SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1999
Tuesday, March 17, 1998.
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
WITNESSES
I. MICHAEL HEYMAN, SECRETARY
CONSTANCE B. NEWMAN, UNDER SECRETARY
J. DENNIS O'CONNOR, PROVOST
MICHAEL H. ROBINSON, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
Opening Statement
Mr. REGULA. We will get started with the committee hearing. I am pleased to welcome all of you from the Smithsonian. Your statements will be made a part of the record.
Secretary Heyman, if you would like to summarize for us.
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, sir, I would. Thank you for the opportunity.
Last year was really a good one for us. We had over 30 million visits between the museums and the zoo here in Washington, and that was up 23 percent from the year previous. That says something about Washington, in general.
Mr. REGULA. A 23 percent increase in visitation?
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. REGULA. Just think what that would do if you had a fee.
Mr. HEYMAN. That is what I thought you would say, sir. [Laughter.]
I walked right into that one, did I not?
We opened the Geology, Gems, and Minerals Exhibition, which is sterling. We had a host of other exhibitions that were very, very good. I do not have to go through all of them, just a couple. The Ansel Adams show, turned out to be, I think, the largest draw the American Art Museum has ever had. That museum is just crowded every day. Unfortunately, the show ends in about a week, but it has been wonderful, and that has been true throughout the whole of the Smithsonian. We have had really very fetching exhibitions.
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
''AMERICA'S SMITHSONIAN''
''America's Smithsonian,'' that big traveling show, is now back. Its last stand will be and is in the Ripley Center, which gives people from the Washington area an opportunity to see it and gives staff at the Smithsonian an opportunity to see it. It drew over 3 million people when it went around the country. So it was exceedingly successful.
Mr. REGULA. Let me ask you, did you break even on cost?
Mr. HEYMAN. No, sir. We are still in the hole, but I trust that we will dig our way out considerably by a number of devices; one is the NOVUS credit card; the other is the possibility, although I am not sure yet how imminent, that we will do an international tour, which will be a profitable venture.
Mr. REGULA. International?
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes. Not with the same artifacts, but with other materials from the Smithsonian. If that works well, that will be a nice offset against losses from ''America's Smithsonian.''
But I do not really look at them so much as losses as an investment, especially now that we have begun to be as successful as we are on the Web, which is really outreach, and as we have begun to be in the Affiliations Program with museums around the country.
So, in a sense, this kind of established us around the country and, perhaps, it will also prove to be very useful as we get into a capital campaign. It is a little hard to know, but it can be viewed in investment terms, I think, properly.
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
SMITHSONIAN HOME PAGE
Digitization remains a large priority for us, and you know in our budget we have a request for $3 million for the base to increase the amount of digitization we can do. The Web continues to enlarge. We are we getting over 12 million, close to 14 million—hits a month.
Mr. REGULA. A month?
Mr. HEYMAN. A month. It is, as you know, a very dense site with each of the museums and the research institutes having Home Pages under the Smithsonian Home Page. People spend a lot of time with us. It is not simply coming in and coming out. As far as we can determine, people are spending some significant time with us.
We are beginning to put exhibitions on the Web. The site has two presently and various museums have exhibits as well.
We are in the process of doing the first exhibition that I think was ever designed solely for the Web. It never existed other than on the Web, and it is going to open up new areas.
DIGITIZATION OF IMAGES
I detailed the digitization matters considerably in my written statement. It is obviously about access to our collections. The sums that we are getting from the Federal Government and hope we will have in hand are being combined with grants from IBM, and Intel, and Hewlett Packard.
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. Give us an example of what you would digitize. I hear it is quite expensive to do.
Mr. HEYMAN. Where we are putting our attention right at the moment is a whole bunch of photographic images that are in the American History Museum. They are not all American History materials, but what else do they include, Dennis?
Dr. O'CONNOR. There is a lot of two-dimensional material, Mr. Chairman, that we will be digitizing. For example, as part of collection management, when an object comes in it is photographed. We can just simply take that photograph, scan it, and then it becomes part of a digital record that we can either use for collection management or we can use to put it up on the Web as part of a virtual exhibit.
So there are two-dimensional materials; photographs, negatives, art work, and then the more difficult task—and, indeed, you are correct, more expensive—will be to digitize three-dimensional images with the technology such that you can turn the image around to be able to see all sides of it.
Mr. REGULA. This would be on your Web site then.
Dr. O'CONNOR. Yes.
Mr. HEYMAN. It will be on our Web site, and it will be connected with our Collection Information Systems [CIS], so that it is going to be possible to find the images that you want.
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
When we finish combining the CIS materials from the various museums, you are going to be able to come in on subject matter, let us say American Indian, and you are going to be able to find what we have in all our museums under a single subject matter, so that you are not going to have to scan museum-by-museum in order to find images, and the images will have with them the reference materials—essentially, the labels—that identify and explain the images.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Skaggs, we can be sort of informal this morning. So, if things occur to you, as we go along, do not hesitate.
Mr. SKAGGS. Thank you.
WEB ACCESS FOR EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS
Mr. HEYMAN. And, obviously, we are using Web access for a number of educational programs. Natural Partners continues to expand. There are lesson plans on the Web now from a lot of the Smithsonian organizations. The Smithsonian Office of Education has posted a whole series of lesson plans——
Mr. REGULA. Teachers would pick this up?
Mr. HEYMAN [continuing]. That teachers can pick up and download, and then they can download materials, also, in support of the lesson plans.
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. Do you have interactive potential, so that a school that is so wired could actually have an interactive classroom with the Smithsonian?
Mr. HEYMAN. Obviously, we do with Natural Partners. Now, what else are we doing presently?
Dr. O'CONNOR. The most significant interactive environment, Mr. Chairman, is the Natural Partners Program, and there is a downloading site, I believe, in many states of the Union, at least onesite.
Mr. REGULA. Then the schools can plug into that.
Dr. O'CONNOR. That is correct.
Mr. REGULA. This has enormous potential.
Mr. HEYMAN. It has enormous potential. It also has a lot of problems that are going to have to be faced over time, not the least being that interactive electronic potential is interesting, but you have to have somebody on our side to be interactive with, and so that increases the load on curators and research people, many of whom are really quite willing and excited about doing it, but they cannot do it all of the time, obviously, and also do their jobs.
So sorting all of that out over time, for all institutions, not simply ours, is going to be a real challenge.
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
AFFILIATIONS PROGRAM
We are continuing the outreach of the Affiliations Program. You will recall the Affiliations Program is one in which the Smithsonian is entering into agreements with museums around the country. We are up to, I think, really nine now, or at least eight, where we have Memoranda of Understanding.
I look forward to this as probably the most interesting new activity of the Smithsonian that has occurred during the time that I have been Secretary because I think this has the potentiality over the next 10 or 15 years to spread all over the United States, with portions of the Smithsonian collection in many places which will give people access to those artifacts and will bolster the efforts of regional museums around the country.
I was worried whether our museums would want to be in a position to cooperate in this, but the ones that have so far been asked, primarily, which are American History and Natural History, seem to have absorbed this level of activity well and are really getting interested in it.
The Provost has a small staff of people who are the facilitators, which is really critical for making these arrangements work.
The amount of publicity that the Smithsonian is getting in each of the venues, where agreements are being reached, is considerable, and the amount of notice, with respect to the programs that are occurring through the American Association of Museums and other like sources, is considerable.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So we have now got inquiries from organizations in 30 states, and we know that a number of those are going to work out over time. So it just keeps mounting in terms of the number of people picking up our invitation.
RESEARCH
The research continues apace at the Smithsonian. I do not have to go through it. I have that in my written testimony. But we have been doing, for instance, a lot of work on El Niño in Panama. That has been one of the places with drought, and it has been very interesting to view what has been occurring, as Dennis was telling me, with regard to the adaptation by plant life, even in a single year.
Up at SAO we are trying to find planets elsewhere than in our solar system, and so far we have found one. That discovery was made, I guess, at Arizona using the multiple-mirror telescope.
But there is an enormous amount going on.
Mr. REGULA. Would that be the new scope in Arizona that was put up on Mount Hopkins?
Mr. HEYMAN. This was found with the old one. When will the new one be in operation?
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Dr. O'CONNOR. We just closed the multiple mirror, and the single mirror is due to arrive up on top of the mountain, hopefully, by April. The first light we are anticipating sometime in July.
Mr. HEYMAN. It is going to be a heck of an experience taking this huge single mirror up that mountain. As you might know, it is a very narrow trail that goes up, and there has been a lot of testing going on with respect to how to assure its safe arrival.
Mr. SKAGGS. Maybe we could visit, Mr. Chairman. I think it would be a good time.
Mr. HEYMAN. We would be delighted to have you visit there and then to visit the new site on Mauna Kea in Hawaii.
Mr. SKAGGS. That might be pushing our luck. [Laughter.]
Mr. HEYMAN. And then we are in a partnership in Chile on the Magellan Project.
Mr. SKAGGS. We might be in the vicinity. [Laughter.]
Mr. HEYMAN. It would be a delight. We would be really pleased if you came.
Dr. O'CONNOR. Choose an evening with a new moon, Mr. Skaggs, because with a full moon it is too light. The stars do not show well.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. One of the things that amazed me when I went was that people do not look directly at stars any more. They really see the stars on a television set, and that is the way they are received. The image is enhanced electronically. You could be sitting here, and you could be looking at the same image that one is looking at right on the site.
Dr. O'CONNOR. Nowhere near as fun.
Mr. HEYMAN. No, nowhere near as fun.
Mr. REGULA. It's not like being on the site, though.
