[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 114 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H5653-H5659]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 363 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 2584.

                              {time}  2115


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 2584) making appropriations for the Department of the 
Interior, environment,

[[Page H5654]]

and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and 
for other purposes, with Mr. Paulsen (Acting Chair) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, 
an amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg) is 
pending, and the bill had been read through page 105, line 13.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. The National Endowment for the Arts has a 40-year 
history of investing in communities across the country to expand access 
to the arts. The NEA has awarded 2,400 grants, spanning communities in 
all 435 congressional districts.
  The proposed cuts to the NEA would have a crippling effect on a 
program that has been proven to work. Often when I talk about the arts 
and how I feel about them, I always say how thankful I am to be able to 
work in an art building that is a masterpiece, but I'm going to be 
practical tonight. All we're interested in is money, and that's what 
I'm going to talk about. I hope that people will pay attention to what 
we get for that little bit of money.
  In FY 2010, the Federal Government invested $167.5 million in the NEA 
for the purpose of providing funding to nonprofit arts organizations. 
That funding created $166.2 billion in total economic activity, 
supported 5.7 million jobs, and--listen to this one--generated to the 
U.S. Treasury $12.6 billion in tax revenue. That does not include the 
State tax revenue or the local tax revenue. So we spent $167 million 
and got back $12.6 billion.
  I defy anybody in here to tell us that we get that kind of return on 
any money we spend here. I wish we could find more ways to multiply our 
money by such a magnitude while enhancing the public good at the same 
time. Investment opportunities like these are few and far between, and 
we should be expanding our investment in such a successful program, not 
cutting its funding to the bone.
  I am the proud co-chair of the Congressional Arts Caucus, a group 
that has supported the NEA for almost 30 years. The Arts Caucus is 
composed of 186 dedicated, bipartisan Members who are committed to the 
growth and the success of the arts. Why? Because the arts make a 
difference.
  The NEA reached its peak level of funding in fiscal year 1992, but it 
has never fully recovered from a 40 percent cut in fiscal year 1996 
when, once again, people mischaracterized the work of the NEA. We have 
seen progress with increasing NEA funding since fiscal year 2008, but 
just last year, the NEA was forced to deal with a crippling cut again 
to its annual budget. If this year's appropriations bill takes effect, 
the NEA will have had its budget cut by 20 percent in just the last few 
months. These cuts are not sustainable and do great harm to the success 
of the arts sector across the country.
  There is widespread national support for the NEA and the arts, 
including from companies like Westinghouse and Bravo. Actually, what 
really happened so much for us that was so good was when Bravo and 
Westinghouse particularly said they would rather hire people who had 
backgrounds in art because of what they were able to do--their 
innovation and using both sides of the brain. Bravo was wonderful, 
advertising all the time how important arts are to the children in this 
country. The bipartisan U.S. Conference of Mayors made art a priority 
in their 10-point plan, saying Federal resources must also be invested 
in nonprofit arts organizations through their local arts agencies with 
the full funding of the Federal arts and cultural agencies.

