Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, the appropriations process for the coming fiscal year has just begun, and much is being said about how tight the budget numbers are this year. And while this is a statement of fact, it is no excuse for our current fiscal situation. At the turn of the 21st century, the Federal Government had an historic budget surplus of $3 trillion. In just 3 years, the government is facing historic deficits, upwards of $7 trillion. Bad fiscal policy has greatly diminished the Federal Government's ability to invest in the Nation's resources and the Nation's people. The tight budget numbers are the result of tax giveaways to people who least need it, the people that the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, has said owe the most to the country and pay for far too little. Much is lacking in this appropriations bill. Overall spending levels are down. Federal land acquisition funds have been significantly cut, even the projects requested by President Bush. Once again the bill fails to meet the obligations of the so-called CARA light agreement. Operating funds for the National Park Service are only modestly increased. The modest spending boost is barely enough to keep pace with expenses and fails to tackle the $5 billion maintenance backlog at the Nation's parks. The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities are again underfunded. The bill shortchanges investments in the American people and our country's natural resources. Former President Theodore Roosevelt, one of the fathers of the American conservation movement, warned that in utilizing and conserving the natural resources of this Nation, the one characteristic more essential than any other is foresight. We are lacking that, Mr. Speaker. Back in 1992, funding for the NEH and the NEA reached their funding zenith, $176 million for each agency. Over the years their budgets have been slashed again and again. Recently this body has voted to increase the funding for the arts and the humanities and I urge my colleagues to continue this trend to support an amendment to increase funding for both of these agencies. The gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and I will offer an amendment later to do so. As Pulitzer prize-winning former Librarian of Congress Daniel Boorstin said, ``Planning for the future without a sense of history is like planting cut flowers.'' Investing in the arts is smart business. The $232 million the Federal Government invested in the NEH and NEA in 2002 had an economic impact of $132 billion and generated billions in Federal, State and local tax revenues. Every dollar they invest in local theater groups, orchestras or exhibitions generates $7 for the arts organization by attracting other grants, private donations and ticket sales. In my district alone, 1,215 arts-related businesses employ almost 20,000 people. Buffalo, New York, I am pleased to say, was just recently designated as the number four destination in the United States for top art events and venues. We are very proud of that. Nationwide, creative industry businesses employ almost 3 million people, 2.2 percent of all who are employed. Investing in the arts is also smart for our children. Over and over arts education has proven to increase academic performance, regardless of socioeconomic background. The NEA provides grants for local arts activities in every State and every congressional district. Small grants make a big difference. The National Endowment for the Humanities is at the forefront in preserving our American culture and history. Democracy will not flourish without an understanding of its past. The NEA and NEH preserve and promote the understanding of where we have been and where we are today that our democracy needs to endure. Democracy dies in a cultural vacuum. This bill even guts funding for the President's We the People initiative, which supports exploration of the significant events and themes in American history. Bruce Cole, the Chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities, warns, ``We face a serious challenge to our country that lies within our borders and even within our schools, the threat of American amnesia. We are in danger of having our view of the future obscured by our ignorance of the past. We cannot see clearly ahead if we are blind to history. And a Nation that does not know why it exists, or what it stands for, cannot be expected to long endure.'' Very wise words from Mr. Cole. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify the amendments to correct the line reference from page 103, line 24, to page 103, line 14.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment that will provide just a small increase for Federal arts agencies but which will pay us back many times over, both in hard dollars and in ways that are simply incalculable for the people that we represent. Since 2001, when our national economy began its dramatic downturn, we have seen some of our largest industries shaken to their core. Without consumer spending and housing market, the recession would have been even deeper and more discouraging for most Americans. But during those dark days, one industry sailed on battered by the prevailing wind but staying afloat, thanks in part to Federal funding, and that was America's incomparable nonprofit arts industry. Even without the corporate and philanthropic support of prior years and with fewer State and local dollars, the indomitable $134 billion nonprofit arts industry, seen here on this chart, kept selling tickets, employing artists, attracting tourists, providing jobs, supporting small businesses and churning out receipts to Federal, State and local treasuries. In cities, towns and hamlets across the country, artists continued to write and compose and dance and perform, and audiences kept coming to watch and listen and absorb their creativity. Inevitably, they left with what