Mr. HEYMAN. We have five telescopes now that are dedicated to schools in the United States. I spoke about them once. They are through the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. Schools can sign up, and then once——
Mr. REGULA. Schools meaning colleges?
Mr. HEYMAN. Elementary schools and secondary schools, basically.
Mr. REGULA. Really?
Mr. HEYMAN. Secondary schools, more so junior high schools than high schools, but most of the astronomy that is offered at the K through 12 level is at the high school level.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But they can sign up, and then they can scan portions of the sky by prearrangement on these dedicated scopes, and then they get the results of that scanning back into the classroom over the Internet. It is an extraordinary opportunity with regard to being able to export experience in the manner that I was indicating, which is visually through the Internet.
So it is just expanding in all kinds of ways is the point, I guess, I am really seeking to make.
SMITHSONIAN BUDGET REQUEST
Let me turn to the budget request. Our total budget request is $419.8 million. That is up about 4.4 percent from last year.
In salaries and expenses, we are asking for mandatories, and we have three program improvements that we are seeking; one of those is $3 million for digitization—the subject I was speaking about just recently. Some portion of that is for Natural History for relocation and moving in the East Wing, now that that is finishing, and for staffing in the West Wing. That is the wing that we are constructing with the proceeds of the bond that was successfully launched. So that is not being federally supported on that side.
And then $11 million for the NMAI—for the National Museum for the American Indian—to begin to support the move of artifacts from the Research Branch up in the Bronx down to the Cultural Resources Center in Suitland, Maryland. That will be a process that will take a while, obviously, because each of those items has to be conserved, and then packed, and then moved. So it is a real process and there is a lot to do with that.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So it is the move; it is the staffing up of the Cultural Resources Center in Suitland; and it is the beginning for exhibit design with regard to a Mall museum which, hopefully, will be up—what did we say?—2002, and for which, of course, we are seeking federal funding for the last portion of that.
We have requested $40 million, up $8 million for R&R. We still need, of course, the eventual $50 million so that we can be on a sustaining basis in relation to the analysis we have shown you in the past, and I hope we can be seeking that in the near future.
As far as construction is concerned, obviously, we are asking for the last portion of the National Museum of the American Indian, and that is a bifurcated request; $16 million in terms of this fiscal year, an advanced appropriation of $19 million for next year. If both of those could occur presently, the probabilities are high that we would be able to start construction later in this fiscal year. That is the reason for including the advanced appropriation, as well as the appropriation for this time.
Then $2 million for minor construction and alterations and modifications in planning. We are requesting $4.5 million for the Zoo for construction. $3.8 million of that is really R&R, and then $700,000 is for planning in relationship to the Holt House, which is a minor amount, but a more major amount in terms of master planning.
CAPITAL PLANNING
Let me just say before I end my statement and invite your questions, that there are other buildings that we have been involved with; one, of course, is the Dulles Center, and we will have finished construction drawings, which are, at about 65 percent now, by next fall. We are hard at work seeking to raise money for that. We have some asks out presently, which is the first stage of that money raising, including some up in the State of Washington, obviously Boeing. We hope very much that they are going to be a major donor.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Virginia is coming through on the Dulles Center project with its promises in its Fiscal 1999 budget. It has infrastructure money, and the extra million dollars that it added at the request, really, of this committee some time ago, and we are quite confident that all of that is going to come through. So we will see how this proceeds because, obviously, it depends an awful lot on the success of the capital campaign for Dulles.
I spoke with you, Mr. Chairman, and I do not think with other members of the committee, about the possibility of our seeking to purchase with non-Federal funds a building in the area of American Art and the National Portrait Gallery. The obvious target has been the old Hecht Building, which is diagonally across the street from the Patent Office Building that contains those museums.
The purpose of it would be, first of all, to give swing space when we do the major remodeling, the repair and restoration, on the Patent Office Building itself. It would be very good to move everybody out and get that done more efficiently than otherwise would be true if we have to do it in sections with people still in the building.
Thereafter, we would look forward to that building being occupied by some of the uses that are presently in the Portrait Gallery and in the American Art Museum because we would very much like to increase the exhibition space in the Patent Office building, and that would mean moving some offices out and moving some other facilities out that are presently in there; like conservation, like archives, like photography, and putting them elsewhere.
In addition to that, we would see that building being used for trust-funded leases, especially, that are elsewhere in the city, so that we could be occupying it ourselves and get out of other lease space.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I have no idea whether we are going to be successful in arranging the financing in order to do this. If it looks as if we are, I will be coming to you, Mr. Regula, and to staff with a written proposal that explains this in great length and, certainly, we would look forward to discussing this with you and getting your views as to whether or not you think it is permissible for us to go forward. But I am not at that stage yet in terms of knowing whether I am going to be able to find the financing.
From time to time, you have all asked about the balance between repair and restoration of our existing facilities and building new facilities. I have never been able, and I shall not be able now, to answer that in a definitive way.
I can only say that, given the fiscal preoccupations, understandably, of the Congress, the potential of getting money from the Federal Government to do new buildings has been minimized, which means that if we are going to do new buildings, or at least increase our space in the foreseeable future, we are going to have to be finding sources of funding outside of the Federal Government.
That will raise, of course, the problem of adding to the operating budget and what the sources of that additional funding are going to be. But it is going to be self-regulating in itself. The potential of raising that kind of money outside will dampen our attempts to go forward to increase space.
But I must say that an institution like the Smithsonian, which is in the collection business and exhibition business, simply cannot stop collecting. We can minimize it; we can limit it; we can be more and more careful about what we get; we can try to de-accession some of the things that no longer seem to be of great interest, but in the end, the numbers of things we have will increase if we are doing our job.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Some expansion is clearly in the cards, but it is going to be very moderate, I think, given the fiscal circumstances that I have indicated to you.
This concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you all for your attention. I look forward for the three of us, if not the four of us, to cope with whatever questions you might like to ask.
[The information follows:]
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
PERCENTAGE OF COLLECTIONS OF EXHIBIT
Mr. REGULA. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I have a few, and then we will go to the other members.
What percentage of your collections is actually on exhibit?
Mr. HEYMAN. Well, first, I want to say that in the Museum of Natural History that contains a huge number of our objects—120 million out of the Institution's 140 million—there are lots of items that will never be exhibited, and there are lots of items that are very tiny. So you might get beetle collections or other kinds of insect collections with hundreds of thousands of items that are there for research purposes and I would say for archival purposes.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Museum of Natural History is one of the world's greatest archives of materials that were once alive, which are just very valuable for a whole variety of reasons, especially as new techniques come, for analyzing those objects.
In any event, that is 120 million. Of that 120 million, we probably show 100,000 or maybe even less.
Then in the balance of the museums we have many fewer items, and we show a larger proportion of them. If you consider all of the items we have, we exhibit about 3 percent. I have not yet calculated what it would be if you took away those research collections. We still are not exhibiting a high proportion of what we have there in collections.
Mr. REGULA. In the minutes of your board meeting you have a whole list of new construction item proposals. I wonder if you analyze what you have and determine if there is some way to consolidate some of this. As you point out, even if you get private funding for a new building, the operation costs over a period of time will be greater than the cost of the building. I think there will be, in the foreseeable future, budget limitations.
It would seem to me that you have to consolidate some of what you have that probably is not relevant now, nor will it ever be.
Mr. HEYMAN. Well, I think we have to do somewhat more of that, and we are de-accessioning. I hope we are going to be able to find homes for a number of the items through the Affiliation Program. As that grows, more of our materials will no longer be in our own hands—physically, in our own collections—but I do not know how major that is going to be in terms of the numbers.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STRATEGY FOR FULFILLING FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS
I think that the pressure will come when we simply cannot hold any more, and that has a way of self-regulating itself in terms of those who are in charge of collections. But I did really want to say something about that paper that was in the Regents' agenda the last time, which is called, ''Strategy for Fulfilling Facilities Requirements.''
The reason that that paper was in there is because the regents have gotten very interested in space planning, and the Regents are as inquisitive of what we are proposing to do, as this committee is, with respect to going forward, especially if the proposal is that we go forward with money that is not Federal money.
So the desire for oversight is considerable, which I respect and I think is very proper. We are going to come before the Regents in the next meeting or the one following with a space plan, but we thought we would give them the kinds of analysis that had been rattling around the Institution for some time to prepare them for when we come in with the space plan, and that was the ''Strategy for Fulfilling Facilities Requirements,'' the paper that was in the Regents' agenda.
I took that, actually, this morning at home, and with my trusty calculator I took a look at what the 4.6 million additional square feet are all about. I found out that 1.252 million of that 4.6 million square feet are already approved because those are the Natural History wings, the Dulles, and the NMAI.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. Right.
Mr. HEYMAN. So that leaves me the balance, which is about 3.2 million. Of that balance, 720,000 square feet are in buildings like the Hecht Building that I just discussed. They are in the Federal Office Building on Independence Avenue, 10–B, which we have coveted because we could see ourselves taking all our Federal lease spaces—for instance, in L'Enfant Plaza and the like—and putting them in one place, and also have an arrangement with regard to chillers for the Air and Space Museum, for the Arts and Industries Building and the Castle that would work exceedingly well. That is another 251,000.
A third is some plan—it is not an actuality at all, we have never discussed this with the Regents at all—to acquire a building in Southwest, which would be a replacement for the large building that we lease at 1111 North Capitol, where the Office of Exhibits Central, mail, and a whole variety of those kind of activities are located. I do not know whether we can swing that, but that would be put and take space; again, relieving a lease.