                              {time}  2120

  In addition, I have a letter from 26 national art organizations 
urging Congress to prevent any further reduction to the investment in 
our Nation's arts and culture infrastructure, which I would like to 
submit for the Record.
  The simple truth is that funding of the arts creates jobs. There are 
756,007 arts-related businesses in the United States that employ 3 
million people. In my district, there are 1,229 arts-related businesses 
that employ 15,864 people. And remember what's already been said so 
well by Mr. Simpson is that this is seed money from the National 
Endowment of the Arts which brings in other money--public money, 
private money--which is terribly important to make these programs 
survive. And these programs, as I've already pointed out, are an 
economic gold mine. They employ creative workforce, they spend money 
locally, they generate government revenue, and are a cornerstone of 
tourism and economic development.
  Along with creating and supporting jobs, the arts provide job skills 
to our Nation's youth--this is very important to understand--that are 
marketable to the innovative companies that drive our economy and push 
America to the forefront in the global marketplace. I've already 
mentioned Westinghouse, but there are many more.
  Exposure to the arts fosters learning, discovery, and achievement in 
our country. This is, again, simply a fact. Research has proven 
participation in arts education programs stimulate the creative, 
holistic, subjective, and intuitive portions of the human brain.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman from New York has 
expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Ms. Slaughter was allowed to proceed for 2 
additional minutes.)
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. For example, from what we've been told by the 
University of California-Davis, the only doctors who really understand 
what they hear in a stethoscope are those who have studied music. High 
school music students score 102 points higher on the SATs than their 
peers. Students with 4 years of art in high school obtain 57 points 
more on their SAT.
  So we're making an investment in our students and our future.
  But they play other important roles elsewhere in the economy.
  Businesses are attracted to communities with a strong arts sector. 
And we see that everywhere there is art in existence, the presence of 
the arts can revitalize rural areas, inner cities and areas struggling 
with poverty. Cultural tourism brings in $192 billion every year to the 
U.S. economy.
  Listen to those figures. I hope to goodness everybody is as impressed 
as I am.
  Furthermore, American arts are an important export for our country, 
bringing in $30 billion more every year.
  One statistic that I found particularly telling is that in 2010, the 
attendance at three New York museums--the Met, MoMA, and the 
Guggenheim--exceeded the attendance of all of the New York professional 
sports teams, all of them combined, by over 300,000 visits. People are 
interested in arts due in part to the NEA, and they come again and 
again and bring their families.
  Along with all of this is a great intrinsic value that we know. I 
really must say that a lot of people think that art is not important, 
and they don't think about it or what it does to the human spirit. Art 
in so many ways tells us who we were, who we are, and who we hope to 
be. And if you think you're not affected by it, tell me what happens to 
you when you hear ``Taps,'' ``Amazing Grace,'' ``America the 
Beautiful,'' and the stirring that it gives in your whole person and 
makes you want to be better than you are.
  Please, please don't decimate this program in which we invest so 
little but get back so very much.

                                                    July 25, 2011.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative, as the FY12 Interior Appropriations 
     bill comes to the floor for consideration by the full House, 
     we write to urge you to prevent further cuts to funding for 
     the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). The direct federal 
     investment in the artistic capacity of our nation supports 
     thousands of jobs, strengthens communities, improves lifelong 
     learning, and boosts this country's international competitive 
     advantage.
       Every U.S. Congressional district benefits from an NEA 
     grant, leveraging additional support from a diverse range of 
     private sources to combine funding from government, business, 
     foundation, and individual donors. The NEA awarded almost 
     2,400 grants in those districts in FY 2010. The NEA has 
     provided strategic leadership and investment in the arts for 
     more than 40 years. Americans can now see professional 
     productions and exhibitions of high quality in their own 
     hometowns. Among the proudest accomplishments of the NEA is 
     the growth of arts activity in areas of the nation that were 
     previously underserved or not served at all, especially in 
     rural and inner-city communities.

[[Page H5655]]

       Nationally, there are 668,267 businesses in the United 
     States involved in the creation or distribution of the arts 
     that employ 2.9 million people including visual artists, 
     performing artists, managers, marketers, technicians, 
     teachers, designers, carpenters, and workers in a wide 
     variety of trades and professions. By direct grants and 
     through allocations to each state, NEA dollars are 
     distributed widely to strengthen the arts infrastructure and 
     ensure broad access to the arts for communities across the 
     country.
       The NEA funds school-based and community-based programs 
     that help children and youth acquire knowledge and 
     understanding of, and skills in, the arts. The NEA also 
     supports educational programs for adults, collaborations 
     between state arts agencies and state education agencies, and 
     partnerships between arts institutions and educators.
       We understand fully the shared sacrifice that we all must 
     make in order to help get our Nation's fiscal house in order. 
     But funding for the National Endowment for the Arts was 
     already reduced by $12.5 million in FY11, and the FY12 
     Interior bill currently includes an additional $20 million in 
     funding cuts. We urge you to prevent any further reduction to 
     the investment in our nation's arts and culture 
     infrastructure when the Interior Appropriations bill is 
     considered on the House floor.
           Sincerely,
         American Architectural Foundation, American Association 
           of Museums, American Federation of Musicians, American 
           Institute for Conservation of Historic & Artistic 
           Works, American Music Center, Americans for the Arts, 
           Association of Art Museum Directors, Association of 
           Performing Arts Presenters, Chamber Music America, 
           Chorus America, College Art Association, Dance/USA, 
           Fractured Atlas, League of American Orchestras, 
           Literary Network, Local Learning: The National Network 
           for Folk Arts in Education, National Alliance for Media 
           Arts & Culture, National Alliance for Musical Theatre, 
           National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, National 
           Association of Latino Arts and Culture, National 
           Council for the Traditional Arts, National Performance 
           Network, OPERA America, Performing Arts Alliance, 
           Society for the Arts in Healthcare, Theatre 
           Communications Group.

