I agree wholeheartedly that shipping this work overseas is a bad idea.  I'm also very concerned about open access to the records via the Internet.
But it is an interesting conumdrum for the independent abstractor.  We work in an industry where we have convinced many title companies that it is in their best interest to outsource the courthouse work to us.  When I started, almost all the courthouse work was done by local attorneys or title company employees.  I spent a lot of time convincing the attorneys and title companies that using my services for courthouse work would be profitable for them, freeing them up to concentrate on their core business.  Some saw it as an infringement on their livelihood.  Now we have a slew of independent abstractors.
Now we are facing the same problem.  Thanks to the Internet, much of our work can be done without visiting the courthouse, albeit, not as well, yet.  But for the simple jobs, overseas outsourcing is cheaper and quicker than we can often provide.
The point, if there is one, of what I'm trying to say is that we are in a different situation regards overseas outsourcing than IBM employees losing jobs to overseas contract companies.  We have promoted outsourcing of work, it is who we are.  The vendor management companies didn't exist a decade ago.
I think that for job preservation, and security, that the public records should be accessible on-line only to carefully vetted parties.   I hope that NALTEA can grow fast enough to influence the politicians to the danger of unfettered access to the public record via the Internet.