And then the last is a small item, which is the Nichols School, which is near the Anacostia Museum, which is surplus property of the District School System and would just be a great enhancement to the Anacostia Museum. Again, I have no idea whether we can, in fact, swing this, but we are trying hard to see whether we, on a lease or whatever, could relieve some of the crowding at Anacostia.
That leaves approximately 2.5 million square feet, which I call ''dreams.'' They are somewhere between the next 15 and 30 years, and I think all one can say is that they are dreams, and they are not ones that are, in actuality, being planned.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So that is a report which, on the face of it, seems very grand. But I think when one looks at it with care, it is not nearly as grand as it otherwise would seem.
Mr. REGULA. How many square feet do you lease?
Ms. NEWMAN. We will get that for you. It is about $6 million worth.
Mr. REGULA. You can submit it for the record.
[The information follows:]
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LEASED SPACE
The Smithsonian Institution leases approximately 450,000 square feet of space in buildings located throughout the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.
BACKLOG MAINTENANCE AT THE ZOO
Mr. REGULA. Backlog maintenance. I know you have the $250 million backlog that you have alluded to in the past, which did not include the National Zoo. Now, it is my understanding that there is about $65 million in the combination of Front Royal and the Zoo, $26 million of which is critical. How are you planning to address all of this?
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. I think I would ask Mr. Rice or, Connie, do you want to do that?
Ms. NEWMAN. Mr. Chairman, what has happened is that the Zoo has gone through the same process as the Institution, as a whole, analyzing the buildings and the systems in the buildings. So the amount that you have is a result of the total analysis, but priorities will be set.
Mr. REGULA. You mean the $65 million?
Ms. NEWMAN. $65 million, yes. The priorities will be set determining what requires the restoration right now because there is an iminent safety problem, what is active, and then what is less important.
It will come to you in the same way that we have come to you with the Institution as a whole. So that you should not expect a request for the total amount because the priorities are quite different. In some of the buildings, it is a desire, but it is not of major concern to the Institution.
We are going to submit a full report to you on the Zoo analysis, as we did on the Institution, when it is completed. When will that be? Dr. Robinson?
Dr. ROBINSON. Well, it is well on the way at the moment. The reason all of this transpired, of course, is we have a new head of our Office of Construction and Maintenance, and she set this in place two years ago, and it takes a long time to work this out.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. Would the $40 million you have requested for maintenance include some at the Zoo?
Ms. NEWMAN. No. The Zoo is a separate request.
Mr. REGULA. So that would be an additional item.
Mr. HEYMAN. We put in approximately $3.8 million in the Zoo Construction request for R&R, but that was true last year, too. In fact, the lion's share was for repair and restoration.
Mr. REGULA. The lion's?
Mr. HEYMAN. The lion's share, that is right. [Laughter.]
Mr. REGULA. I will stop at that one. [Laughter.]
We could have a menagerie here.
SMITHSONIAN MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCIES
One question, and then we will go to Mr. Skaggs.
You have heard me talk a lot about management. Could you cite any examples where, by applying good management techniques, you have been able to either become more efficient or reduce costs?
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. Well, yes. We went through, in the first two years that I was Secretary, taking out a whole level of middle management. So we no longer have six assistant secretaries, as we did have when I came. We have centralized a number of those functions in a single office of the Provost with a smaller staff than existed for the totality of the assistant secretaries who were in that activity area, and we have done the same over on the Under Secretary side.
So what we have done is to go from a circumstance in which, at least at the top management, we had a big horizontal line of assistant secretaries, we have gone to the Secretary, the Provost, and the Under Secretary as the decision-makers in the Castle rather than eight people.
I think that, first of all, saved money just simply because of the reduction in numbers of positions, although the full savings of that is slow in terms of attrition. But I think what it really has done is that it has made decision-making, certainly in the Central Administration, a lot more efficient with the trade-offs occurring within offices rather than between multiple Assistant Secretaries, each with their own budget.
Mr. REGULA. Do you constantly review the things that you do to say is this function still appropriate in 1998? You have such a wide range of areas of research. You mentioned the telescopes. I do not know what your so-called customer base is for that information; likewise, what you do in Panama and probably things that I have no knowledge of.
Do you have some review process to say is this function still—maybe it is nice—but is this still appropriate, given the constraints on our budget, in 1998 and future?
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. Let me turn to my two chief operating officers. Dennis, do you want to talk about that a little at the unit levels on your side?
Dr. O'CONNOR. Briefly, Mr. Chairman, we meet regularly with the directors, and part of their planning is an annualized plan that they will perform during the course of the year, and that provides a forum for questions that you have just raised; is it appropriate, are there things that we are doing that we should no longer do?
I guess my question to them is, are there things that you would like to do more than you are doing now and, if so, what are those and where are the trade-offs?
I think that we can see, programmatically, a movement in that direction; a movement, for example, that has occurred with the fusion of the management of the Environmental Research Center at the Chesapeake Bay with the Natural History Museum. That integration, I think, is going to provide a new programmatic thrust that did not exist before, and it will not lead to any increase in personnel.
So unit-by-unit we do reviews, both annually and then during the course of the year every month in conversations with the directors.
Ms. NEWMAN. On the administrative side we do the same thing through the budget process. One way you get at asking the hard questions is, ''If you were to have a 10 percent reduction, how would you reduce? What would be your decision-making process for reducing the amount?''
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The other way in which the question gets raised is, ''What would you out-source?'' Now, when we ask the question ''What would you out-source?'' you are also asking the question, ''What is it that you need to be doing, period?'' and then, ''What do you need to be doing within the Institution?''
I find that the most valuable discussions about what we need to continue to do internally come through the question of out-sourcing because it pulls people out to ask the very tough questions when they are attempting to defend what it is that they are doing and when the questions are being asked, ''Why are you doing what you are doing and could it be done in a more cost-effective way externally or do we still need to be providing those services?''
The last couple of years there have been some very interesting and tough discussions along those lines.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Skaggs.
PEER REVIEW OF SMITHSONIAN RESEARCH
Mr. SKAGGS. Thank you. Good morning, again.
I had in mind, and I think it follows on the Chairman's last question to pose what, I guess, has become sort of an annual question of my own about coordination of research activities with your sister institutions, both governmental and university.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
For instance, you mentioned the El Niño research in Panama. How have you structured what may be going on in that area to avoid duplication with what NOAA may be working on or NSF through its grantees?
Dr. O'CONNOR. Congressman Skaggs, actually, it is interesting that much of the information on the intensity of El Niño has come from a cooperative work with NOAA and the satellites that are providing these very rich color-coded images on temperature of the surface water and below.
Our scientists are using that to correlate with this rather substantial decrease in rainfall, and then scientists at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute have begun to do very precise measurements of budding and flowering—increased budding and flowering—as a result of the decreased water.
All of that then is coupled together with yet another group of scientists, who are studying carbon dioxide fixation as a result of that process.
So we try to cooperate with a number of agencies. Currently, for example, there are 32 visiting scientists from the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, and I am missing one other department, who are resident at the Natural History Museum cooperating with our scientists.
Mr. SKAGGS. The Smithsonian's research activities are done, essentially, in-house, as I understand it. You are not making grants to others.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Dr. O'CONNOR. That is correct.
Mr. SKAGGS. Which then raises the question that, let's say, compared to NSF, in which its grants or applications for grants are, I believe, generally, put through a pretty rigorous peer review process, what is the analog to that peer review stage of things to sort of check on the pursuits of scientists in your institutions?
Dr. O'CONNOR. First of all, for example, at the Astrophysics Lab, all of their research is almost 100 percent externally funded. So they go through the same kind of peer review process.
At Natural History, on the other hand, most of the peer review process that occurs there is not so much at the point in which funding is obtained, but rather after the funding is obtained, through the internal process. The peer review comes from publications and the review of the scientific data, as it is put out into the scientific literature.
I might also add that the scientists from Natural History, STRI, SAO, the Environmental Research Center, all serve as reviewers for the National Science Foundation, and so they are tied into that network and really know what is going on.
Mr. SKAGGS. One of the schools at home proudly published the cumulative number of footnotes which had cited research done by folks at the school as sort of the key leading economic indicator of the value of their past research. Do you all have a footnote barometer for the Smithsonian or is that a valid measure?
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Dr. O'CONNOR. That is a cottage industry in the scientific literature, sir. I might add that it has been noticed that sometimes those who are most often cited are being cited because the work was not very good. So it comes and goes.
Mr. SKAGGS. There are good footnotes and bad footnotes.
Dr. O'CONNOR. That is correct, sir.
Mr. SKAGGS. Not a value-neutral commodity.
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
You all sort of live at the exciting intersection of, on the one hand, the intellectual and cultural life of the country and, on the other hand, here you are at the political side of things. So I am just wondering how political correctness is doing at the Smithsonian these days.
You have had some exciting experiences in the last few years on that. I think, not wanting to make light of it, it is important for you all to continue to push the American public to understand itself as well as possible and not be trapped by too much of the political climate in doing so.
Mr. HEYMAN. That has been a preoccupation of mine for the three past years.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I have come to the view, Mr. Skaggs—this is especially relevant when we are in areas of political controversy—that we ought not shy away from the subject matter, but that what we ought to do, both in the morality of curatorship and also because it is politically wise, is to try to be as balanced as we possibly can, so that we are showing the contrary arguments and not just a single way of interpreting whatever the facts are.
I think that that is beginning to seep into the kind of Code of Conduct in the Smithsonian. I think that it will be very interesting to see, when we have the opening of the show on sweatshops in May, the extent to which that has migrated.
