Norm Dicks

Mr. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I ask the gentleman from Wisconsin, is that the exact amount of the Slaughter amendment?

Mr. DICKS. We are having so much fun.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I think I have got the time, do I not?

Mr. DICKS. So the effort here by the majority, again, is to take the money now in front of it, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, it happens that the Indian Health Service comes before the National Endowment.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, why cannot we have a vote, as we did earlier, to put the money into the National Endowment for the Arts, Humanities and Museum Services, which clearly was the intent of the House when we had this prior vote.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say the chairman has been extraordinarily even-handed and polite with all Members and has done an extraordinary job, and I regret that this happened. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) for unanimous consent request.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. DICKS. I would be delighted to yield to my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn), for any comments he wants to make.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as many of us know, the National Endowment for the Arts was created in 1965. I believe that this endowment has done a tremendous amount to help foster the arts in this country. When the Endowment was created, we did not have the great range of the arts we now have. We now have performing symphonies and ballets all over this country. We have seen a tremendous growth in the arts, and I believe that one of the major reasons for that is because of the challenge grants and the other programs that the Endowment approved over the years. The private sector looking to an entity, an arts organization getting a National Endowment for the Arts grant, is almost the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. Since the endowments were created, we have seen a tremendous growth in the amount of money that the private sector contributes to the arts all over this country. A few years ago, we were funding the National Endowment at about $170 million. It was cut back dramatically. Today we only fund it at $98 million. In fact, we will have a bipartisan amendment after we take care of the Stearns amendment to increase the money for the endowments in a modest way. The President has requested for each of the endowments $150 million. A few years ago, Congress had some concerns about the quality of the grants and some of the grants that were approved by the National Endowment for the Arts. We put in very strong language saying, since they cannot approve every grant that comes in, use quality as a standard for judging and assessing these grants, and do not let an entity get a grant and then give it to a sub grantee for some other purpose. I believe that under Jane Alexander and Mr. Ivey, Mr. Ferris at the Humanities, that we have seen managers who have seen the words from the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) and myself that were crafted, and have implemented it. We now have congressional Members who are on the advisory boards of the panels to give congressional input, to make sure that the American people's voice is being heard on these issues. So I think this is an amendment that Congress has defeated over and over again. I am confident that we will again defeat it today, because I think the American people believe that the modest investment we make in the arts, and I think also in the humanities, is tremendously important in communities all over this country. We see education, education in the arts being an important item in many communities. I can remember going with Jane Alexander to Garfield High School in the city of Seattle and seeing an after-school program where the kids were doing very good high quality work in the arts. The kids were enthused about it. It helped us, I think, in dealing with crime and also furthered their education. It gave them something to believe in. I think that educational programs are good. Dale Chihuly, one of the world's renowned glass artists from my district in Tacoma, Washington, has an after-school program to teach kids how to create blown glass and create glass art. These kids, some of which have been juvenile delinquents, swear that this has transformed their lives. One, they have something to do after school and, two, they are working in the arts in a very creative way. I had a chance to go up and visit them to see their work, to actually try to create glass art myself. I was not as good as the kids, but it really made an impression on me and showed that programs like this that are sponsored by the National Endowment for the Arts are truly very important to our country. So I urge today that we will resist this amendment.

Mr. DICKS. I withdraw my point of order.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on this amendment.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that each side have 7\1/2\ minutes on this amendment and all amendments thereto.

Mr. DICKS. We are going to treat this amendment separately from this previous discussion in terms of everything else, but on this one we will agree to 7\1/2\ minutes on each side, split it down the middle.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, is the next vote going to be on the underlying Dicks amendment?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. Again I want to point out, we already own these lands. There is no land grab here. We are not adding anything additional here. We are creating a monument which the President has the authority to. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), a distinguished member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall). (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the distinguished ranking member, who has done a lot of work and research on the Antiquities Act.

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) who is a valued member of the subcommittee.

Mr. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, was there enough people standing for a recorded vote?

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman why we do not just go ahead and vote on this amendment.