they came for, their minds enlightened, their souls renewed. How magic that is when what makes both people's life and economy richer is one in the same thing. The lesson is clear, the stability of Federal funding is all the more important to the arts in times of fiscal fluctuation. And where else can we find such a bargain? For 1/ 100 of 1 percent of the Federal budget, the nonprofit arts agencies generate over 5 million jobs and give back 14 billion to State and local governments and over 10 billion to the Federal treasury. Consider this enormous return on our investment and our request is modest this year. Though the President requested $18 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, because we recognize the tight budget we face we will ask only $10 million, and this small increase will ensure that the NEA's new program, America's Masterpieces: Three Centuries of Artistic Genius, which First Lady Laura Bush announced with such enthusiasm last year, will take the best of our heritage to new and younger audiences across the country. Every dollar of this increase will go to the program. Not a cent will fund administrative costs. Similarly, rather than the $27 million which the President requested for the National Endowment for the Humanities, we are asking only $3.5 million. The additional money will continue funding for such popular programs as ``We the People,'' which teaches and studies the understanding of American history, and every State and territory in the United States last year benefited from this initiative. Should you have any doubts left about the ability of the Federal seed money to build a local economy, think about your own preference when you travel. What do you look for when you are in a strange city or country? After checking into your hotel and locating a restaurant, you search out the local cultural attractions, do you not? The museum, the art gallery, the theater, the folk festival, the other indigenous arts; in fact, the attractions that made you want to go there in the first place. Sixty-five percent of all American travelers do the same. They include cultural events on their trips and they spend more on the average than local attendees do at their favorite cultural institutions. In my own district, the Cities of Buffalo, Rochester, and Niagara Falls, New York are dependent on tourist dollars to keep their economy and local small businesses running. You probably have watched and been grateful for the same phenomenon in your district. Just today I learned that Buffalo was now the fourth most desired arts destination in the country, according to the American Style Magazine's annual poll, and I say thank goodness for those tourist dollars. I hope by now you have seen the research seen by Americans for the Arts, which was sent to every congressional office. Entitled ``The Creative Industries,'' the report includes a map of your own district and a chart that shows every arts-related business in your district and the number of jobs that each supports. It gives you a graphic indication of the geographic and economic reach of the arts. But the benefits of our Federal investment are neither confined at our districts nor stop at our borders. The output of artists and other creative workers in publishing audio-visual music and recording and entertainment business amounts to over $60 billion annually in overseas sales, and this huge return helps the U.S. maintain an ongoing global position of economic strength and leadership. Think for a moment about the Reagan funeral. Who was not deeply moved by the tenor's rendition of Ave Maria? Whose eyes did not tear when the Marine band played Amazing Grace or God Bless America and the wonderful choir that sang The Battle Hymn of the Republic? Who can even imagine such a moment of national importance not imbued with such profound feeling without the artists performing their great music? Long after everyone alive today is gone from this Earth, that ceremony will be remembered by generations to come through the artistry of great photography. Let us remember that it was President Reagan himself who set up the Presidential Task Force on Arts and Humanities.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security of the Committee on Appropriations.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to emphasize the importance of art therapy, especially in treating older adults. In my work as co- chair of the Congressional Arts Caucus, I have long emphasized the therapeutic benefits of the arts. Art therapy is a profession that serves people of all ages with a means of expressing emotion and coping with life issues. Emotions are often difficult to convey in words and an artistic avenue can serve as an effective way to communicate inner thoughts and feelings. The elderly in particular face many emotional difficulties including loss, isolation, disability, dependency, and concerns about healthcare and treatment. Gerontology studies have shown that engaging the elderly in artistic activity may improve health and quality of life by decreasing the incidence of depression, anxiety, medical visits and related medications. In addition to the emotional gain and sense of dignity and self- esteem achieved, the elderly can benefit from art therapy in clinical ways. In seniors who suffer from memory loss or cognitive impairments caused by Alzheimer's disease and stroke, levels of function can be maintained and improved. One woman who worked with an art therapist was able to remember and depict aspects of her life that she could not communicate verbally. Others who have difficulty concentrating due to dementia and disorientation show improved attention through the creative process. Cognitive stimulation and social interaction contributes to alertness and orientation. Art therapy therefore has many implications for health maintenance and cost-containment for the elderly. Art therapists are master's