But I honestly believe, as I did when I taught for all of the years that I did, that when I was dealing with value collisions in teaching law or city planning, that I had an obligation to raise all of the arguments and not solely to present my own view. I think that is even more important in the context of museums because, at least in the context of the university, you have got active and lively students who pepper you with questions and counter-arguments, unless you are an absolute authoritarian in class, which is hard to do any more.
In museums, you really do not have the opportunity for that kind of interaction. If your audience is going to see more than one side, you have got to do it yourself, and it is not going to come because people are asking questions or making counter-statements.
So we talk about this a lot. I have been writing about it, and making speeches, and there are conversations that have been going on within the Institution. Clearly, not all agree with my view, but I think there are more now who do than previously was true.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. SKAGGS. Although, your reference to university life raises an interesting possibility that you could have curator office hours of sorts, where if the interested public did want to come in and engage with those that put things together in whatever way they are put together, they could have an opportunity to have those kinds of conversations, too, and not be so passive.
Mr. HEYMAN. Actually, we do. We really try to give the opportunities often, with panels, with seminars, with programs in which people can interact. The problem really is that, if 10,000 people see your show, 100 show up for such a panel, so that you are not reaching most of the people who go through your exhibition.
Mr. SKAGGS. I was sort of thinking of a little sort of like Peanuts-type booth saying ''the curator is in'' over at the side of the exhibit.
Mr. HEYMAN. It sounds like a confessional. [Laughter.]
Mr. SKAGGS. One budget question; the forward funding request for the American Indian Museum, have we done that before, Mr. Chairman? Are we able to do that?
Mr. REGULA. We are taking a look at that. It is unique.
Mr. SKAGGS. I know on my other subcommittee, it is one of the most provocative things that can happen, to ask for forward funding on construction.
Mr. HEYMAN. We were a little surprised when our request for the total came back in two parts, and I had not known that there was such a technique. But I now have the OMB guidance on the use of that technique. I have been informed, in any event, that this has been used in Defense appropriations, but I do not know if it has been used otherwise.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But, obviously, what it does do is that it puts off to the next fiscal year the scoring of that amount of money. From our point of view, what it does is really permit us to get going this year. It is very tough to start construction until you have all of the money, and we are okay on the private side now because we have raised all of that money or have pledges, and we can put risk capital in front of the pledges. But it is pretty hard to start until you get the whole of the Federal appropriation.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Nethercutt.
PRIVATE FUNDING FOR MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen.
With regard to the National Museum of the American Indian, how much have you raised in private funds or have pledged?
Mr. HEYMAN. We are really in the 40s or the low 50s in total. But for the construction of the mall museum, we have raised $36.6 million, which is a third. The original authorizing legislation proposed that the Federal Government would be no more than two-thirds. So we have always taken that as a one-third/two-third match, and we have raised our one-third.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Are you telling us that you have, in your private fund-raising undertakings, raised between $40-and $50 million?
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Is there any reason why, notwithstanding the act that authorized the not more than two-thirds approach, that private money cannot support a greater proportion than one-third?
Mr. HEYMAN. No, except that most of that was raised for specific purposes. Part of it was raised for endowment; part of it was raised for outreach; part of it was raised for activities that go on at the Haye Center in New York. In other words, most of it has come in semi-restricted because there is a campaign plan and people have given to the particular objects or objectives, rather, in that plan.
So it is not so easy to move that money around, given that the people who contributed it contributed for specific purposes.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I am just thinking in terms of the budget restrictions we have, trying to stay within our caps, if it is not advisable to make that offer.
Mr. HEYMAN. I understand that, sir. We did make that offer, and it was taken, with regard to the Suitland facility. That really strained our capacity to move money around because, as I understand it, in any event, what occurred was that the amounts that were unrestricted were largely used for supplementing what we thought was going to be entirely Federal funding for that building.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
ARCHITECTURAL CONTRACT FOR THE MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Is there any controversy relative to the construction design or architectural design of the building or the location of the building or any of those things on the Mall at this point? Have you heard any criticism or concern?
Mr. HEYMAN. No. Everybody has been quite happy with the conceptual drawings, what it is going to look like and its location. We are having a little difficulty right now in our relationships with the team of architects in terms of finishing the production of the construction drawings. But my able Under Secretary is taking care of that beautifully.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. What is the nature of the controversy?
Mr. HEYMAN. I will let her explain it to you.
Ms. NEWMAN. The contract was let in 1994——
Mr. NETHERCUTT. The architectural contract?
Ms. NEWMAN. The architectural contract was let in 1994 for work to be completed in June of 1998. The firm was Geddes, Brecher, Qualls & Cunningham—GBQC—with the lead architect, Doug Cardinal, who is Native American, and that is important for this particular contract for me to say that to you.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The design was due in June of 1997, 35 percent design was due in June. We did not receive that design and, in fact, received only 20 percent design in August.
Then the construction documents were due in December of 1997. That meant 65 percent. We did not receive that. So we sent a cure notice to them in December and gave them until the 12th of January to respond. Their response was unsatisfactory because there was a split between the GBQC and the lead architect. We, therefore, then sent a default termination to them in January.
At the same time, I want you to know that there is a parallel operation going on, which is an analysis of what it is we, in fact, have; what is the cost of what has been presented to us and what do we need to do to ensure that this design can come in at $110 million, close to the date that we expected it.
But the contractor has rights. So we have the default termination, and they have a right of appeal to the Secretary.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. They, the architects?
Ms. NEWMAN. The architectural engineers have a right of appeal. They had until the 11th of March. They, in fact, submitted an appeal on March 3rd. But they have additional documents that they have 45 days to submit. So by the 27th of March they will submit those to the Secretary, and the Secretary then will make a final determination. If he does not determine in their favor, they can then go to the U.S. Federal Claims Court.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So we are having the conflict, but we need to assure you that we are not stopping work. We have people analyzing and determining what it will take for us to carry this out internally with some outside consultants if the architectural engineers do not prevail in their appeal.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. What is the nature of their appeal, just in general?
Ms. NEWMAN. They are saying that, in fact, they can now—they are talking about the future—they will get back together and that they can now present the design, the construction documents, as required, on schedule and within our costs. I should stop there. I do not want to get us into trouble.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I understand. I do not want to get you in trouble either. I am just trying to understand if there is any reasonable justification or whether we are wasting—it appears they may be some slippage here on time, and I am wondering how that might affect—I heard you say you might be able to stay on schedule notwithstanding this appeal process and so on. You feel that way?
Ms. NEWMAN. Yes, I do.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I do not know if I have any more time left.
Mr. REGULA. Yes, you have some additional time. We have been informal this morning.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I want to turn to the National Zoo for a minute. We have had a previous hearing here where we talked about the fire protection and suppression systems at the National Zoo.
The Subcommittee was informed at the time that you were relatively satisfied with the system currently in place at the Zoo, and I heard you testify, Mr. Chairman, about the $3.8 million to do repair and improvements at the Zoo, which includes upgrading the fire protection system.
Has there been some change of heart relative to the fire protection system that suddenly it may not be adequate now or to what extent is there an adjustment in your prior thinking?
Ms. NEWMAN. At the time, Mr. Congressman, that we made that observation, we were very much concerned about the imminent danger because of the problem with the fire safety system, and we have taken care of that.
What we are now talking about is long-term upgrading of the system. But the money that was used at the outset, did take care of the problem that we had raised with you.
Mr. HEYMAN. Mr. Nethercutt, we have an appropriation for FY 1998 of $770,000 for that, and we are seeking $120,000 this year. So it is not——
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. NETHERCUTT. So it is a small——
Mr. HEYMAN. It is a small amount in relationship to a problem which we were able, at least it appears here, to address last year.
Ms. NEWMAN. At a million dollars.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. What is the million dollars?
Ms. NEWMAN. Well, it was the entire safety system that required that much upgrading, which we have taken care of by an internal reprogramming from the central repair and restoration account.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. So you spent a million?
Ms. NEWMAN. It was close to a million.
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes. In addition funds are available for fire detection and suppression, plus access safety and security, that combination, from Zoo R&R. Of that, $770,000 went into fire detection and suppression.
Ms. NEWMAN. And we did come here for the reprogramming. We did notify you of that.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I understand. And you want to do another $120,000; is that right?
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Last December, I am informed, there was some wide attention given to a female researcher at the Yerkes Primate Research Center in Atlanta who died after coming in contact with a macaque monkey infected with the Herpes B virus. She got some fluid in her eye, apparently.
You have the same kind of monkey at the National Zoo, and I am wondering if there is any danger to the public or others?
Dr. ROBINSON. There is no danger to the public. All of the animals are behind glass, so that won't affect the public, and we have strict processes for contact with the animals. As far as I know, there are none of our monkeys that are Herpes virus carriers where staff are not aware of that and would not get involved in that kind of contact.
[The information follows:]
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
Mr. NETHERCUTT. So you are aware of it, and you are taking some precautions with your zookeepers.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Dr. ROBINSON. Yes, we have learned that from the Yerkes Center. We have new regulations in place. We can provide you with details of that.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. No, I just was concerned about it. I did not know if there were other people at risk, perhaps those folks that handle the animals there. I wanted to be sure you were aware.
Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Skaggs, do you have any additional questions?
Mr. SKAGGS. No, sir.
SECURITY AT MUSEUMS AND COLLECTIONS STORAGE SITES
Mr. REGULA. A couple of things. What is the current condition of security at the museums and collection storage sites? Security takes on a lot of dimensions.
Ms. NEWMAN. Mr. Chairman, we have two ways of assuring security; one is through our automated systems and the other through actual personnel.
When we have concerns about the automated system, it means that we are required to increase or move around a higher percentage of the personnel.
