[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 31 (Wednesday, March 12, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H939-H946]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           ARTS AND EDUCATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. GEKAS). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 7, 1997, the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. 
Slaughter] is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority 
leader.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about one of the 
best things that we can do in education for our children. It has been 
proven over and over again what a wonderful effect it has on them.
  Would it surprise you to know that a child in a school in the United 
States that has 4 years of arts programs, the verbal scores on the 
SAT's go up 67 points and the math scores go up 45? Would it amaze you 
to know that the most important thing we can do to cut the dropout rate 
and the absenteeism is to have children participate in art, proven over 
and over and over again.
  One of the most important ways that we can give a child self-esteem, 
and so many of them need it, is to give them the ability to create. And 
once again, we have learned over and over and over again that children 
who create do not destroy.
  All this is done in simple programs in schools all over the United 
States. And every parent that has ever put on the refrigerator door the 
drawing brought from home or the little plaster cast of the hand, the 
things that we keep forever, I think probably everything that my 
children ever touched is stored away in a box somewhere where I like to 
take them out and look at them for my memories, every parent who has 
ever experienced that knows the wonderful feeling that that child has 
of being able to create and to express.
  We are losing whole generations of children these days to violence, 
to absenteeism, to disinterest, the inability to learn.

                              {time}  1900

  What happens? A country faced with problems like that, that says at 
the same time we are going to turn our back on the one simple cheap 
thing that we can do to benefit these children. Does it work? You bet.
  I wrote legislation to educate homeless children in the United 
States. It is an astonishing fact that every day in this country 
between 750,000 and 1 million children are homeless. It is not their 
fault. Their parents used to work; they just do not anymore.
  A lot of people do not understand what homelessness means to a child. 
They can go to a shelter, but they can only stay there a certain number 
of days and then they have to move. Or they can live in a State park or 
a local park maybe 2 weeks, and then they have to move. It is in every 
respect a nomadic existence.
  So we have these numbers of children in the United States unable to 
get their education, because many times they do not have their birth 
certificate. It was always a very important thing for us in the United 
States. No child went to school without their inoculations, their birth 
certificate, and a permanent address.
  This was not an indigenous population in the United States. We had 
never really took any plans or even discussed any plans on what we 
would do about kids without a permanent address or who maybe lost their 
birth certificate in one of those many moves they had to make. So a 
family that is confronted, let us say, with putting food on a table or 
duplicating a birth certificate for $10, logically and sensibly is 
going to opt for food on the table for the children.
  So we wrote a little piece of legislation here that said we do not 
care whether they have their birth certificate or not. We know they are 
born, they are standing in front of us. We want them educated. The 
United States cannot go into the next century with children who are 
unhealthy, untrained, and uneducated.
  One of the most important things, again, that has been important to 
this population and consequently to us is the arts programs, is that we 
were able to provide these children with the ability to be able to 
express themselves, to be able to deal with what had happened to them, 
for the first time to be able to open up to a stranger as they 
discussed the work that they had done.
  So the United States over the years has decided that art may not be 
too important to us, or that maybe it is only for the rich people who 
want to go to the museums or the art galleries, and for the rest of us 
it does not really matter. Well, we could be meeting here in a Quonset 
hut but we are not.
  We are here in a work of art that every day makes all of us who work 
here not only understand how lucky we are to have been elected, but how 
blessed we are to work in this building with the American eagle 
overhead and our first President's wonderful portrait by Stuart over 
there that every schoolchild knows. The first thing that occurred to me 
when I got here was that was the original. We have Lafayette over here 
on the other side and all the wonderful carvings of people who have 
come before us.
  What is it that really tells us what kind of a nation, one that has 
disappeared off the earth, was like? When we excavate, how do we 
determine whether they were enlightened, whether they were civilized? 
Simple. By the art they left behind.
  How do we explain to children growing up in the United States what it 
was like for the pioneers, the people in Conastoga wagons, the people 
who opened up the West, the patriots? By the art left behind. This 
Capitol is full of it. This city is full of it. This city is in many 
ways a work of art.
  Can this country afford to be the only industrial country on the face 
of the earth that determines that art is not important? I do not think 
so. There is not an industrial country anywhere on the planet that does 
not have a national budget for the arts; sometimes 1 or 2 percent of 
their total budget.
  What do we do? President Nixon started the National Endowment for the 
Arts because he thought the United States ought to make some statement 
as well. And over the years we have whittled away at the money and 
whittled away at it until now, this year, we are being asked to pay 
$136 million for arts programs in every nook and cranny in the United 
States, $136 million, which is a great deal less than the United States 
spends every year for military bands.
  It does not amount to a whole lot in the scheme of things when we 
think about what it does. Let me give my colleagues some idea of what 
happens there. Let us talk not about the beauty of it but the economy.
  The arts support 1.3 million jobs. The nonprofit arts community 
generates $36.8 billion annually in economic activity. The arts 
produces $790 million

[[Page H940]]

in local government revenue and $1.2 billion in State government 
revenue. And for the $136 million that we hope we can vote this year to 
put in, we will get back almost $4 billion in taxes paid into the 
Federal Treasury.
  This is not an idle piece of work. I know of no other thing in this 
Government, and I have served three terms on the Committee on the 
Budget, I promise my colleagues I know of no other expenditure that we 
make that brings back that kind of monetary return. It just does not 
happen.
  So if we add to that what we can do for the children in school, 
something that we struggle every day with, and we just heard the 
previous speaker talking about children not being able to read or to 
talk and all these kinds of things, we can see that some of these 
programs can open them up and help them to do that. Why would we not 
want to?
  Now, I am not going to ask anyone to take my word for it, because I 
do not altogether understand it myself. But there is a direct 
correlation between dance and math. No two ways about it. Today, 
classical music is supposed to stimulate some part of the brain and 
that then that individual will have a better idea of spacial concepts. 
That is wonderful.
  We do not know how all this works, but we are right now in the decade 
of the brain. All these wonderful studies have been taking place and we 
see how certain parts of the brain light up under certain stimulation 
and we have found out so much.
  We have found out, for one thing, that we have to begin at birth, 
with a baby, to stimulate it, to educate it. We have a short window of 
opportunity, really, to open up that little mind to be everything that 
it can be.
  It is critically important that we look at the United States and 
whether we are going to be a participant in this, in this decade of the 
brain, or are we again going to turn our backs on it.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia 
[Mr. Lewis]; and then we will next be joined by my colleague from 
California [Mr. Farr].
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague and 
my good friend from New York [Ms. Slaughter] for holding this special 
order.
  Mr. Speaker, in 1965, Congress established the National Endowment for 
the Arts. The idea behind the endowment was to create a climate for 
freedom, freedom of thought, freedom of imagination. Congress found 
that while no government can create a great artist or a great scholar, 
it is necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to encourage 
freedom of thought, freedom of expression. I believe that we must 
provide the resources to support these freedoms.

