could you imagine going to fill your vehicle up with gas and paying just ONE FEE???
I would be paying $50 to fill my truck and a man filling up his motorcycle would pay the same $50.
This is an INSANE way to run an organization.!!!
A Fair price structure from getting just a quick 10 page copy and an Adjusted Price to get a 300 page copy.
Lets all be reasonable about prices going up each year. and that should be expected.
BUT this is a FEDERAL PUBLIC RECORDS ORANIZATION and should NEVER be priced out of range of the average citizen.
I believe this Increase to be Excessive. And if the NARA and the NATF believe that they are NOT excessive, then they should permit the IRS to do a Public Audit of the organization that would be avaliable On-line to show why we need to pay these new fees.
Thanks for taking the time to read my opinion.