[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 156 (Saturday, November 8, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2227-E2228]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PLANNED SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION EXHIBIT ON SWEATSHOPS IS UNDER ATTACK 
                        BY THE APPAREL INDUSTRY

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. TOM LANTOS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, November 7, 1997

  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support 
for the Smithsonian Institution's planned exhibit on the history of 
sweatshops in America--``Between a Rock and a Hard Place: A Dialogue on 
American Sweatshops, 1820-Present.'' The exhibit is scheduled to open 
at the Smithsonian here in Washington in April 1998. Unfortunately, 
however, the U.S. apparel industry is seeking to prevent the display of 
this exhibit on the grounds that the exhibit will not present a 
balanced picture of the garment industry. Rather than letting an 
objective exhibit of historical and contemporary significance go 
forward, the California Fashion Association, which represents major 
clothing manufacturers in southern California, has vowed to turn the 
exhibit into a political football and prevent its display.
  Mr. Speaker, it is no surprise that clothing manufacturers are 
opposed to this exhibit. It is

[[Page E2228]]

also no surprise that the leaders of the opposition to this exhibit are 
from southern California--notorious for the El Monte apparel sweatshop 
in which some 70 Thai workers lived under slave-like conditions until 
the horror was discovered and the brutality was terminated. This, Mr. 
Speaker, was not a century ago--this was just 2 years ago in my home 
State.
  Make no mistake about it, Mr. Speaker, the garment industry's fear is 
not that the American people will view the history of sweatshops in the 
19th century but that they will view conditions in sweatshops operating 
today--in 1997.
  Sweatshops are in violation of our Nation's overtime, minimum-wage, 
and safety laws. Sweatshop operations are often underground and 
disguised, and monetary transactions in connection with these 
activities are usually done in cash. For these reasons, it is difficult 
to get a precise idea of how prevalent sweatshops really are. Some 
specialists have estimated that there are as many as 7,000 sweatshops 
across the United States.
  Sweatshops are often outside the law in other ways, not only evading 
wage and hour laws, but also avoiding the payment of Federal, State, 
and local taxes. Violation of local building codes is common, including 
such serious safety problems as blocked fire exits or no fire exits at 
all. The operators of these sweatshops seek out and exploit 
undocumented immigrants. Let me make one thing clear, Mr. Speaker, 
immigrants are not the cause of sweatshops, they are the victims of the 
operators of such vicious practices.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask that at this point, an excellent editorial--``Save 
the Sweatshops''--which appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle be 
placed in the Record.

           [From the San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 23, 1997]

                          Save the Sweatshops

       To its lasting credit, the Smithsonian Institution is 
     planning a hardedged exhibit on sweatshops, an historical 
     look at rapacity and exploitation that is still in our midst. 
     One poignant feature has raised the ire of the apparel 
     industry: a depiction of the El Monte factory raided in 1995 
     where some 70 Thai immigrants lived in peonage while cranking 
     out clothing.
       The exhibit, prepared in part with the help of California 
     state labor authorities, will borrow equipment seized in the 
     raid in order to re-create the dungeon-like sewing shop. Is 
     the factory typical of clothing factories? Obviously not. But 
     it should provoke thought about immigrants, their hunger for 
     work and the role of a vigilant government.
       The exhibit, which is due to open next April, will trace 
     sweatshops from early last century to the present. By its 
     very title, it deals with an unsavory back alley of American 
     working life. Along with El Monte, it will highlight the 
     epochal Triangle Shirtwaist fire in Manhattan that killed 146 
     women trapped in a sweatshop in 1911. Such episodes aren't 
     pretty, but brushing them away, as industry publicists would 
     like, would be a mistake.
       These critics may be counting on the Smithsonian to cave 
     in. Several years ago it wanted to mount an exhibit that 
     showed the Japanese death toll from two American atomic bombs 
     that ended World War II. Veterans groups objected saying the 
     decision to drop the bombs was not fairly explained, and the 
     museum eventually recast the exhibit in tamer form. That 
     debate had its own ingredients, and it would be a mistake to 
     compare it to the El Monte dispute.
       The Smithsonian, which serves as a curator of American 
     life, cannot survive such challenges and serve its mission 
     well. Critics who want to sanitize controversy deny everyone 
     a chance to experience history.

  Mr. Speaker, I further ask that two Letters to the Editor which 
appeared in the Los Angeles Times also be placed in the Record. The 
letters appeared in the newspaper after it published news stories about 
the controversy over the sweatshop exhibit in September of this year. 
The first letter is from I. Michael Heyman, the Secretary of the 
Smithsonian Institution, and the second is from Evan Smyth of Los 
Angeles:

    Letter of I. Michael Heyman, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution

       The Smithsonian Institution is an educational institution 
     that strives to make American history accessible, useful and 
     meaningful to the millions who view our exhibitions, read our 
     catalogues and participate in our public programs. It 
     occasionally presents difficult, unpleasant, or controversial 
     historical episodes, not out of any desire to embarrass, to 
     be unpatriotic, or to cause pain, but out of a responsibility 
     to convey a fuller, more inclusive history. By examining 
     historical incidents ripe with complexities and ambiguities, 
     we hope to stimulate greater understanding and appreciation 
     for the historical forces and choices that shaped America. 
     Ultimately, the Smithsonian Institution mounts these kinds of 
     exhibitions because we have confidence in the American 
     public's desire for candor and appreciation for important 
     historical stories.
       The exhibition, ``Between a Rock and a Hard Place: A 
     Dialogue on American Sweatshops, 1920-Present,'' scheduled to 
     open April 15, 1998, will be a balanced presentation, both in 
     the historical material it presents and the outside views and 
     participation it will include. We have sought to include the 
     voices of participants on all sides of this issue. Our 
     exhibition will be strong in scholarship, but equally it will 
     be sensitive to participants' concerns. We will continue to 
     reach out to all interested parties, including the 
     manufacturing, apparel and retail sectors, to ensure a fair 
     and balanced presentation.

                  Letter of Evan Smyth of Los Angeles

       The apparel industry trade groups claim that their position 
     could not be heard in an exhibit like the one proposed for 
     the Smithsonian. Perhaps they are right, but I would be very 
     interested to hear their position on sweatshops in light of 
     the following facts:
       The slave conditions at El Monte are a matter of public 
     record.
       One of the largest garment manufacturers in Southern 
     California, Guess, Inc., is currently scrambling to defend 
     itself against charges in a class-action lawsuit that minimum 
     wage and overtime violations are rampant in their 
     contractors' sweatshops. Guess, Inc., has been removed from a 
     Department of Labor trendsetters list because of recidivism 
     in its `fight' against wage-and-hour violations. Sweatshop 
     conditions appear to be the cornerstone of the apparel 
     industry rather than ``a few bad apples.''

     

                          ____________________