  Since that time, our Nation has changed dramatically. We have 
witnessed what I like to call a nonviolent revolution with the civil 
rights movement. We have seen a technological revolution in all areas 
of society. We have seen our Nation grow and really change.
  Mr. Speaker, I grew up in rural Alabama, in an area without a 
telephone, without running water, without power. My father was a tenant 
farmer, a sharecropper. He was not allowed to vote or sit in some 
public places. But today we can fly through the air like a bird and 
swim through the water like a fish. We put a man on the Moon. We 
communicate by satellite, by computer on the Internet.
  These revolutions are social revolutions, our cultural revolutions, 
our revolutions in science and technology, are the results of our 
collective imagination as a Nation, our sense of direction and our need 
for growth and change.
  Throughout history, as the Nation has grown and changed, it is 
imagination, it is art, that has uplifted us and guided us and defined 
us. It is imagination that has made our dreams come true.
  Just 2 weeks ago I had a great experience, a wonderful experience. I 
visited an elementary school in Atlanta called Mary Lin Elementary. I 
was impressed and amazed by all of the students at this little school. 
Children as young as 4, in kindergarten, 4 years old, but also children 
of all ages had drawn pictures of what they understood to be the civil 
rights movement. These young students, these young bright minds, had 
decorated every hall in every building with their colorful vision, each 
drawing different, each drawing unique. Every student was involved. 
Every student understood something about history through their 
imagination, through art.
  Just yesterday I had lunch with an art teacher from the Atlanta 
public schools, Ms. Deborah Laden. She told me that she received less 
than $100 for each student in her class for art education. It is a 
shame and a disgrace that in a Nation as rich and as powerful as the 
United States, in a Nation, yes, that has put a man on the Moon, we do 
not invest more in our children, in their ability to dream dreams and 
to share and express those dreams.
  In the same way children learn through art, we all are inspired by 
professional artists and others who have taken time to explore human 
existence and human history. It was President John Fitzgerald Kennedy 
who once said,
       Behind the storm of daily conflict and crisis, the dramatic 
     confrontations, the tumult of political struggle, the poet, 
     the artist, the musician, continue their quiet work of 
     centuries, building bridges of experience between people, 
     reminding man of the universality of his feelings and desires 
     and despairs, and reminding him that the forces that unite 
     are deeper than those that divide.

  President Kennedy went on to say,

       I see little of more importance to the future of our 
     country and our civilization than full recognition of the 
     place of the artist. If art is to nourish the roots of our 
     culture, society must set the artist free to follow his 
     vision.

  Today, more than 35 years later, these words are more important than 
ever. We are in the midst of the information age. Our workers must be 
able to learn quickly. They must be imaginative thinkers and creative 
individuals. They must handle the tools of technology with a sense of 
philosophy, a sense of history, a sense of vision, a sense of 
community.
  With a modest investment, just a little bit, a modest investment, we 
can help fill in the gaps of American education and encourage art 
education in our schools. With a very modest investment, we can help 
decorate every hallway of every school in every State with creative 
vision of our youngest minds, uplifted and inspired by their own 
imagination and the imagination of each other.
  These young children, because of art, because of their imagination, 
may grow up to be visionaries, to be scientists, artists, doctors, 
lawyers, ministers. These young children will lead us into the 21st 
century.
  Some of my colleagues today may ask if we can afford to invest in the 
arts. Our answer must be, how can we afford not to? Free the artists, 
provide the necessary resources, let the imagination, the minds run 
wild. It is what our country, it is what our society is all about.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman again for holding this special 
order on the arts.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. And, Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his 
participation. That was wonderful and I appreciate that very much.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I would yield to my colleague from California, [Mr. 
Farr] and we will have a few discussions here on this same subject.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. FARR of California. I thank my distinguished colleague from New 
York for yielding, and the Speaker tonight. We spent a wonderful 
weekend in his beautiful State of Pennsylvania.
  Walking over to the Capitol tonight to join in this colloquy on the 
arts, I could not help but think as I looked up at the sky and saw the 
crescent Moon up there, just the wisp of a crescent Moon over the 
Capitol, how this building is indeed a living museum of art. It is a 
living museum of history, a living museum of democracy in the United 
States. Yet more than ever what this building demonstrates is the 
creative talent, the historic talent of this country displayed in 
paintings, displayed in photographs, displayed in works of sculpture in 
Statuary Hall, displayed in the architecture of the building, displayed 
as a symbol to the greatest democracy in the world.
  And yet Members who serve in Congress like to think that there is an 
option in this country, that arts are essentially a disposable 
commodity, that it is something frilly. I cannot help but