  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CICILLINE. In Congress, we have to, of course, responsibly cut 
spending, but at the same time we also have to make the necessary 
investments that create jobs now, guarantee the future strength of our 
economy, and renew the vitality of our communities. And that's why we 
should absolutely reject this effort to further reduce the investment, 
our Nation's investment, in the National Endowment for the Arts.
  Our targeted Federal investment in the arts through the NEA is very 
modest and is really crucial to spurring the contributions of corporate 
and foundation partners through their support through philanthropy, 
sponsorships, and volunteerism that help to sustain and leverage arts 
investments in communities all across this country.
  This investment in the arts becomes all the more important during a 
time when States and cities all across this country face greater and 
greater fiscal constraints and at the same time are searching for 
opportunities to leverage Federal dollars and to spur economic 
development and job creation.
  I represent a State that has realized an extraordinary return on 
investments generated by the arts. In Rhode Island, the presence of the 
arts is really sown into the fabric of our communities and of our 
economy. According to recent data from Americans for the Arts, in just 
the First Congressional District, in my district alone, more than 1,400 
arts-related businesses employ nearly 6,000 people, and that represents 
more than 5 percent of the businesses in my district.
  As the former mayor of Providence, I've seen firsthand the economic 
impact of the arts and the power of art to transform people and places.
  I know the benefits of the arts in enriching our communities and 
uniting them as well. Arts nourish our soul.
  The United States Conference of Mayors sent a letter to Members of 
Congress urging us to protect funding in the arts and to reject this 
amendment, recognizing that arts create jobs and produce tax revenues, 
that arts put people to work, and that arts attract tourism revenue. 
Arts in the creative industries are an enormous part of what fuels our 
local economies, bringing hundreds of thousands of visitors to our 
cities, generating activity in restaurants, hotels, transportation, and 
hospitality services.
  This activity not only strengthens the vitality of our communities, 
it generates revenues for State and local governments. Across our 
country, the arts industry provides much more than aesthetic benefits. 
It creates meaningful economic benefits and opportunities.
  During this period of budget austerity, we shouldn't neglect those 
investments with a proven positive rate of return. We shouldn't siphon 
off the fuel that helps power the American arts industry, a sector of 
our economy comprised of more than 750,000 businesses, employing nearly 
3 million people nationwide, and generating more than $166 billion in 
economic activity.
  Cutting the National Endowment for the Arts undermines our 
responsibility to create jobs and grow our economy, and diminishes us 
as a Nation.
  As one study demonstrates, when we consider the overall direct 
Federal cultural spending of $1.4 billion, we're achieving a return on 
investment that's nearly 9 to 1. If we're really serious about 
strengthening our economy, putting more Americans back to work, and 
reining in our deficit, then we have to be smart about our investments 
and about our reductions.
  With estimates indicating that every dollar of Federal funds invested 
in the arts generates $9 in economic benefits, further reductions to 
the National Endowment of the Arts are counterproductive and, in fact, 
will move our Nation backwards. It moves us backwards not only in the 
effect that we lose the immediate economic return on the investments, 
but this cut also pushes our country further behind our competitors and 
the global economy.
  It was one of the great giants of the United States Senate, the great 
and passionate leadership of Rhode Island Senator Claiborne Pell, that 
led to the creation of the National Endowment for the Arts in 1965, the 
program that we're fighting to defend today. In 1963, Senator Pell 
opened hearings on preliminary legislation on this issue by stating, 
``I believe that this cause and its implementation has a worldwide 
application, for as our cultural life is enhanced and strengthened, so 
does it project itself into the world beyond our shores.
  ``Let us apply renewed energies to the very concepts we seek to 
advance, a true renaissance, the reawakening, the quickening, and above 
all, the unstunted growth of our cultural vitality.''
  In those words Senator Pell said clearly that this disinvestment that 
we're discussing today for the National Endowment for the Arts nearly 
50 years later is a stark and appalling contrast to the renaissance and 
reawakening embodied in the National Endowment for the Arts.
  For too long, the arts have been the first target for spending cuts 
in our public schools and here at the Federal level. It is at our own 
economic peril that we continue to deprive our youth and our 
communities of their connection to the arts.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.

