Norman D. Dicks: “I rise in very willing opposition to this amendment. This amendment is not about adding money to anything, it is about…”

“I rise in very willing opposition to this amendment. This amendment is not about adding money to anything, it is about cutting the minimal funding which is currently in this bill for the arts. In light of the vote just taken by the House of Representatives, in which 234 Members voted for the arts, I think it is also very untimely. This amendment would cut the NEA below the $116 million requested by President Bush and recommended by the Republican leadership of the committee. The $116 million provided in this bill for the National Endowment for the Arts is only 1 percent above last year. It is $46 million below the level approved in 1994 for the agency. The gentleman's arguments against NEA are outdated and do not reflect the many reforms implemented by the Congress and former NEA chairman Bill Ivey, and the new chairman, Eileen Mason, to address public concerns about controversial arts projects supported by public funds. Anyone who knows about the arts realizes that there will always be controversy.”