[[Page H941]]

think, as we talk so much about the need for this country's underlying 
security and its economic creativity, that the most creative aspect of 
America is in the diversity of its arts. It is the engine of our 
economy, and where that begins is in schools. It also begins in the 
home. It also begins in the political families that we live with.
  This weekend when we went on the retreat, the bipartisan retreat to 
talk about how we can bring more civility to Congress, to this House, 
to this very Chamber we are in tonight, I could not help but think that 
as the families engaged in this discussion with their children there, 
that what the leadership of this House provided was essentially a 
weekend of arts for the children. That is what they chose, as we 
discussed among ourselves. They chose to give the children art so that 
the children could be very creative, and every parent blessed that.
  And yet some of those parents come here at the same time the next day 
or this next week or the next month and will do everything they can to 
discourage the funding of arts through the public sector. What we are 
about is education in America. What education is about is an educated 
work force. And what a work force is about is building an economy. And 
what that economy is about is in a global, competitive society, is 
being a little bit more creative. It is not just the creative mind. It 
is the creative fingers, it is the creative toes. Therefore, if we 
really want this country to be strong and independent, we have got to 
invest in the arts.
  When I was in the State legislature in California, I cochaired the 
Joint Committee on the Arts. We invested in the arts in California. 
Why? Not because it was an optional thing to do; it was because 
industrial development in California demands it. The Los Angeles 
Chamber of Commerce demands that we invest in arts because they sell 
arts very well in Los Angeles. San Francisco demands that you invest in 
the arts because San Francisco is known for its arts.
  New York, where you come from, what would New York be without the 
arts? What would the city of New York be? Look how much money the city 
puts into it, private sector and public sector money. And yet again 
where we fail to really commit ourselves to the arts is in our public 
school education program.
  In California we have made it so important that we require that in 
order to graduate from high school, every student must take at least a 
year of arts, or we give them the option of a year of foreign 
languages. Both of those are, we think, skills necessary to compete in 
the 21st century.
  We are here tonight to remind our colleagues that the arts are not a 
frivolous, disposable commodity in America. They are essential not only 
to our cultural well-being but to our economic well-being.
  I applaud the gentlewoman for her dedication to the arts, for forming 
the Arts Caucus, for allowing high school children from all over the 
United States to be in competitive contests in their districts and hang 
their art here in the Capitol so that they can be role models to the 
thousands, to the millions of students who walk through this Capitol 
and see children their own age being able to promote the arts.
  I thank the gentlewoman for allowing me to join in on her colloquy on 
the arts, and I would remind all our colleagues that the arts are some 
of the most essential products of American freedom in a democratic 
society, an expression of one's self, of community and of nation.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I thank the gentleman from California [Mr. Farr].
  I yield to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bentsen].
  Mr. BENTSEN. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I 
rise today to recognize the importance of the arts in our Nation and 
our communities.
  The National Endowment for the Arts, the NEA, and the National 
Endowment for the Humanities, the NEH, serve important educational, 
cultural and economic roles in our society. The benefits of the 
Endowments for the Arts and Humanities have often been overlooked. 
While much attention has been paid to a few controversial grants, most 
NEA money goes to support important community programs such as museums, 
libraries, schools, and orchestras. The NEA is a great investment in 
the economic growth of every community and country. The nonprofit arts 
industry alone generates $36.8 billion annually in economic activity 
and supports 1.3 million jobs and returns $3.4 billion to the Federal 
Government in income taxes.
  In terms of dollars and cents, the United States spends only 64 cents 
per person to support the arts each year, a level 50 times lower than 
other industrialized countries. The arts industry attracts tourist 
dollars, stimulates business development, spurs urban renewal, and 
improves the total quality of life for our cities and towns.
  Additionally, the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities 
broaden public access to the arts so all Americans can participate in 
and enjoy and learn from the arts, improving the quality of life of our 
children and families. The NEA supports educational programs such as 
teacher institutes, museum exhibitions and advanced study grants that 
enrich the cultural livelihood of our communities and our Nation.
  Not only do these programs ensure accessibility to our museums, 
universities and libraries, but they also serve as a vital link to our 
children's education. These programs are an integral part of our 
comprehensive education that help broaden the horizons of our children 
and instill in them a love of learning. They represent our Nation's 
cultural heritage, creativity, and pride.
  Without the assistance of the NEA, various programs vital to my 
district would not be possible. The Museum of Fine Arts of Houston, the 
Alley Theater of Houston, the Dance on Tour Program and the Houston 
Grand Opera would be in jeopardy.
  Young Audiences of Houston is another valuable organization which 
works in my district, that demonstrates the beneficial impacts and 
contributions the arts have in our communities. Celebrating its 40th 
anniversary this year, Young Audiences of Houston is 1 of 32 
independent chapters of Young Audiences, Inc. that form the Nation's 
largest nonprofit arts and education organization and the only arts 
organization to be a 1994 recipient of the National Medal of Arts. 
Young Audiences is dedicated to educating children through the arts and 
to making the arts an integral part of the school curriculum.

  Young Audiences' highly participatory, curriculum-related arts 
programs reinforce classroom instruction, foster creative thinking 
skills, awaken interest in learning and broaden student understanding 
of world arts and cultures. Emphasis is placed on multicultural 
programming and on serving children at risk in schools with high need. 
The arts provide positive role models, enhance self-esteem, foster 
academic achievement, encourage students' sense of ownership in the 
educational process and help young people elect to remain in school. 
Furthermore, Young Audiences contributes to the economic vigor that a 
healthy cultural climate brings to the city and helps keep Houston in 
the forefront of arts education reform.
  I congratulate Young Audiences on their 40th anniversary and commend 
them for their dedication to educating children and communities through 
the arts. The NEA and the NEH are at the forefront in the preservation 
of our historical and cultural heritage, encouraging the use of 
technology, strengthening education, and broadening access to the arts 
for all Americans to participate in and enjoy. Our continued support of 
the arts will enhance our children's future, their educational 
development, economic growth and their quality of life.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I thank the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bentsen] for 
coming and joining us this evening. That was a very important message. 
We are trying to reinforce what art means to children in making better 
students, cutting out the dropout rate, all the wonderful things we 
want for the children at risk.
  I yield to the gentleman from California [Mr. Horn], the co-chair of 
the Congressional Members Organization for the Arts.
  Mr. HORN. I thank my colleague from New York. She had done just a 
splendid job when she chaired the arts caucus a few years ago when I 
first came here in 1993, and I am delighted that she is reinvigorating 
it, because there are many Members in this Chamber that have strong 
support for the arts.