                              {time}  2130

  Mr. CICILLINE. I ask unanimous consent to be given 1 additional 
minute to conclude.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Rhode Island?
  Mr. WALBERG. I object.
  The Acting CHAIR. Objection is heard.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. I move to strike the last word, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. As sure as Wednesday follows Tuesday, you can count on 
congressional Republicans to propose gutting programs benefiting the 
arts and humanities. It's as predictable as it is irresponsible and 
unwise. It's the same old penny-wise, pound-foolish approach we have 
come to expect from a party that wants to spend lavishly on corporate 
giveaways while cutting just about every initiative that empowers the 
American people and improves lives and our communities.
  I can't believe that while the Nation stands on the brink of default, 
while Republican stubbornness puts us less than a week away from 
economic calamity, we're having a debate about funding for the arts 
that represents 3

[[Page H5656]]

cents, 3 cents for every $100 of nonmilitary discretionary spending. 
Three cents, Mr. Chairman.
  Believe me, the budget for the National Endowment for the Arts isn't 
breaking the bank. Grants to support museums and theater companies are 
not what caused a huge deficit, and cutting them will not put us on a 
fiscally responsible course. In fact, investments in the arts more than 
pay for themselves. For every $1 spent on arts programs, the country 
gets back $9 in economic benefit.
  My friends on the other side of the aisle love to make arts funding a 
scapegoat. They never miss an opportunity to turn a spending debate 
into a culture war referendum on art. But let's be clear: The arts 
represent a vital economic industry, a mainstream employer of millions 
of Americans, and an integral part of a functioning society. The 
nonprofit arts sector generates more than $12 billion in tax revenues 
and more than $166 billion in economic activity every single year.
  Communities that have a vibrant artistic life are magnets for tourism 
and new businesses that create jobs. There's also evidence that 
communities that embrace the arts tend to have higher real estate 
values, more civic activities and volunteerism, less crime, and lower 
poverty rates.
  The arts are also a critical ingredient in the development of our 
children, with research showing that students receiving arts education 
perform better academically and are more likely to succeed in life.
  But despite all the ways that arts support the common good, 
Republican leaders want to cut NEA. Instead, Mr. Chairman, I think it's 
time we cut Big Oil subsidies and cut loopholes for corporate jet 
owners. Arts programs have already taken a budget hit in recent years 
and are trying to do more with less. If we can give billions in 
subsidies to oil companies that are already raking in record profits, 
then surely we can maintain modest investments in the nonprofit arts 
sector that makes a vital contribution to American life.
  Let's stop blaming small agencies for a fiscal crisis that was caused 
by three wars and tax cuts for the people who need them the least. 
Let's maintain robust funding for NEA.
  With that, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from 
Rhode Island.
  Mr. CICILLINE. I thank the gentlewoman.
  For too long the arts have been the first target for spending cuts in 
our public schools here at the Federal level. It is at our own economic 
peril that we continue to deprive our youth and our community of their 
connection to the arts. I have seen on so many occasions the power of 
music and dance and theater to ignite the imagination of a young 
person, that causes them to stay in school, to follow their passion, 
and ultimately to realize their dreams.
  Today's global economy demands an even greater level of creativity, 
innovative thinking, and entrepreneurship, a 21st century skill set 
that is enhanced by exposure to the arts in learning and in daily life. 
I participated in an arts education roundtable with CEOs from all 
across the country who said that those skills of creative problem 
solving, of innovation, of entrepreneurship were skills they were 
looking for in the workers of the 21st century. And the arts nourishes 
and enhances those skills.
  We cannot underestimate the importance of maintaining critical 
Federal funding for our arts to fuel our national economic recovery, to 
grow our local economies, to teach our children, and to expand our 
civic discourse during these trying economic times.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to reject further reductions to the 
National Endowment for the Arts because now, more than ever, we need 
the National Endowment for the reawakening, quickening, and unstunted 
growth of not only our cultural vitality but of our economic prosperity 
as well.
  Mr. YARMUTH. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Chairman, when we, in this House, decide how the 
taxpayers' money is going to be spent, it represents a statement of our 
values, a statement of our priorities. And the question of whether we 
should adequately fund the National Endowment for the Arts is one of 
those that speaks loudly to our values. It speaks loudly to our respect 
for the creative genius of human beings. It speaks loudly about our 
understanding of what the human soul is about.
  We've heard much documentation of the economic impact of the arts 
throughout our country, $165 billion annually in economic activity. I 
certainly can attest to the fact that in my community of Louisville, 
Kentucky, more than 20,000 of my constituents are involved actively, 
professionally in the arts. We are one of the only communities that has 
resident theater, resident opera, ballet, children's theater, a vibrant 
visual arts community. It is one of the things that significantly 
enhances the quality of life in my community. It's one of those things 
that brings people to my community. So the economic importance of the 
arts is undeniable.
  But I ask again about our priorities. The amount of money that we're 
talking about now, roughly $10 million over a period of years, we spent 
in the first few minutes of our activity in Libya. The first few 
Tomahawk missiles we launched there, that was $10 million. We spend $10 
million in less than 1 hour in Afghanistan, less than 1 hour. So here 
we're talking about millions of jobs supported by funding from the 
National Endowment for the Arts, $165 billion in economic activity, 
against all of the other things we do where there is so little payback 
for where we spend the taxpayers' money.
  There are two things I would like to mention in addition to kind of 
the value-added aspects of arts funding.
  If you think back over the history of mankind, what has survived of 
the great civilizations of this world? The only thing that has survived 
has been the creative product of the minds of men and women throughout 
history. Literature, music, architecture, paintings, sculpture, these 
are the only things that have survived.

