Congress's Librarian, Fired by the PresidentThe presidential firing of Dr. Hayden raises serious questions about legislative independence
The 14th Librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden, speaks after taking the Oath of Office during a ceremony in the Great Hall of the Library of Congress in Washington, Wednesday, Sept. 14, 2016. On Thursday, President Trump fired Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden. Dr. Hayden became the 14th Librarian of Congress in 2016. In that role, she oversaw the Library of Congress, a major legislative support agency. She was appointed for a ten -year term, which this dismissal cuts short. This matters because it represents the second branch of government—the Executive—making decisions about the operations of the first branch—Congress. While this may conform to the letter of the law, it violates long-standing principles and practices under which Congress determines the operations of its own branch. Legislative Branch Agencies The Library of Congress is part of a constellation of Legislative Branch agencies that provide support to Congress. The major legislative branch agencies include:
A number of smaller agencies also exist. How does the Library of Congress fit within this constellation of agencies? The Library of Congress has a roughly $850 million budget and approximately 3,500 employees in FY 2024. It houses a number of agencies and functions, including:
There are other functions as well, such as the CIO's office with a $168 million budget and 404 staff.
Organizational Chart of the Library of Congress Together, these agencies are the machinery of Congress. Yet some are still wired to the Executive A Quirk of History: Why the President Appoints the Librarian As you can see, the role of the Librarian of Congress is significant. The Library is 225 years old, initially created in an appropriations bill to provide housing for books and managing research materials for Congress. The position of Librarian of Congress was created in 1802 as part of a compromise between Congress and President Jefferson. The first two Librarians of Congress were simultaneously Clerks of the House of Representatives. The president was given appointment authority. This seems odd to modern ears – why would the president appoint the Librarian of Congress? When the position was created, the White House dominated the Congress and the party system. According to George Galloway, who wrote the seminal History of the House of Representatives, the leader of the House of Representatives was in effect a prime minister. "Jefferson converted the position of floor leader into a spokesman for the President. Under Jefferson the floor leaders of the House 'were presidential agents, appointed by the executive, and dismissed at his pleasure." In this framework, it makes sense that the Clerk of the House would also serve as the Librarian of Congress. (Wikipedia suggests that the Librarian was also the president's former campaign manager.) That person, John Beckley, was the president's close ally – and the Congress was an arm of the White House. This era ended in 1809 when the mechanisms Jefferson had "developed to maintain executive leadership were converted by Henry Clay and the leaders of the House into instruments of congressional control of the executive." But the process for appointment of the Librarian of Congress remained. It wasn't until 1897 that the Senate assumed the power to confirm (or reject) the president's nominee as Librarian of Congress. At the same time, the Librarian also gained the "sole responsibility for making the institution's rules and regulations and appointing its staff." This was when the position of Librarian became more professionalized and less of a political animal. The next major change came in 2015, with the creation of term limits for the Librarian of Congress. Dr. Billlington, who had served as Librarian of Congress, was forced out. The New York Times coverage goes comparatively lightly on how he became a nightmare boss who failed to show up for work, yelled and threw things at staff, failed to digitize library holdings, failed to properly account for Library spending, and so on. The creation of term limits was to make sure that incompetent managers could not stay on too long – that Congress would have an opportunity to ease them out with a minimum of controversy Assessing Dr. Hayden's Tenure Dr. Hayden, who was appointed by President Obama in 2016, was known for serving as CEO of the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, Maryland, and serving as president of the American Library Association from 2003-2004. Dr. Hayden had a challenging tenure. Dr. Hayden inherited a troubled agency, with numerous unresolved recommendations from GAO and the Library’s Inspector General—particularly regarding IT systems I have followed her tenure closely since her confirmation nearly a decade ago, attending almost every hearing where she testified A few major turning points defined her tenure. She centralized information technology at the Library inside the Office of the CIO, which put into effect recommendations from the IG and GAO. Just read the tenor of this 2015 GAO report: "Library of Congress Needs to Implement Recommendations to Address Management Weaknesses." This helped kick off a significantly improved and realigned technology process that appears to have addressed a number of problems. Dr. Hayden removed the head of the Copyright Office after longstanding conflict. Though some described it as a turf war, the office has since made progress modernizing its systems. Dr. Hayden failed to act for several years in relation to serious problems with the Congressional Research Service. Gross mismanagement by the agency's head, Mary Mazanec, led to double-digit annual turnover rates. Only when Congress placed significant pressure on Dr. Hayden did she remove the agency's director. Dr. Hayden’s strength lay in member services and political navigation. She built relationships with Members of Congress and their families, hosted meetings and dinners, and facilitated high-touch access to the Library’s collections. This is necessary for any Librarian to be able to survive, although it sometimes has the perverse effect of reducing Congressional pressure to reform the Library. The capstone of Dr. Hayden’s tenure is the Library’s new Visitor Experience, where people who come to Washington, D.C. can see more of the Library's collection in a museum-like experience. The project has run late and over budget, due in part to issues with the Architect of the Capitol (who was already recently fired for his management issues). The Visitor Experience always has seemed orthogonal to the mission of the Library, but it was approved by Congress. Dr. Hayden was a capable, if not visionary, administrator. She wasn't notable for her vision, but she was responsive to Congress. When Congress directed her to engage with the public, she would. When Congress directed her to improve information about Congress online, she did. When Congress instructed her to develop new programs for staff, she did. Compared to her predecessor, she was a spectacular success. Her performance aside, the fact that her tenure could be ended unilaterally by the White House underscores the problem Reclaiming Congressional Authority Dr. Hayden was groundbreaking as the first Black woman—and the first person outside the traditional mold—to serve in the role. She is a smart, capable, black woman, and also a librarian, and these facts alone drew the ire of some folks. Pres. Trump did not state a reason why he removed her. There is a lot of speculation, but it ultimately does not matter. While many are defending her on personal or professional grounds, I take an institutional view. The president should not choose the head of legislative branch agencies. That is a process that should be run by the Congress. In recent years, Congress reformed the appointment process for the Architect of the Capitol, shifting it from a presidential appointment to a congressional one. This joins the Congressional Budget Office and the U.S. Capitol Police as being chosen through legislative branch mechanisms. All legislative branch agency heads, in my view, should be chosen by Congress, independent of presidential involvement. This is essential to preserving Congress’s institutional authority, protecting separation of powers, and ensuring government accountability. Under the current system, President Trump would always have the opportunity to choose her successor. It was unnecessarily destabilizing to cut her tenure short. Congress should act to reform the appointment process. In the interim, the White House should ensure that any nominee reflects the institutional priorities of Congress.
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104 |