[[Page H942]]

  Increasingly in our communities, there is stronger and stronger 
support for the arts. One of the reasons there is stronger support is 
that the National Endowment for the Arts has done, on the whole, a 
splendid job. So has the National Endowment for the Humanities. So has 
the Institute for Museum Services. These are minusculely funded by the 
Federal Government, but they make a difference, because we have the 
opportunity to engage with partnerships at the local level. The match 
money is very effective in involving people.
  I am fortunate in my district, which includes Long Beach to Downey in 
southern California, Los Angeles County, that we have vigorous arts 
groups, and we have had excellent support from the NEA. That is very 
important to our museums. The Long Beach Museum of Art, the California 
State University Art Museum. All of those have been recognized as 
having high quality, that involve people, involve young people.
  The symphonies in several of the cities in my district go out and 
reach out into the schools so young people can see what I had the 
opportunity to see when I was 5 or 6 years old. I did not know much 
about music at the age of 5 and 6 except the piano and singing around 
the table with everybody else. But one night in Hollister, CA, 
population 3,500 at that time, in San Benito County whose total 
population even though it was 60 miles long was about 13,000 people, to 
the high school came a wonderful musical organization, a symphony. 
Everybody dressed in the magical black tie and their instruments shiny. 
How did they end up in Hollister, CA, where there were not too many 
people? It is because the Works Progress Administration, the WPA, had 
funded them to go into the rural areas of our State where all of us 
were growing up pretty much on ranches, a few grew up in the towns, and 
they performed some of the great music that night. It made a difference 
in my life. I decided I wanted to be a music major, which I was through 
high school. I did not pursue it that much in college because I 
realized I did not have the world's greatest talent on the French horn. 
I was OK, but not the greatest talent, and that my desire to be a 
conductor would probably be a dubious desire, although I had been the 
conductor of all the student orchestras. But that made a difference in 
my life, and that has made a difference in millions of young people's 
lives.
  A dean I had at California State University Long Beach when I was 
president, I made her Dean of Fine Arts, Maxine Merlino. She is in her 
eighties. She holds the world's swimming championship for her age 
group. She was doing murals here in Washington, DC in what we know as 
the Old Post Office down a few blocks from the White House, and those 
murals are still here, and they are bringing joy to people as they look 
at those murals.
  We can replicate that, in towns, in communities, in rural areas, in 
mountain areas, and in our great urban areas. It is tremendously 
important to continue these endowments. We have got a few critics. Yes, 
they object to 10 grants out of the 100,000 made. That is not bad. That 
beats baseball's scoring. It beats football's scoring. Obviously when 
you are in the arts, some things are going to be controversial. That 
does not mean we need to approve them. Just do not go see them. Go look 
at something else. Art has different tastes for different people. We 
have got to remember, this is a country of great diversity, and we need 
to bring out in the various immigrant groups, as we have in Long Beach 
with the Cambodian group, the groups from Laos and their beautiful work 
that is on display in the various museums in the city of Long Beach.
  Arts are also increasingly entrepreneurial. Yesterday my colleague 
from New York and I had the pleasure of sponsoring with several of our 
colleagues the visit of Bill Strickland from Pittsburgh. He has been 
awarded the Genius Award of the MacArthur Foundation, and he truly is a 
genius. He was a young man who could barely read, who dropped out, who 
took up ceramics and from that artistic career he gained the self-
esteem that he needed, and by one chance after the other, he 
incrementally has built one of the major centers of not only the arts 
but a number of other things, because one thing led to the other. And 
he has worked with out-of-work members from the steel mills, welfare 
mothers and others, and, as we all know, we are talking about the 
welfare bill in here and how do you get people into the job market that 
have never had an opportunity to be in the job market? He has shown it 
can be done.

                              {time}  1930

  What has he developed? As I say, he started with ceramics, and pretty 
soon people sold some of the ceramics work. He trained them as artists. 
Then he worked with industry, and he had pharmaceutical training, he 
had television training, he had a whole series of things: flower 
gardens, horticulture, a catering service developed to feed the 
students that came to his school, an integrated thing, a small 
community in one of the worst districts in Pittsburgh where people 
would often be afraid to even go to an event at night. And in his 
beautifully designed buildings, which have been the work of both 
corporations, individual philanthropists and just plain knowing how to 
make the money in your food operations and your sale of art he has 
developed a marvelous pinnacle and vista where young people and young 
and old can come and appreciate what has happened.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the time she has given me, and 
I wish her well in this endeavor.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Horn, you know one of the things that he told us 
yesterday that really stuck with me was that he has this wonderful 
building and all these students who come there, and they have been 
there for 10 years, and 2 blocks away is the school that he went to as 
a youngster, and it has bars on the windows and police cars outside and 
people patrolling the perimeter. But in his facility two blocks away he 
said that he needs no guards in the daytime, there has never been any 
graffiti, and despite all of the important and expensive equipment and 
things he has inside that building nothing has ever been touched.
  Mr. HORN. That is right, and he also said that since he happens to be 
African-American and the African-American black students that go there, 
and white students go there, there has never been one incident, not 
one.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Once again we just find that arts brings people 
together and does the kind of thing that we want for human beings, and 
it really would be dreadful if we made a statement here on this floor 
that it did not matter to us.
  Mr. HORN. And it seems to me that whether it be the WPA Orchestra in 
1935 that I saw or the hundreds of orchestras that have benefited from 
grants from the endowment and their outreach into schools they can 
change people's vision, and we all know about the books.
  One of the professors at California State University Long Beach wrote 
a best seller called ``Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain''; Dr. 
Betty Edwards of our department of art, and another one on ``Drawing on 
the Artist Within.'' A million copies of the first book, half a million 
copies of the second.
  People can learn to be artists not necessarily for the commercial 
aspects but for their own enjoyment, and I have felt for 30 years at 
least that if we stress the right side of the brain in the schools, not 
just the left side of the brain, important though that is with 
mathematics and all the rest, we would build self-esteem in these 
children, and we would then transfer them into success in some of the 
mathematical, history, whatever subjects, languages, all the rest. But 
we need to help people develop their creative talents, and it has made 
a difference.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. And we find that once that right brain is developed it 
spills over on to the left-hand side, and, as I pointed out earlier, 
that just 4 years of art, the verbal scores on SAT's will go up 65 
points, and math, 45, and I know of no other thing we can do for these 
students to get that kind of result.
  Mr. HORN. I happened to go to a high school where we had an 
outstanding music department. We had a 100-piece concert band, a 60-
voice choir and a 60-piece orchestra. Now that was in a school of 500 
where only maybe 10 out of the 110 graduates went on to college, but it 
made a difference in peoples' lives to hear Tchaikovsky, to hear 
Brahms, to hear Beethoven, to have