                              {time}  2140

  If you look around this glorious room that we have the privilege of 
serving in--famous painting of George Washington, Lafayette, the 
architecture that's represented here--this is all the creative product 
of the men and women of generations. This is what our soul speaks to 
the world, to generations to come, and this is what we're talking about 
funding.
  One of the greatest exports that we have from this country is our 
cultural product. We export music; we export film; we export drama, 
theater, all of these things, activities funded by the National 
Endowment for the Arts. So when we say to our taxpayers, our 
constituents, what are your values, we can say, you know, those 
Tomahawk missiles are wonderful.
  And I certainly understand that we need to defend our country. But 
when we talk about our contributions to the history of mankind, 
humankind, it is undeniable that what we invest, the small amount we 
invest in supporting our creative genius, will be paid back many, many 
times over.
  So I am proud to stand here and support funding for the National 
Endowment for the Arts, opposing the Walberg amendment, which would 
further cut the funding that has already been substantially reduced, 
and stand for the values of the millions and millions of men and women 
and children who not only participate in artistic activities, but also 
benefit immeasurably through an enhanced quality of life in our 
country.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLT. I move to strike the requisite number of words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, last month I gathered almost 200 individuals 
interested in the arts and humanities to discuss National Endowment for 
the Humanities and National Endowment for the Arts programs. The 
turnout was impressive. But considering their eagerness to win 
endowment grants, it was also a reminder of how tight funding is for 
these critical programs.
  My friend, poet Paul Muldoon, read some poetry to the attendees and 
reminded all, in his words, the NEA and the NEH are not properly 
funded. It is a national disgrace. Now, that was before the amendment 
that is here tonight that would cut the NEA even further.

[[Page H5657]]

