[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 11 (Thursday, January 19, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1131-S1132]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        NATIONAL SERVICE PROGRAM

  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President and my colleagues, I remember when I was 
practicing law in Louisiana as a very young lawyer. One of the senior 
lawyers was explaining to me how we should proceed in a courtroom. His 
suggestion was,

       If you don't have the facts on your side when you are 
     arguing your case, well, you should talk about the law. But 
     if you do not have the law on your side and you are handling 
     a case in court, you should talk about the facts.

  He went on to suggest if you do not have either one on your side, you 
ought to just stand up and shout and walk around the courtroom and act 
like you know what you are talking about.
  Mr. President, I would suggest that some of the Republican rhetoric 
that I have heard in talking about national service takes the approach 
if you do not have the facts on your side, just make them up and say 
whatever you want about a program in order to try to show that it is 
not a good program.
  I think it is very important that we stick to the facts when we talk 
about programs and things we do in Government. I think the public gets 
so much misinformation that it is very important to try to point out 
when the facts are wrong when we talk about programs.
  I start off by making these comments because I was really very 
surprised by the Senator from Iowa, who was on the floor earlier, his 
remarks regarding national service that I read in the Congressional 
Record.
  I supported the program. It was the type of initiative that the 
President ran on 2 years ago, the type of program that I think is a 
good program. When I read the gentleman's statements in the 
Congressional Record, I was flabbergasted. I said, This cannot be true.
  In essence, what the Senator was saying was that the AmeriCorps 
Program, part of the National Service Program, was costing $70,000 per 
student--$70,000 per student--in order to help kids go to college. I 
said that is ridiculous; I am not going to spend $70,000 a year to send 
kids to college. I found out some serious mistakes, in my opinion, were 
made about characterizing this program that is costing $70,000 a 
student in Pennsylvania, in the city of Philadelphia.
  What I found out was that the mistake that was made in using these 
facts was the fact that they did not take into consideration private 
law firms that were contributing to this individual's salary; they did 
not take into consideration the Philadelphia Bar Association's 
contribution in this particular area. When he added up what the private 
sector was going to do with up to 11 full-time workers, he came up with 
the figure of $70,000, when in truth the Federal Government's 
contribution and the cost to the taxpayers was only $4,911. That is a 
big difference from $70,000.
  The AmeriCorps Program, the National Service Program, is really what 
I think Republicans have always been talking about. Let us get away 
from giveaway programs. Let Members terminate programs, and just give 
money away from Washington to get people to do certain things. The 
essence of what AmeriCorps is all about--and we have had up to 200,000 
young men and women in this country volunteer to participate in the 
AmeriCorps Program. It is a wonderful concept. It builds on the Peace 
Corps Program.
  By the way, Peace Corps Program volunteers get a stipend; they are 
paid. Just like the Vista Program has young men and women in this 
program, that participate in the program and do wonderful things, they 
get a small salary, as well. The concept of AmeriCorps, and why I think 
Republicans and Democrats alike should be supportive of it, is because 
it is a partnership between the Government and the citizens of this 
country.
  It talks about community, responsibility, reciprocity; it talks about 
saying if the Government is going to help me to go to college, I have 
an obligation to reciprocate and give something back. What they give 
back in the AmeriCorps Program is doing community work, doing legal 
work in the communities, working in a law enforcement program, in a 
drug rehabilitation program, in a nursing program, an environmental 
cleanup program, as they are doing in my State of Louisiana, as we are 
doing in Louisiana where we have young AmeriCorps students who are 
working in the sheriffs department and local law enforcement.
  Mr. President, they are giving something back to a Government that 
has helped them go to college. It is a partnership. It is not a 
giveaway program. It does not cost $70,000 for one young student to be 
able to participate in this program. It is asking the local community 
to say, do you need these types of students working in your local town? 
Most of them are saying, Yes, we need some help. We need some help in 
the environment. We need some help in drug enforcement programs and 
drug rehabilitation programs.
  So the AmeriCorps Program is not a giveaway program; it is a program 
that encourages young people to participate. We have an all-volunteer 
army. They get paid, too. They get a salary so they can survive and so 
they can live. I do not think they detract from an all-volunteer 
military. The basic fact is we should be encouraging young men and 
women to give something back to a Government that has helped them get 
an education.
  As President Clinton has said so many times in this country today, 
what you earn is going to be based on what you learn. The facts are 
dramatic, that a young person, a young male in this country that 
graduates from a 4-year college earns about 83 percent more in his 
lifetime than a person who has not been able to go to college; 83 
percent more in a lifetime. That is not just pie in the sky. That is 
real facts.
  That is something that we as a nation should be encouraging. And we 
do not encourage it under national service by a giveaway program; we 
encourage it to be a partnership by saying to that young man or young 
woman that if you would like to go to college and you need some help, 
we will help you pay for your tuition. But it is not free; it is not 
free. You have an obligation to try to give something back to your 
Government--not in India, not in Japan, not in Europe, not in a Third-
World country, but right here in America. That is why it is called 
AmeriCorps. It is not a foreign aid program. We are not sending kids to 
other nations to help them solve their problems. We are saying that if 
you accept this challenge, we will let you work in your local 
community, back where people know you, where you may ultimately end up 
working as a citizen in a partnership with your local citizens in your 
local community. [[Page S1132]] 
  That is why when someone says, well, this program costs $70,000 a 
student, it is absolutely not factual. It does not cost $70,000 for the 
taxpayers of this country. What we have in Philadelphia in this 
instance is a situation where the local bar association and several law 
firms in the country have helped put up money to pay the salaries for 
up to 11 AmeriCorps students who will be working in that community as 
lawyers and as law students, helping people that have problems, helping 
people understand the Government and this system. The Federal 
Government is going to put out $4,900 to allow that student to work in 
that community. We have helped them get a college education and they 
are paying back with their services, and getting enough of a stipend 
from the Federal Government to at least survive and to be able to 
continue that work and do it full time. We are talking about full-time 
workers.
  This is not a giveaway program. Does it cost anything? Of course, it 
costs. But how much does it cost to build a prison? We spend $300 
million for a national program to try to get people to have a 
partnership with their Government, to get a college education, and give 
something back to the community. We spend billions of dollars, I 
suggest, building prisons in this country and running prisons in this 
country, to incarcerate young men and women who have gone by the 
wayside, maybe because they did not have a National Service Program, 
because nobody cared. Nobody told them they have a reciprocal 
obligation to give something back to a Government that has helped them 
get a college education.
  I have heard Speaker Gingrich in the other body talk, time and time 
again, about communities, family, and service, and giving something 
back to the communities. This program is an example of giving something 
back to the communities, of national service, of saying: I want to help 
my Government do better. If my Government helps me get a college 
education, I am pleased, but I also recognize that it is not free. I 
will give back to my Government in the same ratio that they have given 
to me.
  I think that produces a stronger community. I think that produces 
stronger families. I think that produces a sense of what America is all 
about. So I would suggest when we talk about national service, let 
Members first get our facts straight. Let Senators first understand the 
real cost.
  I suggest, second, let Senators join together if there are problems, 
and let us improve the program. Let us not, by incorrect factual 
information, try to kill a program that I suggest is in keeping with 
what America is all about.
  I yield the floor, Mr. President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burns). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________