[[Page H943]]

tears come to your eyes. It makes you a human being, and that is what 
we ought to be encouraging in this country.
  Think of this king of this or that country had not been funding money 
to Beethoven or to Mozart. Those were the patrons of their day two 
centuries ago. What a difference their music has made in our lives. 
Mozart died, as we all know, at a very young age, in his thirties, and 
Tchaikovsky and others had patrons.
  Well, there are still patrons for our symphonies, and some large 
symphonies frankly I do not worry about; they can get the money in a 
major city. But it is those middle-sized cities and those very small 
cities that are just beginning in a musical adventure that we need to 
give encouragement and stimulus to.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. That is the best thing about the NEA. It wants to make 
sure that every nook and cranny from sea to shining sea has the same 
opportunity.
  I yield now to my colleague, Connie Morella, from Maryland.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York, my 
good friend, Mrs. Slaughter, for yielding to me and for the special 
order on an issue that we all believe is so very important.
  I rise, Mr. Speaker, to express my support for the arts and to 
highlight the important world of the arts and the educational 
development of our children and the economic growth of our country.
  The arts and humanities have absorbed their fair share of budget cuts 
over the past 2 years. Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts 
and the National Endowment for the Humanities has been slashed by 40 
percent. I oppose any efforts to eliminate or make further cuts in 
funding for the NEA and the NEH.
  I wholeheartedly believe that Government should support the arts, and 
according to a Lou Harris Poll I am in sync with most of the Nation. 
The latest Lou Harris public opinion poll concludes that 79 percent of 
the American public favors a governmental role in funding the arts. 
Sixty-one percent would pay $5 more in taxes to support the arts, and 
56 percent would pay $10 more in taxes for the arts.
  Mr. Speaker, 86 percent of America's adults participate in one or 
more of the arts. Frankly you know that is 33 percent more than 
participate; by that I mean vote in Presidential elections. Cultural 
funding is a mere two one-hundredths of 1 percent of our multi-billion-
dollar budget. We spend 70 cents per person on the humanities, 64 cents 
per person on the arts, on history, English literature, foreign 
languages, sociology, anthropology, and other disciplines. Seventy 
cents a person buys teacher training programs. These programs provide 
professional development opportunities for our teachers to increase 
their knowledge in their field and pass it on to their students. It is 
estimated that the 1,000 teachers who participate each summer in NEH-
funded summer institutes directly impact 85,000 students per year.
  In Maryland the arts are an important part of the economy. In 1995, 
for example, the arts contributed $634 million to the State's economy 
through direct spending by arts organizations and audiences. More than 
$21 million was generated in State and local taxes paid by arts 
organizations and audiences, and 19,000 jobs were generated. On our 
National Arts Advocacy Day, March 11, 1997, members of the Maryland 
Citizens for the Arts visited Capitol Hill and brought with them a 
special message: ``The arts stimulate economic growth.'' For every 
dollar the NEA invests in communities there is a twenty-fold return in 
jobs, services and contracts.

  The arts invest in our communities, the arts develop in our citizens 
a sense of community, and they contribute to the liveability for 
families in that community.
  The arts are basic to a thorough education. Student achievement and 
test scores in academic subjects can improve when the arts are used to 
assist learning in mathematics, social studies, creative writing and 
communication skills, and I am particularly proud that the chairman of 
the Maryland Citizens for the Arts is Eliot Pfanstiel who is a 
constituent of mine.
  Mr. Speaker, our legislative agenda could have far reaching 
implications for the cultural vitality of our Nation. Art is the 
symbolic expression of who we are. It is how we remember. It is 
important, even vital, that we support and encourage the promotion of 
the arts and humanities so that the rich and cultural story of our past 
can be made available to future generations.
  I have often liked the expression that the arts are the border of 
flowers around the pot of civilization, but I would say they are more 
than the border of flowers. They really are also the border of 
nutrients, what we really need for our subsistence and for our cultural 
vitality and for the greatness of our country.
  I thank the gentlewoman from New York again for arranging this 
special order, and I know she is so important to all of us.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I thank you so much for being here, and I appreciate 
your message.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to close with two very brief examples of what we 
were talking about with the revitalization of towns' economy through 
art. The Northeast has suffered out migration, as you know, over a 
number of years, and one little town in New York State called Peekskill 
was really in very bad condition. The downtown area was basically dead, 
theatres had closed, restaurants closed. It was not much happening 
there until a sort of spillover from New York City. A famous artist 
came into Peekskill, and a well-known sculptor took over the old movie 
theater. It was perfect for his massive work, and galleries began to 
open, and then there was a massive change in Peekskill. People began to 
come in droves. The restaurants opened up again because people needed 
someplace to live, they needed a place to stay, they needed a place to 
buy gasoline, they needed a place for snacks, they needed things for 
souvenirs for their children, and that economy was brought back because 
of the art that was in Peekskill.
  Providence, RI has just recently embarked on the same kind of an 
adventure in their downtown area. They have turned parts of abandoned 
factories and other buildings into places where performing artists and 
other artists can work in a group in one square mile of downtown 
Providence. It has been absolutely an amazing revitalization. It has 
brought back that city of 160,000 people to life and has stopped the 
out migration to other parts of the State and to the country.
  Art speaks for itself, but I do think it is important for me and for 
my colleagues to say to you that we are not asking here for anything 
that is frivolous, for anything that does not pay its own way, for 
anything that does not help our children in incalculable ways.
  So, Mr. Speaker, when art reauthorization comes to the floor of the 
House, I urge my colleagues to support it, and I hope that everybody in 
America will as well.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to celebrate the arts in 
America and to call on my colleagues to fully fund the National 
Endowment for the Arts [NEA], the National Endowment for the Humanities 
[NEH], and the Institute of Museum and Library Services [IMLS].
  Whether it is visual art, performance art, music, poetry, literature, 
or historical preservation, the NEA, the NEH, and the IMLS have all 
served our Nation well, and America is stronger because of them.
  I am proud that my district includes most of the Broadway theater and 
many of the nonprofit theater institutions, including Lincoln Center 
and the New York Shakespeare Festival. It also includes the SoHo art 
galleries, museums, radio and television studios, record and film 
companies, and hundreds of individual artists, writers, dancers, and 
musicians. The positive economic impact of this arts community has long 
been documented. The contributions they make to the economy and to the 
quality of life in New York is immense. In fact, when people nationally 
and internationally think about New York City, they often think about 
its cultural richness.
  Other cities are beginning to realize that the arts draw people into 
the city and provide a valuable economic boost to the local economy. As 
a result, mayors across the country are rushing to build arts and 
cultural centers in their own cities and are seeking national support 
for their efforts. Just as the arts community in New York receives a 
portion of Federal support, so too should these newly emerging artistic 
centers. That is just one reason why we will need to increase arts 
funding to expand the reach of the arts to people throughout the 
Nation.