  The NEA and the NEH help ensure a well-rounded education, and result 
in a well-rounded society. Now, of course the National Endowment for 
the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities are different, 
but they are similar in what they bring to our Nation.
  The arts and humanities inspire our children to explore their own 
creativity and encourage positive development in the course of their 
educational careers. The arts and humanities are a fundamental 
component of our society and they, indeed, warrant Federal funding. The 
arts and humanities help us know ourselves as a people.
  Just a few weeks ago, here on this floor, the House approved a bill 
that increased the spending for the Department of Defense by $17 
billion. The total funding for the endowments is hardly more than a 
percent of that increase in defense spending that was passed. Talk 
about misplaced priorities.
  I'm reminded of the often told exchange between Scientist Robert 
Wilson, the Director of Fermilab, when he was testifying before the 
Senate and Senator Pastore. The Senator asked, with regard to a science 
experiment at Fermilab, whether it would help defend this country 
against the Soviet Union. Replied Dr. Wilson, no, Senator Pastore, this 
will not help defend us against the Soviet Union, but it will help make 
our country more worth defending.
  This amendment is based on the premise that arts and humanities are a 
luxury. The author of this amendment to cut the NEA further says 
America is impoverished. Mr. Chairman, I'll tell you what would leave 
America really impoverished is if we strangle the arts and humanities.
  We've heard what the arts contribute to our economy. The Americans 
for the Arts, in its report, Arts and Economic Prosperity, details that 
the arts support more than 5 million jobs and generate tens of billions 
of dollars in government revenue.
  Arts are good for our cultural development, yes. They are good for 
our society at large and good for our economic development as well.
  I've heard from a number of my constituents on this matter, and 
nearly everyone has pleaded with me to preserve as much funding as 
possible for the arts and for the humanities. As one of them said 
poignantly, ``A Nation without culture is a Nation without a soul.''
  I strongly oppose this amendment and other efforts to strangle the 
arts and humanities in America and to defund the National Endowment for 
the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment. Our focus today ought to be on jobs. And as some of my 
colleagues have already said, funding the arts creates jobs. For 
negligible investments, we create lots of jobs, because not only are 
the arts supported, but when you have artistic programs, restaurants 
and other activities generate jobs all over the community.
  And our focus ought to be on education. Those children, for example, 
who are involved in of the arts, do better in school.
  Now we're trying to cut funding for the arts in this amendment, and 
we cannot ignore why all these cuts are necessary. Last December we 
passed a tax cut of $800 billion, $400 billion a year. Now, we're 
looking to make cuts. Most of the projections are that we need $4 
trillion over the next 10 years in deficit reduction, $400 billion a 
year. I hope we don't ignore the fact that that's the same number, $400 
billion tax cuts a year, and now we're looking for $400 billion 
spending cuts a year.
  So when we talk about cutting the arts, when we talk about cutting 
Social Security and Medicare and education and everything else, we 
cannot ignore the fact that all of these cuts are designed to preserve 
the tax cuts that we passed last December. And so to preserve those tax 
cuts--many are going to millionaires, multimillionaires, and oil 
companies--we find ourselves having to deal with this amendment to cut 
the arts.
  Mr. Chairman, we should not be lulled into accepting caps. Caps just 
delay the inevitable because caps don't cut anything today. But when 
you start appropriating under the caps, in a few weeks or a few months, 
we'll find that there's not enough money for the arts, there's not 
enough money for Head Start, there's not enough money for education or 
Social Security or Medicare. So when you accept the caps, you're 
ultimately going to make these cuts.
  We don't have any crisis today, Mr. Chairman, because some don't want 
to increase the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is a perfunctory 
responsibility of this Congress. We've already spent the money. The 
debt ceiling just acknowledges what we've already done. We need to just 
pass the debt ceiling and get back to the regular order where we make 
choices.
  Do we want to cut Social Security and Medicare and the arts in order 
to preserve tax cuts, many going to the oil companies and 
multimillionaires? I hope not, and we should begin by defeating this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, in Minnesota we understand that the arts are 
an essential part of our economy and the number of jobs it creates. The 
arts are so vital to our economy and our development and civic life 
that in 2008, Minnesotans voted to amend our State constitution to 
raise money, yes, to tax themselves and dedicate part of the revenue to 
the arts.
  Minnesota is the only State in the country where there's a dedicated 
public funding source for the arts. In our Constitution, Mr. Chair, we 
passed a legacy amendment. Hunters, anglers, conservationists, parents, 
seniors, all came together to say the arts, along with preserving our 
environment, is integral to our legacy, to our way of life in 
Minnesota.
  In my district alone, the arts employ over 8,000 people. And the arts 
and the culture industry contributes over $830 million to Minnesota's 
economy. Investing in the arts makes economic sense, and it's good 
public policy.
  As has been pointed out, for every dollar that is spent by the NEA, 
$9 in economic activity is generated. We must make tough choices, given 
this fiscal crisis, and I believe the NEA's budget has been targeted 
and it has been shrunk enough.