In the analysis of our needs, however, we do believe that to bring our systems up to quality required, we need close to $12 million.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
One way that we are addressing that need is through the repair and restoration that is going on now. For example, as we go into Natural History, American History, when we go into American Art and the Portrait Gallery, we will, at the same time, build in the requirements for the network to support that system.
The $12 million assumes, to a certain extent, that we are not going about it in that way. However, we had hoped at one time that the money that was available—the terrorism money that would be available to Federal agencies—would be available to us in order to upgrade our entire system. We are concerned that we do not have card access. We would like to upgrade our alarm monitoring. We want more closed circuit TV.
But the truth of the matter is we are comfortable that our collections are safe, that the public and the staff are safe because we have altered the personnel balance in order to ensure that.
Mr. REGULA. So you would classify it as adequate, at least.
Ms. NEWMAN. It is for now, but the preferred strategy is for us to upgrade that system and be able to reduce the level of personnel and to have a much more sophisticated process.
I want to say to you that we are not concerned about the safety. However, it is in the Institution's best interest over the near term to repair and to restore to the Institution a more sophisticated system.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STAR SPANGLED BANNER
Mr. REGULA. I note, Mr. Secretary, that the Pew Charitable Trust has indicated an interest, as part of the millennium celebration, providing $5 million if it were to be matched by $5 million Federal to restore the Star Spangled Banner. What is the status of that?
Mr. HEYMAN. Well, I think that Pew has gone even a little further than that, at least in its own mind; that should the Congress respond to the request that has come for millennium funds and should we get $3 million of that, they would be willing to credit some of our regular budget that has been utilized in relationship to the Star Spangled Banner as part of that $5 million.
They have also indicated to us that they would help us seek to raise some additional money from other foundations. So they are being very cooperative, and I am really quite confident that the grant from Pew will come through.
Mr. REGULA. In this budget, do you have the money for the Smithsonian match or would that have to come in the——
Mr. HEYMAN. No, we have that—not the $3 million, but $2 million we would be able to work out from base budget, yes. We would not need an additional.
Mr. REGULA. But you would need the additional $3 million.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, we would need the additional $3 million. I mean, we would need the $3 million, and we can find enough credits in American History budget for the $2 million.
Mr. REGULA. So you would need that in your Fiscal Year 2000.
Ms. NEWMAN. No, 1999.
Mr. REGULA. You need it in 1999, the $3 million?
Mr. HEYMAN. I believe that in the President's budget there is a request for $50 million next year; $25 million to go to Federal agencies, and we would get some portion of that $25 million.
Mr. REGULA. So you would anticipate it would be part of that.
Mr. HEYMAN. If that comes through, and I keep my fingers crossed.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Yates.
Mr. YATES. Thank you. Hi, how are you?
Mr. HEYMAN. Hello, Mr. Yates.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
AMERICA'S SMITHSONIAN
Mr. YATES. Hi, Mike.
Tell me how your 150th anniversary show went. Do I have the impression that you came out of that with a debt?
Mr. HEYMAN. We came out with a debt. We were talking about that before. We have come out with a debt, which we are reducing by a variety of means, by other kinds of arrangements with the sponsors; one is the NOVUS credit card. We are going to put whatever is earned on that towards that debt. We also have the possibility that is being explored by the Under Secretary for an international tour. It would not be the same artifacts, but that would be a tour, which would, if it occurs, be profitable, and we would apply the profit of that towards the debt.
Thereafter, we would simply absorb the remainder in trust funds and view ''America's Smithsonian'', as the Regents have, as an investment of the Institution for a whole bunch of purposes. The Capital Campaign that will be forthcoming, and the Affiliations Program that seems to be picking up steam around the country, and the portion which we cannot match, we will view as an investment to get us around the country.
But you know, Mr. Yates, that ''America's Smithsonian'' had over 3 million people visit it, and now it is in Washington in the Ripley Center. So people in Washington, D.C. have the opportunity to see it, too.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. YATES. How was the debt incurred? Were there not enough people to see the show?
Mr. HEYMAN. We did not charge admission, you will recall.
Mr. YATES. Oh, I see.
Mr. HEYMAN. We based this all on sponsorships, and we did not get as many sponsors as we had hoped.
Mr. YATES. I see. How long do you think it will take to pay it off?
Mr. HEYMAN. Well, five years. That is what we have been thinking of—a five-year range.
Mr. YATES. That is pretty good. It is a big debt, is it not?
Mr. HEYMAN. It is in the 20s. I am not exactly sure where it is in the 20s now, but it is in the 20s.
CONDITION OF SMITHSONIAN BUILDINGS
Mr. YATES. How is the condition of your buildings?
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. Do you want to talk about that a little bit, Under Secretary Newman?
Ms. NEWMAN. Yes. We have conducted a major analysis of our buildings; the status of the HVAC systems, the roofs, the facade, to determine where, given their age, where they are on a continuum, and we have established priorities based on the age of the building and the actual determination of the condition of the building.
We have determined that American Art and the Portrait Gallery and, later, the Arts and Industries Building and the Castle, are the three remaining buildings that require immediate—or fairly immediate, within the next two or three years—attention.
Mr. YATES. How much money will you need for those?
Ms. NEWMAN. We are saying that we really need for those buildings and for our buildings, generally, a level of $50 million a year in order to bring those up to the level that is required and to keep the other buildings at a level required; that we would need to maintain $50 million a year.
We are saying that we have——
Mr. YATES. How many years?
Ms. NEWMAN. We are saying forever because, you see, we restored Freer and Sackler, and that is in good condition. But, as time goes on, the systems that were put in there will require attention. So we are saying there is a cycle and, given the cycle, it requires a certain level of investment each year to keep all of the 300 buildings at a status that we require.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. YATES. I hope the reporter caught the incredulity in my voice. [Laughter.]
I remember, some years ago, we put money in the budget to pay for restoring the glass roofs of the Smithsonian buildings. Do you remember that? Did you ever do that?
Ms. NEWMAN. Do you mean for the National Gallery?
Mr. YATES. Not for the National Gallery. I am talking about glass roofs——
Ms. NEWMAN. At the Freer. At the Freer, we did do that.
Mr. YATES. Are they in shape now?
Ms. NEWMAN. Yes.
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, we are presently doing it at the Air and Space Museum. All of that glass is getting replaced.
Ms. NEWMAN. The windows.
SMITHSONIAN BUDGET NEEDS
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. YATES. Is your budget adequate for your purposes? [Laughter.]
Mr. HEYMAN. One could always use more, but, yes. If we can continue the tradition of getting our mandatories and our inflation adjustment so that we can keep up our base, we have the right kind of flexibility so that, in general, it is an adequate budget.
Mr. REGULA. Let me follow up simply to say if our allocation requires that there be less——
Mr. HEYMAN. Then we have troubles.
Mr. REGULA. But you will be able to prioritize for us.
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, sir. If it turns out that way, I would appreciate what you have done in the past, which is to permit me to confer with you about that.
Mr. REGULA. Indeed, we will. Once we know what we are dealing with, we will get back to you.
Mr. HEYMAN. Thank you.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Nethercutt.SMITHSONIAN RESEARCH BUDGET
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of more questions.
How much money is spent on Smithsonian research, how much in your budget would you estimate?
Mr. HEYMAN. We are looking it up. This is a very hard question. The reason that it is a hard question is that people who do research are also doing exhibitions, by and large, and it is very hard to allocate between the two.
For instance, putting aside scientific research at the moment, if you are in an art museum, and there are seven, most of the research that occurs is in the preparation of catalogues for shows, and whether to think about that in exhibit terms or research terms is just hard.
Also, we do research in Air and Space and in Natural History. In Natural History it is a little easier because there are some people who only do research and do not do exhibitions. But in most of the other places it is a mixed bag. We have been testing systems of having people try to put their time into different categories. We have only had one year of that experience. We are not very satisfied with it yet, but it will be the first attempt that we have made to discern between program exhibition, on the one hand, and research on the other.
I have said in the past that, by and large, it is about 50/50, and I think that will probably bear out.
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. NETHERCUTT. 50/50 of what?
Mr. HEYMAN. Of exhibition and research, when you look at that part of our—that is our output, basically; our exhibitions, other public programs, and research. That is what we do. I have thought about it in terms of something like, roughly, half and half.
But, as I say, it is very imprecise because it is very hard to allocate amongst many of the individuals. It is a little like universities in that sense.
WHY SMITHSONIAN DOES RESEARCH
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I have been a reader of the Smithsonian Magazine. I find it very interesting. I, in fact, read an article some time ago on methyl bromide for agricultural uses.
Following up on Mr. Skaggs' line of questioning and the Chairman's, I just was thinking we have the National Science Foundation; we have the Department of Agriculture; we have all of the universities that do, literally, billions of dollars' worth of research, around this country; we have NIH; we have tremendous resources, and I am wondering, No. 1, just for the record, how can you justify—I do not mean that in an offensive way—justify for the committee why the Smithsonian ought to be doing any scientific research, as opposed to feeding off of the other governmental resources and university resources, assuming that there is some substantial cost to it, and, second of all, is there a charge in the mission of the Smithsonian to do scientific research and present it?
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. The Smithsonian, really, its strategic plan, if you will, built in from the very beginning was the Smithson bequest, which is the beginning of the whole Smithsonian, and he left this money for the increase and diffusion of knowledge, and it was taken from the very beginning that increase really meant research. As a matter of fact, the first Secretary of the Smithsonian, Joseph Henry, viewed the Smithsonian solely as a research institution and did not see it having other roles.
