Interesting mini-debate going on over at NewsLanc regarding our local libraries, in relation to this Era piece yesterday about how the number of people using the Duke Street library in particular has soared - up 15 percent in the first six months of the year, compared to the same period in 2007.

I can vouch for the increase, as we were there yesterday (as we have been at most two-week intervals over the summer). Frankly, we’re fighting for space up in the kids’ room in particular. Nonetheless, there persists this idea that libraries are somehow a relic of the past - that the Internet age, the ease with which Amazon.com can deliver virtually anything to your door, or the things that are available for free on line, has made visiting the library obsolete.

And that’s true - for a specific demographic, defined as those who have the money to buy whatever they like from Amazon.com, have the high-speed access they need to get other things for free. We forget that there’s a whole lot of people who don’t fit into that demographic, and that in times of economic stress - like now - the number of people who really, actually need libraries will grow.

But beyond this, there’s what might be called a sort of historical disinterest in libraries here. It has, perhaps, something to do with Lancaster County’s relatively low level of educational attainment (itself partially but not wholly attributable to the Amish factor). According to the Lancaster Economy Report, issued in May by the Local Economy Center at Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster County has a higher percentage of people who have never graduated high school than both the region (Perry, Cumberland, Dauphin, York, Lebanon and Berks counties) and the state; the number of people here who have any college education is lower in both cases, as well.

At the same time, our per-capita library spending is way below the region and the state; in 2005, we spent $13,89 per capita, while the region spent $18.62, and the state $24.62.

There’s a correlation, suggests Dr. Antonio Callari, head of the Local Government Center; and it goes back to a relative devaluation of education in Lancaster County. Where, if you think about it, we’ve never had to worry so much about books and book lernin’ - we’ve worked the land; we’ve worked in the manufacturing plants. Libraries have been seen as nice but not necessary, especially when dollars are short.

Callari argues that libraries are more necessary now than ever before - particularly for that segment of the community likely to be left behind as those with the money and the education are able to plow ahead on its own. The latter may not “need” libraries; the former absolutely needs access to the books and the technology and the connectivity that the library system provides - particularly as our economy evolves, and education becomes more important than it has ever been in the past.

But some of us who theoretically don’t “need” libraries still value them for a variety of reasons. They are a good deal - and when you’ve got kids, they help you instill a lifelong love of reading, and of learning. You value them not merely for what they provide to the community, or to some other demographic, but to you. It’s good to see more people coming to that conclusion in terms of patronship. Would be nice to see it translate into a couple more bucks for our libraries, as well.