[[Page H944]]

  Another reason to support the national endowments is the nature of 
the projects they fund. Let me give you some examples. The NEA 
supported a consortium project to expand Alvin Ailey's summer dance 
camps for inner-city youths in Philadelphia and Chicago; the NEA 
supported a program to create a national model for an integrated 
kindergarten through sixth grade arts curriculum to improve learning in 
all subjects and offer new ways to engage students; the NEA supported 
an initiative to provide music instruction for financially 
disadvantaged minority children in New York City public schools; the 
NEA supported a program to teach playwriting to young people ages 9 to 
13 in one of New York City's toughest neighborhoods; and the NEA 
supported a project to produce and broadcast telecasts of the public 
television series ``Live from Lincoln Center.'' Now it is possible for 
folks in Wyoming and Indiana, not just New York City, to enjoy Lincoln 
Center performances. Helping children learn, reaching out to 
disadvantaged communities, boosting the economy, and providing national 
access to great performances--this is what the NEA is doing in 1997 to 
support the arts and to improve America, and that is why we in Congress 
must continue our bipartisan support for the arts. In fact, more 
projects like these deserve to be supported by the Federal Government 
to inspire our young people, to encourage them to nurture their natural 
talents, and to live up to their potential.
  Therefore, not only must we preserve our cultural agencies, but we 
must increase their funding substantially, so that they can better 
serve our people.
  Without these cultural agencies many beneficial projects would not 
exist, and America would be weaker without them. Think about how the 
arts touch and improve all of our lives. One way to do this is to 
imagine what the world would be like without art. Some have suggested 
to me that we ought to have a national arts awareness day. A day when 
we try to live without art. When we wake up without music, when we work 
in offices without wall hangings, when TV's don't work, when the 
theaters and opera houses are closed, when museums and libraries don't 
open their doors, and when even the reading of books is not allowed. A 
day when all of our national monuments are cloaked in black and art is 
taken out of our public spaces. The Capitol building itself would have 
to close down, because in every corridor and on every wall there are 
examples of public support for the arts--statues, paintings, and 
historic documents all serve to enrich this building and those of us 
who work here. Even the thought of a day without art is frightening. 
So, we must all recognize how integral the arts are to our life 
experiences, how they serve to improve the lives of Americans, and how 
they enrich us as a people and as a nation.
  The Congress must continue its support for the arts if America, as 
President Clinton noted in his State of the Union Address, is to remain 
as a beacon, not only of liberty, but of creativity.
  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker, I rise to denounce the shameful war 
being waged on the arts and humanities. The National Endowment for the 
Arts [NEA] and National Endowment for the Humanities [NEH] have had 
fundamental impacts on our lives and our children's lives over the past 
30 years. It is difficult to comprehend reasons behind vicious attacks 
on the very things that enrich our lives through music, art, dance, 
history, and other means of celebrating culture.
  The appropriations process of the 104th Congress severely cut funding 
for the NEA and NEH. The NEA suffered a cut of 39 percent from $162 
million in fiscal year 1995 to $99.5 million in fiscal year 1997, and 
the NEH, a cut of 36 percent from $172 million in fiscal year 1995 to 
$110 million in fiscal year 1997. These cuts have forced the NEA and 
NEH to reduce staff and grants to States, which has hurt local 
communities in every congressional district.
  Some would have gone farther and had these agencies slated for 
termination--the NEA by September 30, 1997, and the NEH by September 
30, 1998. Fortunately, such proposals were eliminated before final 
passage of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997. We must 
keep them from ever becoming law and prevent the NEA and NEH from being 
eliminated.
  Legislation to reauthorize the NEA and NEH--only to have them phased 
out--was rushed last year through the formerly named Economic and 
Educational Opportunities Committee. The arguments used then against 
both agencies were skewed. Those wanting to eliminate the NEA 
overemphasized a few, select projects believed improper for the 
Government to fund. Efforts to typify these projects which make up a 
very small percentage of all projects handled by the NEA jeopardized 
all other educational and meaningful theater, dance, orchestra, 
literature, folk arts, arts education, and many other activities 
enjoyed in our communities. The NEH was likewise brought into the mix.
  Such tactics are still being employed particularly by NEA opponents, 
despite several changes in the operation of this agency under the 
leadership of its Chair, Jane Alexander. Throughout 1994, the NEA 
performed a comprehensive review of grant review and monitoring 
procedures, tightened guidelines, and eliminated subgranting to third 
party entities which had allowed projects to bypass strict NEA 
application review. In 1995, the NEA conducted a reduction-in-force by 
40 percent, while being threatened with further restrictions by 
Congress to eliminate grants to individual artists and abolish seasonal 
operating support to organizations. These additional restrictions 
became law in April 1996, following weeks of an unprecedented 
Government shutdown, included in the omnibus appropriations bill. At 
the end of 1996, the NEA released its first round of grants under a 
newly revamped grant structure, approving more than 300 projects 
totaling almost $18 million.
  The NEA has clearly been responding to direction from Congress to 
rework the way it operates. It is wrong for this agency to be further 
subjected to unreasonable scrutiny and criticism.
  Similar hostility toward the NEH is unwarranted and unjustified.
  This Congress must approve President Clinton's request to restore 
funding for the NEA and NEH to adequate levels at $136 million for each 
agency. Many State budgets are already strained and cannot substitute 
for Federal support from the NEA and NEH.
  In fiscal year 1997 in the State of Hawaii alone, the NEA funded the 
Hawaii Alliance for Arts in Education at $50,000 for Hula Ki'i--a 
complex of Hawaiian traditional arts to be integrated into school 
curricula on the islands of Moloka'i, Oahu, and Kaua'i. The NEA has 
also funded the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts in Honolulu to 
support a 2-year statewide traditional arts apprenticeship program and 
production of a radio series featuring documentary interviews with 
apprenticeship participants. I find these and other projects given 
grants in the past to be very worthwhile and valuable to residents of 
Hawaii, as well as tourists visiting my State.
  The NEH has, since 1977, approved challenge grants to Hawaii totaling 
$910,700, which has allowed humanities institutions to raise more than 
$2.7 million in private funding.
  For example, Hawai'i Pacific University is using a $575,000 NEH 
challenge grant to raise more than $1.7 million in private gifts for a 
self-sustaining endowment that will support a visiting professorship in 
the humanities, a senior chair in world history, and information 
technology acquisitions. NEH also helped in the wake of destruction 
caused by Hurricane Iniki by making eight emergency grants to damaged 
libraries, archives, and museums totaling $202,000.
  We must continue to support the NEA and NEH on the merits of positive 
impacts these agencies have in our local communities. I urge my 
colleagues to support restoration of funding for both agencies, and 
continued dedication to arts and humanities.
  Mr. MANTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in 
expressing my support for continued Federal funding for the arts, which 
play a critical role in our communities and our schools. I would like 
to thank my colleague from New York, Congresswoman Slaughter, for 
scheduling this special order.
  As a member of the Congressional Arts Caucus, I take a special 
interest in protecting the future of art programs. Because most 
cultural programs cannot survive solely on private funding, we must 
continue to ensure they receive adequate public support.
  The arts play an essential role throughout our Nation, in both rural 
and urban areas. In my district of Queens, I am pleased to represent a 
number of theaters, museums, and dance groups who enrich our 
neighborhoods with their talents. Funding cuts would be devastating for 
these organizations. In fiscal year 1997, I was pleased to see 12 
cultural groups in my district received Federal grants for their 
projects. In addition, I have been pleased to participate in the 
congressional art competition, where one of my young constituents, Ji 
Mi Yang, was the most recent winner from the Seventh District. I look 
forward to participating in this competition again in 1997.
  Art programs play a vital role in our communities and in our schools. 
By enhancing art programs in our schools, we encourage the creative 
side of students while producing more well-rounded, self-confident 
individuals. Art programs enhance our communities. People of all social 
classes enjoy music, theater, art, and dance. Bringing these enjoyments 
to our neighborhoods strengthens the local economy while enhancing 
cultural understanding.
  President Clinton articulated his strong support for the arts and 
humanities during his State of the Union speech. Recently, the 
President's Committee on the Arts and Humanities released a report, 
``Creative America,'' which reemphasized the need to support

