[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 154 (Friday, September 29, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1890]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      IS AMERICORPS WORTH KEEPING?

                                 ______


                           HON. NEWT GINGRICH

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, September 29, 1995

  Mr. GINGRICH. Mr. Speaker, I think you will find Susan Molinari's 
article on AmeriCorps informative:

                      Is AmeriCorps Worth Keeping?

                          (By Susan Molinari)

       Volunteerism is a tremendously American tradition. Few of 
     us, however, would characterize a volunteer as someone who is 
     paid (more than minimum wage) receives medical benefits and 
     child care allowances, and gets a $5,000 education stipend.
       Welcome to the AmeriCorps world of volunteerism.
       The Clinton administration's year-old AmeriCorps program is 
     riddled with problems, not the least of which is that it's 
     too expensive to administer. That's why the Senate followed 
     the House's lead and voted on Tuesday to completely de-fund 
     AmeriCorps. The government simply must stop making financial 
     commitments it can't keep, especially when we have to rob 
     other needed programs to do so.


                         other programs suffer

       Despite that fact that we were able to fund the 20,000 
     AmeriCorps ``volunteers,'' we could not, for instance, fully 
     fund either the Pell Grant or the Stafford Loan program, both 
     of which help thousands more.
       For every AmeriCorps participant who got education dollars, 
     five students could get Pell Grants. Factor in other, 
     noneducation costs for one volunteer to participate in 
     AmeriCorps, and the number of Pell Grants that could be 
     funded jumps to 18.
       Some of AmeriCorps' high costs are directly attributable to 
     the way this ``volunteer'' program is administered. The 
     nonpartisan, independent General Accounting Office estimates 
     that it costs $27,000 per participant to run the program, and 
     this figure jumps to $33,000 when the dropout rate is 
     factored in.
       AmeriCorps' overhead, including $2 million in payments to a 
     public relations firm, accounts for some of the more than 
     $10,000-per-participant cost overruns from the $17,000 
     originally estimated. More than half the cost of the program 
     goes to pay for the bureaucrats who administer it.
       According to the GAO, the price tag to the federal 
     government for one AmeriCorps volunteer is $15.30 per hour, 
     including salary, health and child care benefits. This 
     doesn't include the education stipend, training or 
     administrative overhead. When you plug in the money cities, 
     states and private sources kick in, the cost per hour for one 
     volunteer's time jumps to $19.60, again minus education 
     stipend, training and overhead. Originally, this number was 
     supposed to be $6.43 per hour.
       While government costs soar way over initial projections, 
     private contributions have been much lower than expected. 
     Rather than picking up half the costs, as was promised at the 
     outset, private funds make up only 7% of the cost for each 
     volunteer, the GAO now estimates.
       Rather than costly new government bureaucracies, we have a 
     better way to encourage charity and foster community spirit. 
     For decades we have used the tax code to create just such an 
     atmosphere, through deductions for charitable contributions. 
     And we have a better way to fund the education of middle and 
     lower-income students--by fully funding existing programs 
     such as Pell Grants, to the extent resources will allow.
       I admire the 20,000 young men and women who have joined 
     AmeriCorps, as I admire the 89.2 million Americans who 
     volunteer--without pay--their 19 billion hours worth of time 
     each year. Trying to encourage volunteerism through a big-
     government approach, however, does more to encourage 
     bureaucrats than community service.
       AmeriCorps participants do worthy work, but the real 
     substance of American-style volunteerism is proven every day 
     by those who are willing to give their time to make others' 
     lives better.

                          ____________________