[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 19 (Tuesday, January 31, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H957-H958]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2000
                THE PRIVATIZATION OF THE HUMANITIES ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bereuter). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Chabot] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  (Mr. CHABOT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, we've been told time and time again that 
spending has already been cut to the bone and that we can't cut 
anything without shredding the fabric of our society. Well, that's not 
true. All sorts of needless bureaucracies continue to waste all sorts 
of money and eat a hole in our wallets. Today, I'd like to call 
attention to one of the more egregious examples I've seen during my 
first month on the job.
  I am referring to the tripe that I and all my colleagues received 
this past week from the National Endowment for the Humanities.
  The NEH produced and sent around to us something called a 
Conversation Kit, more formally entitled a ``National Conversation on 
American Pluralism and Identity.''
  Inside you'll find 20 or so high-gloss pamphlets, some of them 30 or 
40 pages long, that contain readings of varying quality, simplistic 
questions, and the Government's edicts on how folks should talk to each 
other.
  This is the brainchild of NEH Chairman Sheldon Hackney and his band 
of ``culture bureaucrats,'' as George Will has labeled them. Its basic 
assumption is that we, as free-thinking Americans, need the Government 
to tell us how to engage in day-to-day conversations. The plan, as I 
understand it, is for NEH-types to go around the country circulating 
these packets and instructing us all how to talk with one another.
  Besides assembling arcane questions such as ``When do we act as 
public people and when as private people?'' or the more abstract 
``Where do we belong?'' the Conversation Kit suggests readings by 
militant feminists such as Patricia Williams and Charlotte Bunch, and 
provides a list of movies that, quote, ``might make good
 conversation starters.'' I must thank Mr. Hackney for spending our tax 
dollars to tell us about a little known film called ``Casablanca.''

  So the American public can see first hand some of Mr. Hackney's 
handiwork, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a small 
excerpt from the Conversation Kit.
  Besides the kit's skewed content, every American should be outraged 
by the expense of printing these Conversation Kits. This particular 
program, I'm told, is going to cost us $1,700,000 just by itself. And 
remember, given our huge national debt, that's $1.7 million that we 
don't have and that we're charging to our children's accounts.
  Mr. Speaker, the NEH again has thrust the Federal Government into 
another venture in which it does not belong. And once again, we see the 
Federal Government pushing its inane, self-righteous agenda on the 
American public.
  These conversation kits maybe politically correct, but they're 
fiscally foolish. They're also insulting to the intelligence of our 
citizens.
  America's filled with sensible, kind, and intelligent people who know 
how to talk with one another. The last thing we need is a group of 
condescending academics squandering our tax dollars to tell us how to 
talk to each other. This is not the proper role of the Federal 
Government and we need to end, forever, this type of wasteful spending.
  That's why I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring 
Congressman Joe Hefley's bill, The Privatization of 
[[Page H958]] the Humanities Act. Let's tear down Sheldon Hackney's 
fiefdom. The critics and the naysayers believe we cannot balance the 
budget. Well, here's a golden opportunity to begin that process by 
trimming $177 million of fat from the Federal budget.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following information:

                               Appendix A


                  checklist for conversation planning

     People:
       Do you need to contact organizations that can help you 
     assemble a planning committee and find participants for the 
     conversation?
       Does your planning committee have the same racial, ethnic, 
     and cultural diversity as the people you hope will 
     participate?
       Have you divided responsibilities among committee members?
       Have you identified an effective discussion leader?
       Have you appointed someone to take notes or tape-record 
     each session?
       Have you personally invited the participants or responded 
     to them personally after they have expressed interests in 
     joining the conversation?
       Have you sent information and directions to participants 
     several days before the first session?
       Have you made reminder phone calls to participants one or 
     two days before each session?
     Content:
       Have you decided how to focus your discussion? if there 
     will be more than one session, have you identified all the 
     topics? Or will participants choose the later topics at the 
     first session?
       Have you selected the materials--e.g., readings, videos, 
     conversation starters, Scholars' Essays, news clips--for each 
     session?
       How will you use the materials? How will you distribute 
     them?
       Have you considered inviting an expert to provide 
     background information for the discussion?
     Format:
       Have you chosen an appropriate conversation format (number, 
     length, and frequency of sessions)?
       Do you have an agenda, including time for opening remarks, 
     introductions, and ground rules?
       Is the discussion leader familiar with the reading 
     materials and the makeup of the group?
     

                          ____________________