[[Page H945]]

art programs and made several recommendations for strengthening 
cultural support in our society.
  During the 105th Congress, we will continue to debate the future of 
Federal funding for the arts and I urge my colleagues to join me in 
continuing to support funding for vital cultural programs.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, what I have found to be most 
inspiring in my life is the act of giving from people and organizations 
that have very little for themselves. This exemplary behavior is often 
exhibited by citizens in our nonprofit groups who, despite serious 
budget constraints, seem to be able to reach down deep and come up with 
a little more for those around them. The NEA and NEH are two such 
agencies.
  The U.S. Conference of Mayors has again written a letter urging the 
President, Speaker Newt Gingrich, and Speaker Lott to consider that,

       The arts and humanities serve as an essential and forceful 
     vehicle to educate our citizens, help our struggling youth, 
     spur economic growth in our communities, and bring us 
     together as a nation.

  And I could not agree with this sentiment more.
  As a proud Representative of one of the world's most celebrated 
cultural centers, I am appalled that this body would consider zeroing 
out funds for two of the most judicious and economical organizations by 
any business' standards. The fact is, that since the 40-percent 
reduction in arts funding, the American public spends only 38 cents per 
person to fund the largest cultural voice in America. The fact is, all 
other developed nations spend more than 2 to 10 times as much as the 
United States. The fact is, through its public-private partnerships, 
the NEA draws roughly $12 for every $1 in Federal funding it is 
awarded. The fact is, the arts have generated billions of dollars 
through many of our industries and return over 10 percent of what it 
earns through taxes. The fact is, the nonprofit arts industry 
represents nearly 1 percent of our work force.
  There are many, many more economic reasons to support the NEA and 
NEH--we all know them, and yet the Republican leadership is still on 
the warpath to kill Federal sponsorship of the arts. As far as I am 
concerned, the fight to end our Federal arts institutions is yet 
another assault on children. These are not the children of the 
privileged as the Republican leadership would have us believe, but the 
kids who are, at their best, culturally deprived, and at their worst, 
at-risk youth with little in their life to keep them going.
  I am extremely honored to serve and be served by what I consider the 
single greatest arts region in the world. New York City is not only 
revered for its famous collections and prosperous operas and dance 
productions, but because it has a rich tradition of sharing these 
treasures with those less fortunate within the community and throughout 
the United States. The wealthy will most likely always have their 
cultivation, but Federal dollars through the NEA and NEH provides 
access for those who would not. And even though Harris polls still show 
that Americans want higher investment in the arts, I think that we have 
no idea how these agencies touch our lives.
  We can find so much waste in our Government departments, not least of 
all Defense, but the NEA and NEH have the most flawless budgetary 
records. The radical right has been very clever in distorting small 
glitches in NEA grants and have purposely misled the public. In 
reality, the NEA and the NEH are the greatest gifts we can offer our 
children and future generations and one of the most generous outreach 
services we can provide to the public.
  I think it is important to remember that only positive energy comes 
from these programs. We cannot lose when we invest in the arts. This 
meager investment helps us to learn more about our history and 
ourselves and conveys to us our common humanity and I would loathe to 
see the dying of this outstanding legacy.
  I fully stand by the President's decision to restore funding to these 
agencies to what they were a few years ago and am pleased to stand with 
my colleagues from across the aisle who understand what the value of 
these agencies is to the greatest Nation in the world. I would also 
like to thank my friend and colleague, Louise Slaughter, for her 
tireless efforts in defending the arts and for her most recent 
undertaking in rejuvenating the Congressional Member Organization for 
the Arts.
  Please support including the arts in our national agenda by fully 
funding the NEA, NEH, and IMLS at the President's suggested levels.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Speaker, we often lose sight of the 
positive effect that music, painting, theater, and dance have on our 
lives and the lives of our children. With that, I rise today as a 
reminder of the importance of the arts.
  Beyond the metropolitan theaters and museums, the arts touch our 
remote suburbs and rural areas through dance troupes and local choirs. 
Folk art festivals across the country provide an arena for creative 
expression that might be overlooked by the commercial arts industry. 
These local initiatives, in turn, spur the economy through increased 
tourism, and encourage a sense of community.
  In my home county of Suffolk, NY, approximately 100 arts 
organizations employ 400 full-time employees and over 2,000 part-time 
employees. The arts generate nearly $150 million in revenue for that 
county alone.
  However, exposure to the arts does much more than expand the job 
market. Support for the arts carries over into the classroom and the 