                              {time}  2150

  The NEA's budget has been cut 20 percent since 2010. Our artists, 
poets, writers, musicians, producers, sculptors, singers, dancers, 
photographers, and actors contribute millions of dollars to our local 
economy and create a vibrant social space for us to come together. And 
we hear time and time again from the major corporations and from the 
start-up companies, from computer companies to health care companies to 
our universities that it is American creativity and space for the arts 
that allows America to move forward.
  So I strongly oppose this cut, and I reject any further attacks on 
the NEA's budget.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORAN. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, you've heard it. I will explain: I rose 
previously to claim the time in opposition, now I am rising to strike 
the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, if this was not such a late hour, we would have had 
five or six times as many Members rising in opposition to this 
amendment. And I trust they reflect the general sentiment of the 
country.
  Winston Churchill, at the height of World War II, was told by his 
budget director that to conserve money for armaments, they needed to 
cut the arts. And he turned to him and said, If we do that, what is it 
that we're fighting for?
  The arts reflect the highest aspirations of our humanity. And in 
fact, in this country, they're a reflection of the true American 
spirit--our talent, our ability to communicate, our ability to relate 
to one another.

[[Page H5658]]

  Now, let me be specific about what this amendment would do, because 
every single Member of this body has a direct grant from the National 
Endowment for the Arts going to that congressional district. If this 
amendment were to pass, more than $100 million in non-Federal matching 
funds for NEA awards would be lost. The number of Americans reached as 
a result will decline by 36 million compared to the number of Americans 
reached by NEA this year. The number of children and youth will decline 
by 3.6 million, and in fact there will be a near-17 percent decrease in 
State and regional partnerships.
  I think if the Members fully consider the impact of this, they will 
realize this is one of the most effective Federal Government programs 
that we have. We have a gentleman whose name is Rocco Landesman. He 
could be making considerably more than he's making today in income, but 
he has chosen to devote his time and attention to leading the National 
Endowment for the Arts. In fact, he has suggested that, given the 
fiscal situation that confronts us, perhaps we should reduce the number 
of platforms for artists so as to save money. But he is determined not 
to reduce the quality of artistic performance in this country.
  We have so many talented people, so much potential, and it is the NEA 
that reaches out and finds that potential all over the country. This is 
a fully national program. Every single congressional district benefits 
from grants from the NEA. And those grants expand the economy, the 
focus of the grant, multiple times--I'm trying to recall the number, I 
think it's five or six times at a minimum, many times 10, 20 times--the 
amount of money that is contributed to a particular artistic focus when 
the NEA decides that it's worthy of getting a grant.
  They have maintained their credibility. In fact, when they were under 
attack in the 1990s, they made sure that every grant passes a very high 
level of scrutiny. Even though I think most of us don't believe in 
censorship, they understand all the competing political pressures. They 
have navigated those political waters. The Our Town program that the 
chairman of the subcommittee referred to is a terrific program. It 
really develops the best of what America is all about.
  This has been a long night. We have tried to fight the good fight 
over here against any number of efforts to cut programs, to repeal 
legislation; but this is one of the most important.
  I would urge this body to reject this amendment, to show our support 
for the National Endowment for the Arts, and really for the phenomenal 
artistic talent that it underscores and generates in this country.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Chair, I rise today to speak of the importance of the 
National Endowment for the Arts. I would like to thank my friend and 
fellow Co-Chair of the Congressional Arts Caucus, Representative Louise 
Slaughter, for her tireless efforts in advocating for the arts over the 
years.
  Every day we witness the impact of the arts on our society. The arts 
in America are an integral component to our cultural vibrancy--
fostering creativity and bringing together communities. Museums, 
performing arts centers, galleries, historical societies, and other 
cultural institutions not only provide significant contributions to the 
social fabric of neighborhoods and communities, but also provide 
significant economic contributions. In my home district in 
Pennsylvania, 1,410 arts-related businesses provide nearly 6,000 jobs. 
It is for these reasons that I support responsible investments in the 
NEA.
  As our Nation is facing unprecedented financial challenges, it is 
critical that we address unsustainable levels of spending. To do this 
all Federal agencies and recipients of Federal dollars must share in 
making sacrifices. The fiscal year 2012 Interior Appropriations 
legislation already includes a 13 percent reduction in spending over 
fiscal year 2011 and a 20 percent reduction over 2010 for the NEA. 
Accordingly, I ask that my colleagues not support further cuts to the 
NEA and oppose the Walberg Amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                 National Endowment for the Humanities