He saw it collecting some, but only in relationship to research, and the research product would be by scholarly papers and by like kinds of product.
The second Secretary of the Institution, Spencer Baird, was a naturalist, and he also was the assistant secretary or under secretary for Henry. He had a lot of objects, natural objects, and he believed that not only should we be doing research on those natural objects—many of them were the product of Western exploration—but he thought we also ought to exhibit them.
We have gone along from the very beginning balancing research with exhibition and other kinds of public programs.
What happens, of course, is that we get our niches. I would be happy—and it is hard to do here to take us through the whole of the Institution—but what you find, for instance, presently, is that our chief research institute that is also a museum, which is Natural History, has a niche.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
It really is, as I was saying before, the archive of the United States, as far as natural objects are concerned, and I would say thank goodness for that because at the university level, as people have become more and more interested in molecular genetics and a variety of other experimental kinds of analyses, we have persisted in keeping this collection, which others are giving up. I can take you through universities around the United States that are going out of the business of keeping objects, systemizing in terms of those collections, and having them available for a whole variety of research that still is exceedingly useful.
I would say that if the Smithsonian gave that up and gave up the associated collection management and analysis of that material, we would leave a big hole in the future with respect to the natural sciences in the United States.
I can take you through other things that we do, which you can see historically how they came to pass, and what are the niches that they are covering. If you take the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, which is now one of the premiere astronomy units in the world, it fits right into what is happening with NASA and with NSF because much of its funding comes from them, and it is a principal agency now that is carrying out missions for them in terms of managing those missions and doing a lot of the basic research that occurs.
Part of that is historical accident, just like institutions always grow. If you look at what is happening at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, it is probably the premiere tropical biology institution in the world, and that happens because of its location. It was there. It had people in it who were aggressive, in terms of building it. It is not duplicative research.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In fact, people who are interested in that come from other places to it and become resident scholars and do their research there. But I think we could go through the whole of the science program in the Smithsonian and show that it is differentiated from others. It is related, but it has its own special niches, and it is darn good, and it would be a shame to give that up, at least from my perspective, as an undertaking.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I understand. I am not surprised that you would feel that way.
Mr. HEYMAN. Passionately. [Laughter.]
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I know.
Mr. YATES. That is the purpose of Smithsonian, actually, is to do research, and if research is not to be continued, I would hope it would be from another institution that the research was taken away because that has been the Smithsonian's job, that has been its function, and it has been outstanding in the field of research.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I learned a lot about methyl bromide. I am just wondering why the Smithsonian is doing methyl bromide research, that is all.
Could you, for the record——
Mr. HEYMAN. Mr. Nethercutt, I doubt if we are. About ten percent of the contents of Smithsonian Magazine have to do with what is happening at the Smithsonian. It is viewed at the Smithsonian as an independent activity. So that most of what it writes about is happening outside of the Smithsonian. I would be surprised if we were doing that research there.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Would you kindly, for the record, advise the committee of the answer to the question about how much is devoted to research at the Smithsonian.
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, we shall.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Thank you very much.
[The information follows:]
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION RESEARCH
In FY 1997 the Institution spent approximately $85 million or 26 percent of the Salaries and Expenses account on research.
Mr. REGULA. Anyone else?
Mr. SKAGGS. As evidence that the Smithsonian's magazine subject matter extends way beyond the Smithsonian, they had a piece, which I am actually going to give you a note about, a piece a couple of years ago, last fall, about Congress and behavior of Congress. [Laughter.]
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I would like to get the citation on that one. [Laughter.]
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. SKAGGS. If there is a curator down there working on Congress, we really ought to know about it. [Laughter.]
SMITHSONIAN PRIORITIES
Mr. REGULA. I want to close the hearing, but I think Mr. Nethercutt has a point, and that is, whether it is the materials in storage, whether it is research, I think you should constantly have a critical analysis to determine if this is relevant in 1998 and prospectively in the future because it is all expensive. I think, as far as the eye can see, you are going to be constantly faced with prioritization.
I would like to put $50 million in backlog maintenance, and I would like to deal with the problems at the Zoo. But to do that, it has to come from somewhere else. So it becomes a management function of saying are the 99 percent, give or take, of things that are in storage are they all relevant either today or at some time in the future, or should you be doing some de-accessing, I guess is the word, to avoid building new buildings. New buildings mean people, they mean heat, and light, and air conditioning, in many instances. They are expensive.
Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, on that point, there is a rumor that Renwick is going to be converted to a presidential museum. [Laughter.]
Mr. HEYMAN. There are lots of rumors.
Mr. YATES. That is not true.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. HEYMAN. No, I must say that from time to time I have thought would it not be nice if we took all of the things in the Smithsonian that related to the presidency and had them next to the White House, but I think the obstacles to doing that are considerable.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Mr. Chairman, may I just interrupt?
Mr. REGULA. Yes.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. I might say, too, out in Spokane, Washington, my hometown and the center of my district, there is an Indian museum that is proposed, and I suggest to you that the Cheney Coles Museum there would welcome, excess items, in the broadest sense without derogating from their value. This may be something to think about in terms of the other museums that are not Smithsonian, but are around the country who may welcome some of the things that you must leave in storage.
Mr. HEYMAN. We would be delighted. You know we have started this Affiliations Program, and we would be delighted of a showing of interest, and then we could start a conversation, and I am sure something could come of it. So, please, if you could give them the word, we would be appreciative.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SMITHSONIAN HOME PAGE
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. I think it is a great idea, and you have pursued that path.
In the 12,000 hits a month that you got on your Web site——
Dr. O'CONNOR. 12 million, sir.
Mr. REGULA. Wait a minute, 12 million a month?
Dr. O'CONNOR. It is 12 million, right.
Mr. REGULA. Is this all from people seeking information? What kind of hits do you get in that 12 million?
Dr. O'CONNOR. The hits tend to follow the behavior of people that would visit the Mall physically. About 20 percent are from overseas. The most significantly visited pages are Air and Space followed by Natural History followed by American History and the Zoo. The demographics are also interesting.
Mr. REGULA. That is fantastic. Does this develop an e-mail message from those people that are taking advantage of your Internet facilities saying, ''We think you ought to have this on''? Constructive criticism, I guess, is——
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes. Yes, quite a bit.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. Do you get some of that?
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, quite a bit.
Mr. REGULA. Other than from this committee? [Laughter.]
Mr. HEYMAN. A lot of it is invited. Comments are invited at a number of the sites.
Mr. REGULA. Is that right?
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes.
Mr. REGULA. That is very interesting.
Well, there will be questions for the record, and we will be back to you on priorities.
VISITING STUDENTS
Mr. Moran, would you like to introduce your guests here?
Mr. MORAN. They are all from Mount Vernon High School, and they are all the best students in the Governments Class. They decided, even though the President is up here speaking, that they would learn more by coming to this Appropriations hearing under Chairman Regula and listening to the Smithsonian Institution. [Laughter.]
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. Yes, they are the brightest students. [Laughter.]
Mr. MORAN. That is right. That puts us in line for a grant some day, if we can think of something——
[Laughter.]
Mr. MORAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for letting me introduce them.
SMITHSONIAN MEDIA PRODUCTIONS
I have three small areas to ask about.
Incidently, it is phenomenal to me how great a job Mrs. Newman can do with the Smithsonian and the Financial Control Board. This woman must never sleep. I used to know her at HEW, when she worked for the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, and was taking care of migrant farm workers. She has a phenomenal record of public service.
But anyway, let me get back to the point. One thing I wanted to say, is that it is so exciting what the Smithsonian is doing with regard to making its collections available throughout the country. I know you must have talked about this, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Nethercutt, but, boy, leading the way, making this truly a national institution, I just can't thank you enough for that kind of initiative.
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I read an interesting thing, that you are going to get into the movie-making business. The Washington Post reported yesterday that you signed an agreement to produce full-length, made-for-TV-movies, with Mandalay Television Pictures and Showtime Networks, and you are going to be drawing from your vast collections of artifacts and materials. You are going to do three films, and it is going to give credibility to these films, obviously.
I want to know, is this the kind of thing that you are going to be expanding? Do you keep creative control over these movies? Is this the start of something really big or is this just kind of putting your foot in the water to see how it works?
Mr. HEYMAN. That is a very good question. We have been dealing with a Hollywood agent, the Creative Artist Agency, seeing whether there was some fit between the Smithsonian and media of the sort that film, TV, and other kind of productions.
We have been talking about this and looking at opportunities now for the last year-and-a-half. This is the first one that is working.
Whether this is a harbinger of a lot that will work, I just do not know. I think that you put your finger on a very interesting fact, which is that we have to retain a considerable amount of responsibility for content, for all of the obvious reasons, and that is hard for producers and directors to live with when they are in the business of making money.
So whether we can really pull this off, I do not know. I think this will be a very interesting experiment to see whether this works well. I hope we will because, if we do, that means that is yet another way that the Smithsonian can get out with its materials and its stories.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. MORAN. Yes. Good.
SMITHSONIAN HOME PAGE
The second area was getting the Smithsonian on line—getting all of this wonderful material on line. A lot of people are asking us, they see a little bit of it, and they are asking how much are you putting in to getting it all on line? You have got another $3 million for digitization in the budget. Are you going to make exhibits, virtual exhibits, on-line to people around the world that may not be able to come to Washington, but could experience it through the Internet?
Mr. HEYMAN. We are doing two things at the moment; one is we are putting exhibitions on line, and we have a number on line now, and we are even designing one that is specifically for the Web. It is not simply replicating an exhibition in a museum.