level mental health practitioners, specially trained to combine psychology and psychotherapy with the visual arts. They work with older adults in hospitals, psychiatric, rehabilitation, community and wellness facilities, nursing homes, residential living communities, as well as in private practices and environments for younger clients. The American Art Therapy Association, founded in 1969, establishes national standards for education and clinical practice. This week, the American Art Therapy Association is hosting an exhibit here on Capitol Hill called, Creative Aging: Beyond Words. This event will display artwork by older adults in art therapy programs from across the United States. The exhibit highlights the ways art therapy contributes to meeting and managing the challenges of later life, and cultivating the strengths of elders. Paintings, drawings and sculptures eloquently convey the multitude of problems confronting elders, and the wisdom of those who have lived full lives. The artists were guided by trained clinicians in the exploration of themes and content for enhanced understanding of personal issues, improved outlook and quality of life. Art-therapy remains under-recognized as a viable treatment. Many older Americans are unable to access such services due to lack of awareness, insurance coverage and insufficient employment of art therapists. I encourage my colleagues in Congress to recognize and support the profession of art therapy and to broaden conventional thinking about services to elders.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for rollcall votes 227 and 228. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 227 and 228.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 100th Anniversary of The Kentuckians of New York. This congressional recognition will be presented on June 3, 2004 in New York City to a gathering of more than 325 persons at a Gala Dinner Dance. On the occasion, the following six Kentuckians will be honored for their distinguished careers in their chosen field, for their contributions to their community for public service, and their impact both nationally and globally: Owsley Brown II, John Y. Brown, Jr., Martha Layne Collins, Bob Edwards, Phil Simms, and Bill Samuels, Jr. The Kentuckians of New York was organized on April 27, 1904. The first president was John C. Carlisle, who served six years. During the turn of the century, several state societies were formed. Those who had chosen New York as their new home longed to maintain contact with persons from their home state. The Kentuckians of New York is one of the few, which remain today and have reached this milestone. In the early days, it was a men's organization, which met periodically to enjoy fellowship and sampling of some of the principal Kentucky products, tobacco and bourbon. During the term of President James C. Bowling (1974-76), Peggy Silhanek and Myra Leigh Tobin became the first two women members. I joined the organization soon after membership was opened to women. I met, not one, but all four criteria for becoming a member: born in Kentucky, lived in Kentucky for at least five years, graduated from a Kentucky college or university, and a son or daughter of a Kentuckian. The society currently has both resident and nonresident members. The primary purpose of the organization is to share fellowship and the love of our Kentucky heritage at two dinner meetings each year. At these meetings, a reception is followed by dinner and a talk about some aspect of Kentucky by a distinguished speaker from Kentucky or with ties to Kentucky. I was invited to be a speaker in October 2001, which followed the terrorist acts on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. It was a very somber time in New York City and in the country. The Kentuckians of New York lost two of its members, James R. Paul and Thomas W. Hohlweck, Jr., who worked in the World Trade Center. My remarks focused on re-assuring members that Members of Congress were addressing terrorism and were concerned about the safety and security of its citizens, and in bringing justice to those who committed the terrorist acts of 9/11. Many illustrious speakers have addressed the organization. One memorable evening was the time when former Governor A.B. ``Happy'' Chandler was speaker, following his induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Former President Richard Nixon came to the reception unannounced to extend his congratulations to ``Happy'' Chandler and to extend greetings to The Kentuckians of New York. Mr. Speaker, on the occasion of The Kentuckians of New York's 100th Anniversary, I join with its members and other Kentuckians who will celebrate in its contributions to New York, to Kentucky, and to our nation.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of rhetoric today about how the economy is on the upswing and how it has improved and how jobs are beginning to return. But I can tell my colleagues that people in my hometown and communities across America remain unemployed. There are 8.2 million people out of work in this country, and there is now only one job opening for every three unemployed individuals. No matter how you spin it, the bill before us today will not do a single thing to create more jobs. That is why I urge Members to join me in defeating the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule making in order an amendment that was not accepted by the Committee on Rules by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) to train 100,000 new first responders. That is 100,000 new policemen, firemen, emergency response personnel, medical personnel, and scores of other citizens who keep this country safe every day and would, of course, create jobs. I offered this amendment in the Committee on Rules last night; but as is usual practice these days, it was defeated on a straight party-line vote. Now, this bill is supposed to be about helping the unemployed. Well, I can tell my colleagues if they really want to help them, they will do everything they can to find ways to create new good-paying jobs. And that is what the Ryan amendment will do. So I urge my colleagues to vote today in favor of job creation, in favor of protecting our communities by voting ``no'' on the previous question. Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. A ``no'' vote will not prevent us from considering the bill before us today, but by voting ``yes,'' Members will be denying this House a chance to create 100,000 new jobs for unemployed Americans. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Congressional Record immediately before the vote.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I am troubled by recent actions taken by the Committee on Rules and the possible consequences for this democratic body. Otto van Bismarck said, ``Laws are like sausages. It is better not to see them being made.'' Republicans on the Committee on Rules have devised and employed new ``sausage-making'' rules over the past several weeks. These rules take several bills, grind them up, and shove them into a new legislative casing and make a new bill. H. Res. 638 provided for the consideration of three bills under the same closed rule, restricting the amount of time for floor debate and deliberation. Once the bills were passed, the rule required the bills be ground and repackaged as one bill. H. Res. 645 provided for the consideration of five bills, again limiting the time for floor debate. Once the bills were considered and passed, the text of all five pieces of legislation were ground together to make one large bill to send to the other body. I would think that the parliamentarians of the House of Representatives would take some interest in what is going on here. Today we are faced with a new device, a Frankenstein rule. Last night, the Republicans cobbled together bad pieces of rules, concocted a few other pieces, and then passed everything as one big monster rule. The text of H.R. 444 is replaced with the text of H.R. 4444. None of the four amendments before the committee is in order, debate on the legislation is limited to 1 hour, and, outrageously, the rule appends the text of two unrelated bills, bills not considered by the Committee on Rules, just simply written in. H.R. 4409 is on the suspension calendar, which would reauthorize title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965. H.R. 4410 is the Teacher Shortage Act of 2004, which would increase the amount of student loans which may be forgiven for highly qualified teachers in math, science, and special education. Now the merits of these legislative appendages have not even been considered by the Committee on Education and the Workforce, having held no hearings on it. And last night the Committee on Rules did not hear any testimony on either one of them. When the rule was passed out, a staffer gave us a copy of the bills. We discovered whichever one of those two suspensions passes first will be cobbled into this bill we are doing today. The other one, I do not know what happens to it. I think it is tabled and forgotten about. Mr. Speaker, it is destructive to us because we have no rules to go by any more. It does not matter what they want to do. Somewhere in the Capitol, people are devising byzantine and awful rules to shove down Members' throats. This bill today, though, is really only a feel-good bill. There is no money authorized for it. It does nothing for the 1.2 million people who are unemployed and have lost their benefits. Mr. Speaker, 8.2 million Americans are unemployed; and the unemployment rate remains the same. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, since December, 2003, the unemployment rate has been 5.6 or 5.7; and extended unemployment benefits expired last year. However, the unemployment trust fund has $20 billion in it. Congress simply refuses to allow the unemployed to tap into that money which is already there. Every dollar spent on unemployment benefits immediately creates more than $2 in economic growth. Instead of using the billions of dollars that are already there untouched in the unemployment trust fund, this underlying bill creates a pilot program for personal reemployment accounts. The goal is to help people get back to work to provide $3,000 for job training, transportation and job search expenses. The fact that there is only one job for every three seekers is not considered here. The problem is it does nothing to create jobs. It trains people for jobs that do not exist, jobs which have been outsourced overseas. According to the Economic Policy Institute, these PRAs are a response to a problem that does not exist. The concept assumes there are plenty of jobs, but the unemployed workers are so comfortable getting $250 a week in unemployment benefits that they will not go back to work. So the problem is the failure of job creation, and these PRAs will be of no help. It is insulting to workers to believe they have to be given a grant to go look for work. As I said before, over 1.5 million Americans exhausted their benefits, and they will not be eligible for this pilot program. If a person uses this PRA, he or she is no longer eligible to receive the benefits of other programs under the Workforce Investment Act, which can be worth as much as $10,000. Any money used from PRAs will be money used from WIA funds, because additional funds are not authorized for this program. Let me say that again. This wonderful program here to put people back to work has no money authorized for it. Why are we not considering real help for the unemployed? This body should be passing legislation to extend unemployment benefits. I urge my colleagues to vote against this Frankenstein rule, so the House can act to help the millions of unemployed Americans and their families. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).