workplace. Recent studies have shown higher SAT scores among high 
school students with an art background and stronger math skills among 
children who study music at an early age.
  Perhaps more important are the analytic and creative skills developed 
through involvement with the arts. These skills not only help children 
excel in our classrooms, but help adults excel in the workplace. Think 
of your own office. Just as we in Congress expect innovative thinking 
from our staff, all industry relies on resourceful and imaginative 
workers to remain strong.
  The arts have the potential to enrich the lives of all Americans. 
Without our support, they may simply become the privilege of an urban 
elite. I urge my colleagues to consider the many benefits of the arts.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow the Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Interior will receive testimony on fiscal year 1998 appropriations for 
the National Endowment for the Arts. These are very important 
deliberations. I believe they will provide a very important barometer 
as to whether the 105th Congress will return this body to a course of 
bipartisan sanity and civility.
  I believe those who pursued a strategy of defunding and dismantling 
the NEA in the 104th Congress made a mistake. I believe those who 
seized upon a few questionable grants to attempt to undo what has been 
achieved in 31 years, with consistent bipartisan support, were 
misguided. I hope that this Congress will reverse that course and 
support the President's proposal to strengthen the NEA.
  I believe efforts to defund the NEA in the 104th were bad public 
policy. It was bad public policy because it was indiscriminate in its 
effort to correct a perceived wrong. If indeed the peer panel review 
system, in a few instances, made decisions of questionable taste with 
regard to what the American people would want to support with public 
funds, that was not a sufficient reason to reduce the NEA's 
appropriation by nearly 40 percent.
  When we reflect on what the arts mean to this society, I think we 
will all see that supporting the NEA is something on which we should 
all agree. We need to reflect on the power of the arts to bring the 
many ingredients of the American melting pot, or as Marc Morial, the 
mayor of New Orleans, recently called it, the American gumbo, together 
in savory harmony.
  This harmony is not always easy or obvious. Nevertheless, I can't 
think of anything else that is more in the national interest than the 
promotion of understanding and the exploration of the complexity of our 
identity. As the agency best equipped and most directly tasked to 
encourage the purposes of art, the NEA should be treated as a budgetary 
priority, not as a budgetary luxury. The NEA should not be viewed as 
expendable because it is, in fact, essential.
  Do we really want to jeopardize programs like the Mosaic Youth 
Theater of Detroit, an afterschool program that develops young theater 
talent in a multicultural setting? Through this program young people 
receive movement and voice training. They are instructed in 
scriptwriting and technical production. They create original works and 
apply what they have learned in performances at community centers, 
hospitals, and nursing homes. Through a 1-week residency at a college 
campus, these youth are exposed to university life. I submit to you 
that this program is far more typical of what the NEA supports than the 
handful of grants that were used to shock the 104th Congress into 
reducing support for that agency.
  The American people have made it clear that they want change, and 
that they expect this change to spring from bipartisan efforts. 
Americans want thoughtful change. In the 104th Congress, NEA funding 
came under indiscriminate attack. Fortunately, these attacks were 
moderated, and I look forward to working with my colleagues in the 
105th Congress to further show our support for the arts.
  As a result of NEA funding cuts in the 104th Congress, my district, 
the 14th District of Michigan, received exactly zero in direct funds 
for fiscal year 1996. NEA funding for Michigan went from $697,000 in 
fiscal year 1995 to $520,000 in fiscal year 1996, a reduction of 25 
percent. By the way, these levels of funding demonstrate just how 
specious the budget-busting argument is when applied to the NEA. One 
needs the most powerful of electron microscopes to find such amounts in 
a Federal

[[Page H946]]

budget that has topped $1.5 trillion in the last several fiscal years.
  As many of you know, I have had a longstanding and deep commitment to 
American music, especially jazz. The downsizing of the NEA, dictated by 
the 104th Congress, led to an elimination of the NEA's music program 
and of all individual grants to jazz artists, with the exception of the 
Jazz Masters Awards.
  How does that sound? The world's greatest democracy eradicates its 
music program? The world's greatest democracy eliminates funding for 
individuals who travel the globe as cultural ambassadors, demonstrating 
in their very art the superiority of the democratic form of government? 
I would say it sounds like the Nation's leading arts agency was forced 
to virtually abandon what the 100th Congress, in House Concurrent 
Resolution 57, which ``designated as a rare and valuable national 
American treasure * * *.''
  I am sure that there are thousands of artists and creative workers of 
all disciplines who feel similarly abandoned. I hope that the 105th 
Congress will be remembered for many positive achievements, foremost 
among them, the restoration and strengthening of the NEA.

                          ____________________