Secondly, we are trying to digitize as many two- and three-dimensional objects as we can in the Smithsonian and have them available for people to see, together with explanatory text. The monies that we are seeking, in terms of our base, are largely to enlarge that number of digital images and have them in a system in which you or I or anybody else who wishes can find them and find something about them that accompanies the image.
Mr. MORAN. Again, that is terrific, and it broadens the base of support for the Smithsonian.
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
One last area.
Mr. HEYMAN. Yes, sir.
NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK
Mr. MORAN. That is the National Zoo. There is a report out recently that shows that about four of the parts of the property there are in serious need of repair, and we have people throughout the Metropolitan Washington area that are concerned about this.
They put in money through FONZ, and I know you get some private contributions. I doubt the private contributions represent a lot in terms of percentages. Are the animal habitats compromised by the current conditions at the facility and is there enough money in this budget to upgrade those facilities that came out wanting in the last report that just came out? That is, the last area I am going to ask about, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. NEWMAN. I think we can say that we are comfortable that this request, in addition to a request that we will be making in the future based on an analysis of all of the facilities there, will be adequate for the Zoo.
We are not concerned about the health and safety of the people working there or the visitors, nor are we——
Mr. MORAN. I think, actually, these people are more concerned about the animals.
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. NEWMAN. Well, I was going with the animals. Nor are we concerned about the conditions for the animals. What we do know, though, is that, given the age of the facilities, that we are going to have to go through the same kind of analysis there as we have gone through for the rest of the Institution, and we are in the process of doing that.
I do not know if the director wants to add——
Dr. ROBINSON. Well, certainly, I do not think any animals are in substandard conditions at all anywhere in the Zoo.
Mr. MORAN. They all seem pretty happy, especially that gibbon. But you do not know, and, apparently, the report implied that some of the habitats may be compromised, but I doubt that you would let that happen.
Dr. ROBINSON. No. In the short-term, there are repairs needed, and this has been accumulating, as with the rest of the Smithsonian over the years, and we have been very assiduous in dealing with this. I think you will find—we should invite you to come and have a look at the Zoo and its new image and see if you feel that.
Mr. MORAN. That is terrific. This is probably the only group of witnesses that would use terms like assiduous or as impressive as assiduous. [Laughter.]
Mr. REGULA. They hope they are. [Laughter.]
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. MORAN. Thank you. You are doing a great job in every aspect. And all of the people that work with you I think are just really professional, first-class. So thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Closing Remarks
Mr. REGULA. I want to thank all of you. We have had a good hearing, and we will be communicating with you once we know what our priorities are as a committee, so that we can achieve the best possible use of the funds available.
I hope that you will continue to evaluate all of your operations to make them as cost-effective as possible. I always remember in World War II when they issued stickers to everybody to put on the dashboard of your car that said, ''Is this trip really necessary?'' because of the enormous fuel shortage. I think you have to take the same approach in any institution; is this function really necessary? Is it serving a good, useful purpose?
Thank you. We are recessed until 1:30.
[The following questions and answers were submitted for the record:]
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
Thursday, March 12, 1998.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS
WITNESSES
KATHRYN O'LEARY HIGGINS, ACTING CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS, AND DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
SCOTT SHANKLIN-PETERSON, SENIOR DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS
"The Official Committee record contains additional material here."
Mr. REGULA [presiding]. We're underway here.
We're pleased to welcome Kathryn Higgins, am I right?
Ms. HIGGINS. It's Kitty Higgins.
Mr. REGULA. Kitty Higgins, and Ms. Scott Shanklin-Peterson, am I right?
Ms. SHANKLIN-PETERSON. That's correct.
Mr. REGULA. Okay. Well, we're pleased to welcome you here today. Your statements will be made a part of the record, and so if you'd like to summarize for us. You may proceed.
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. HIGGINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's a pleasure to meet you and to be here today.
I've been serving as the Acting Chair of the National Endowment for the last 5 months. As you know, since Jane Alexander resigned last fall, the President had to ask someone who had been confirmed by the Senate to serve in this capacity. So in my day job, I'm the Deputy Secretary for the Department of Labor. But it's a lot of fun for me to work with Scott and her team.
MEMBERSHIP OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON THE ARTS
One of the things that I've had to do, working with Scott and others, is to help convene the National Council. We met just a couple of weeks ago and welcomed six new members—colleagues from the House and Senate—to serve as new members of the Council. As you may recall from last year's appropriations bill, the size of the Council was reduced. When we added the six new members——
Mr. REGULA. I had a little to do with that.
Ms. HIGGINS. I thought you might have.
One of the things that I think we've discovered and I think we would like to work with you on is the fact that by reducing the size in terms of voting members, there are a number of the disciplines that right now don't have expertise represented on the Council. So I think we would like to talk to the committee about taking a look at that as to whether it might not make sense to expand it a little bit to give us the opportunity to make sure all of the disciplines that the Endowment deals with are covered.
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Bill Ivey, who has been nominated, and with whom I think you have had a chance to meet, will hopefully be confirmed by the Senate soon. He's, I think, going to be a great addition and a great chair.
The two messages that we heard most clearly from the new members—new colleagues—of the Council, were the need to expand the reach of the Endowment to communities that are under-served and to focus more on arts education. Those are two things that I know are probably not new issues to you, but we had, I think, a very good discussion with your colleagues and members of the Council about those two areas as priorities. Scott and I are both prepared to talk today about how we expect to do that.
MUSEUM IN GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
I wanted to share with you and for the record the experience I had last year when the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota, as you may recall, was affected by the floods, and how devastating that was to them. I think everybody in the country saw the effect of the floods and the fires on that city. One of the facilities that was preserved miraculously in Grand Forks was the North Dakota Museum of Art. It is a NEA grantee, and I spoke today with its director. Their story is, I think, emblematic of what the NEA is all about.
The North Dakota Museum of Art is a museum that showcases contemporary artists. When the city was basically under water, and in the aftermath—and they are still cleaning up out there—the arts museum became a community center. Church services are held there. The dance companies now practice there. Various community groups meet there on a regular basis. It already was, in many ways, the heart and soul of the community, but after the devastation, it has become even more so. The director asked me to tell you that in Grand Forks her museum is a tremendous advocate for the NEA because it has allowed them to bring things to North Dakota that would otherwise not be there. Not only, you know, the museum itself, but also the kinds of art and experiences that folks in that part of the country don't often get to see.
Page 67 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. REGULA. I suggest she write me a letter with that information.
Ms. HIGGINS. Absolutely.
Mr. REGULA. I'd like to have that.
Ms. HIGGINS. She would. She's more than happy to share their experiences with you. She said to me—and you can appreciate this from the part of the country you come from—she said, you know: the Chicago museum calls her about wanting to see if the museum in North Dakota is interested in photography exhibits of farmers. And she said: ''We know all about farmers in North Dakota, we want to experience other things.'' So she's had many, many other exhibits and she's willing to be a very strong advocate for the Endowment.
ARTSREACH INITIATIVE
Let me just mention in terms of under-served communities, ArtsReach, which Scott will talk about, is a brand new initiative that will do much, I think, to make sure that the Endowment's work reaches all parts of the country that are now under-served. That is something we're very excited about. Part of the new money that the President is requesting over last year's appropriations will go in substantial measure to support the ArtsREACH effort.
Mr. REGULA. I'd like to make a suggestion at this juncture. Whenever a grant is made, please send a notice to the Member whose district is affected.
Page 68 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. HIGGINS. You know, we've——
Mr. REGULA. I think Members would welcome that and it would broaden the base of support for this program.
Ms. HIGGINS. Absolutely. That's an initiative, and we've, again, heard from your colleagues. It is something they were very concerned about. We will do that. I think it's already done, but I think we probably need to work at it harder and make sure that the Members are contacted directly and that we do a coordinated press effort to make sure you know what's being done.
ENDOWMENT AND CONFERENCE OF MAYORS
So, we've also, as you perhaps know, worked very closely with the Conference of Mayors to make sure that the cities in this country are working closely with the Endowment to make the arts available in their communities. And that's, I think, been a very positive effort. I was part of an award celebration a few weeks ago where the mayors from all across this country recognized the contributions that were being made in many places by the Endowment. In particular, Senator Gorton and Congresswoman Louise Slaughter were singled out by the mayors as two Members of Congress who had done a lot to help them in preserving arts in their communities.
LEONARD SLATKIN AND ARTS EDUCATION
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Arts education is an area, again, we could all agree is extremely important. The Endowment spends money in this area. I think the State Arts councils probably do a lot of work as well. It's an area where the new money the President has requested would do more. Leonard Slatkin spoke to our Council recently. He's the wonderful, relatively new director of the National Symphony, and he talked about the high school that he went to in Los Angeles. When he was in high school there, he said that there were three choruses, two bands, and one orchestra, all in one public high school in Los Angeles. He said, now it's been two generations since citizens of much of our public schools have had the benefit of those kinds of programs. He said his old school is now an armed camp. So he is a big proponent of arts education. He talked to the Council about the kind of work he hopes to do here in Washington in terms of arts education. He's somebody else who the committee may want to talk to in terms of his views on arts education.
NEA PARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
One of the areas that we are working on at the Endowment is how to involve other Federal agencies. The Department of Labor, for example, does a lot of work with unemployed and disadvantaged young people. The arts are something that we have supported in certain communities. We've got a terrific program in upstate New York, in Poughkeepsie where they have used some of the Federal money that we provide to match with the funding from the New York State Arts Council to make sure that young people get some exposure and training in skills that they can then use in the labor market.
We at the Labor Department are about to sign a memorandum of understanding with the NEA, again so we can work more closely in partnership on things like arts education for young people. There are now 30 agreements that the NEA has with other Federal agencies to work in partnership and expand the reach of the Endowment.