                       grants and administration

       For necessary expenses to carry out the National Foundation 
     on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, $135,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended, of which $125,000,000 shall 
     be available for support of activities in the humanities, 
     pursuant to section 7(c) of the Act and for administering the 
     functions of the Act; and $10,000,000 shall be available to 
     carry out the matching grants program pursuant to section 
     10(a)(2) of the Act, including $8,000,000 for the purposes of 
     section 7(h): Provided, That appropriations for carrying out 
     section 10(a)(2) of such Act shall be available for 
     obligation only in such amounts as may be equal to the total 
     amounts of gifts, bequests, and devises of money, and other 
     property accepted by the chairman or by grantees of the 
     Endowment under the provisions of subsections 11(a)(2)(B) and 
     11(a)(3)(B) of such Act during the current and preceding 
     fiscal years for which equal amounts have not previously been 
     appropriated.


            Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 105, line 18, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(reduced by $13,500,000)''.
       Page 158, line 258, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $13,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would reduce funding 
for the National Endowment for the Humanities by a mere 10 percent.
  I have stood up here and offered amendment after amendment trying to 
highlight areas of our budget that we can afford reasonable cuts. If 
you add up all of those modest cuts, the Federal Government could end 
up saving a significant amount of money. We are facing a fiscal crisis 
in this Nation, a financial fiasco; and if we can't make the cuts that 
need to be made, this country is going to go into a total economic 
collapse.
  Now, if someone's broke, they sell their luxury car and get a more 
efficient one; they stop eating steak and lobster and eat more 
hamburger and hot dogs. They turn in their membership to the country 
club. All those things are beautiful things, nice things, luxury 
things. We have a lot of luxuries that we've been funding through the 
Federal Government for a long period of time. But, Mr. Chairman, we 
can't afford to continue doing so because we are in an economic 
emergency as a Nation. We are broke. We have unsustainable debt. We 
have unsustainable debt that's going to cause our children and our 
grandchildren to live at a lower standard than we live today if we keep 
this up.
  Mr. Chairman, in a race a number of years ago, I said Congress was 
sick; we need a doctor in the House. I'm a medical doctor, and I do 
addiction medicine. Government needs an intervention for its spending 
addiction. In addiction medicine we say, if there's no denial, there's 
no addiction. We've got a tremendous amount of denial about the 
economic crisis we face in this Nation. We've just simply got to stop 
the spending.
  When a business goes under water, it's overextended as the Federal 
Government is, what does it do? It lowers its borrowing level--if the 
lender doesn't do that--it starts trying to figure out how to reduce 
the debt, and then it goes through every aspect of its expenditures and 
tries to cut expenses all across the board in every area. The Federal 
Government needs to do the same.

                              {time}  2200

  And then the business will look at how to raise more revenue. Our 
Democratic colleagues say that we need to raise revenue by raising 
taxes, but that will just tax away jobs. We must create jobs here in 
America. We create jobs in America by getting the tax burden and the 
regulatory burden off the job creators, the small businesses here in 
America that are suffering and are suffocating with the burden of over-
regulation and taxes. We could create more revenue for the Federal 
Government,

[[Page H5659]]

not by raising taxes but by raising taxpayers, and we do that by 
putting people to work and creating a stronger economy. It's absolutely 
critical for the future of this Nation. We can't keep going down this 
road.
  The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for 
the Humanities, I've heard all the arguments, and for the Smithsonian 
Institute and other things that a lot of people think are very 
beautiful and nice, just like that luxury automobile, but we need to 
stop it. The future of our Nation depends upon it. I'm fighting for 
America. I'm fighting for the future of our children and my 
grandchildren. Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts does not 
need to be a priority in the midst of these trying times, and I urge my 
colleagues to support a very simple request to reduce its funding by 10 
percent.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, may I make a parliamentary inquiry?
  The Acting CHAIR. State your inquiry.
  Mr. MORAN. If the Committee does now rise, an amendment has been 
offered, would not the body, the Committee of the Whole, take up the 
conclusion of that amendment when we reconvene on the same bill the 
next time the bill is brought up, whether it be tomorrow, Friday, or 
Saturday?
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment will still be pending.
  The question is on the motion to rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Broun of Georgia) having assumed the chair, Mr. Paulsen, Acting Chair 
of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
2584) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, 
environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2012, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________