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
NEA ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET
Let me say that—and Scott will make a few remarks—one of the things that I've been struck by in my brief tenure working with the NEA is in fact how effective this organization is. I know there's a lot of concern about administrative funding. But the NEA has just 150 employees for its $98 million budget. The Labor Department, which is the agency I serve as Deputy Secretary, has 17,000 employees and a budget of $35 billion. The NEA last year awarded 1,000 grants and manages another 4,200 or so at any given point in time with those 150 employees. The Labor Department, and admittedly we are an enforcement agency as well as a grant making agency, last year awarded 1,300 grants, so just a couple hundred more than the NEA, and yet we have a much larger resource base and a much larger field structure, frankly, to do our work. Now, I'm not suggesting that you fund the NEA—[laughter]—at the expense of the Labor Department. But I am saying——
Mr. REGULA. I thought we were going to fund the Labor Department on the basis of their size. [Laughter.]
Ms. HIGGINS. That's what I'm worried about. So I want to, for the record, make sure that we're coming for more too.
But my point is, that when we talk about administrative—how much is spent on administrative funding—I think we have to look at the workload of the agency. And one indicator is the number of grants, plus all the other wonderful work they do. So, I want to just say that for the record.
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
FY99 FUNDING FOR THE ENDOWMENT
And I would also hope this year that the committee and the House would actually be able to pass an appropriations bill for the Endowment because I do think it's important that the agency be fully funded. I know we worked it out in conference last year, but I think it would be great to see if we could get some funding this year.
Let me stop there and ask Scott to talk to you about some of the other work we are doing.
Ms. SHANKLIN-PETERSON. Thank you, Kitty, and thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. I really appreciate the opportunity to testify today about the importance of the National Endowment for the Arts where I serve as Senior Deputy Chairman. Since the retirement of our former Chairman, Jane Alexander, I've been serving as the chief operating officer and we have certainly enjoyed working with Kitty Higgins and appreciate the Department of Labor allowing her to have this second job as our Acting Chairman.
ENDOWMENT EFFORTS IN SOUTH CAROLINA
Before joining Jane Alexander's staff in 1996, I was Executive Director of the South Carolina Arts Commission for 13 years, and on the staff 8 years prior to that. So I've had 21 years of experience working with State and local leaders to develop the State's cultural resources and ensure that the arts are a basic part of each child's education in South Carolina. So I know first hand how important the Endowment has been to the development of the arts and arts education in South Carolina and many other states.
Page 72 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Endowment, through our partnership grant to the State, helped to develop local arts agencies and local arts centers in about 50 rural communities such as McCormick, and Anderson, and Camden. Through a direct grant from the National Endowment for the Arts, the Endowment was the first investor in the Spoleto Festival, USA, in Charleston which is our Nation's leading international arts festival. It has an economic impact estimated at over $73 million per year for that city. And I've heard Mayor Joe Riley from Charleston say many times that Spoleto Festival, USA would not have happened in Charleston without the National Endowment for the Arts.
And because of the National Endowment's leadership and support in the areas of arts education, South Carolina's schools now have one of the country's strongest arts education programs. And just last night, I received at home, totally unsolicited, an article from a newsletter sent by a former representative in South Carolina, Harriet Keyserling, that is from her school district in Beaufort County, South Carolina, where they have 19 schools. They currently have 75 full-time arts specialists working in their schools, and they have an aggregate of 65 weeks of artists in residence in those schools, which is really truly amazing. And this would not have happened without the leadership from the National Endowment for the Arts.
PRESIDENT'S REQUEST LEVEL FOR FY99
The mission and support of the Endowment is really vital to the future of our country. And I'm honored to be here today to support the President's request of $136 million next year for our agency. The Endowment is a very small agency, as Kitty has pointed out, but it is still the Nation's largest single source of funding for the non-commercial arts. It's the engine that drives other public and private investment in the arts and we boost the economy.
Page 73 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, as well as your many colleagues and let you know how much we appreciate the hard fight that you fought to preserve the National Endowment last year and to create a workable, bipartisan compromise that enabled our 1998 funding to go forward.
The President has requested an additional $38 million, and that will enable us and Congress to help communities preserve and celebrate America's living cultural heritage—a goal that is shared by millions of Americans in every region. It will also permit us to expand our new pilot program, ArtsREACH and it will enable the Endowment to continue supporting learning opportunities for the arts for our children and support creative alternatives for youth at risk. And through our partnerships with our State Arts agencies and regional organizations, we will be able to expand access to the arts across the country.
ARTSREACH INITIATIVE
Mr. REGULA. Tell me about the ArtsREACH Program since you mentioned it.
Ms. SHANKLIN-PETERSON. Okay. That was what I wanted to talk about next. I know that you all have been very concerned about the distribution of dollars from the Endowment across the country and we have as well. And one of the programs that we have just started, and I'm pleased to announce it today, is an initiative called ArtsREACH. We will pilot this program this year with 1998 funds. It's a new grants program for communities in States that we consider to be under-represented in our pool of direct grants and it is accompanied by targeted technical assistance. It was approved by the National Council on the Arts at their meeting 2 weeks ago, and, as Kitty said, it was approved with very enthusiastic support from the new congressional members.
Page 74 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The purpose is to strengthen the role of the arts in communities, and to increase support for the arts, and to broaden the geographic distribution of the National Endowment's direct grants. We have designated 20 States that we consider to be under-represented as they have received five or less grants either this year or last year.
We've also developed at the Endowment a staff technical assistance team that will travel to these States to provide technical assistance, and to conduct workshops.
Mr. REGULA. There are 20 States that had five or fewer grants.
Ms. SHANKLIN-PETERSON. That's direct grants.
Mr. REGULA. Direct grants, yes.
Ms. SHANKLIN-PETERSON. They still received the funding for their partnership agreement with the State arts agencies in addition to that.
Mr. REGULA. No, I understand that. So this is designed to reach out.
Ms. SHANKLIN-PETERSON. This is designed to reach out to those 20 States. And then we will also we will send our staff out to provide technical assistance so that we can help those organizations submit additional competitive grants. And we'll be working closely with the State and local arts agencies as we do that. Just this past week we had one staff member that spent 3 days in Tennessee working with organizations there. This week the Director of our Guidelines Office is in South Dakota and in North Dakota, and in a couple weeks, one of our staff members will be in Alabama touring the State with the State's arts agency director and also a member of Senator Sessions' staff. And Senator Sessions was interested in the ArtsREACH program. He wanted to make sure that people in Alabama were aware of it.
Page 75 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
It will provide grants to arts organizations and communities in these targeted States, and we hope to be able to reach about 75 to 100 communities this year. The objective is to help community leaders use the arts to build stronger communities, and to revitalize the role of the arts in their communities, and to really increase their commitment to supporting the arts.
ROLE OF THE ARTS IN COMMUNITY PLANNING
One example is in Rock Hill, South Carolina, which is a small city that's located about 15 miles from Charlotte, North Carolina. In the late-1980s, they had 17 percent unemployment, and they had 12 textile mills that closed. The Mayor, Betty Jo Rhea, in the late-1980s attended the Mayor's Institute on City Design, a program that the Endowment began in 1986 to help mayors use design to address community problems. She came back very inspired. She brought the community together, and they developed a comprehensive plan to use the arts and design to revitalize downtown Rock Hill and to improve the economy of Rock Hill. In 1991, based on the strong plans that they had developed there, the National Endowment for the Arts awarded them a $150,000 grant which was then matched by $600,000 in local government and private sector support from the Rock Hill area. Now today, they have outdoor sculpture throughout the city, they have a new arts center, they have artist studios on Main Street, and they have an annual arts festival. They also have a two booming industrial parks, and they have low unemployment rate of 2.2 percent. So Rock Hill has become a community where people want to live. It's become a community where industries want to locate. Mayor Rhea credits the National Endowment for the Arts for stimulating this development.
Page 76 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This is only one example. There are others, such as Shreveport, Louisiana; Rapid City, South Dakota; and many other communities across the country that have been involved in community cultural planning.
ARTSREACH INITIATIVE
In addition, we hope that ArtsREACH will help these same organizations become more competitive not only for Endowment funds but also for local government funds, for State funds, and for funds from the private sector. Research that has been conducted by Americans for the Arts, which is our partner in this project, indicates that local arts agencies in communities where cultural plans have been developed are able to raise 33 percent more funding than those that have no such plans.
STATE ARTS AGENCIES' FUNDING
Mr. REGULA. How many States have a State arts agency, and do they all support them with State funds?
Ms. SHANKLIN-PETERSON. All States have State arts agencies. And yes, they definitely supporting them. This year they are support them at a total of about $306 million, which is a 12 percent increase over last year. So I think that really reflects strong public support for the arts throughout the country.
EXPANSION OF NEA GRANT DISTRIBUTION
Page 77 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We're proposing that we allocate $20 million of the President's proposed $136 million budget request to support ArtsREACH so that we can expand the number of communities that we'll be able to reach next year, in 1999, so we can provide funding for the specific grant applications that they would be developing through the ArtsREACH process this year, and also be able to support other project applications from the 20 States.
We've taken a number of other actions to expand the distribution of our grants. We have review panelists that will be recruited from all of these under-represented States. We have made sure that panel appointments are made from all of the States in the country and that they are all represented. We have added geographic impact to our review criteria. And we've worked with the State arts agencies to design a new Folk Arts Infrastructure Initiative which will reach over 30 States this year. And the millennium projects which we will be funding this year will be designed to reach all 50 States. And also, in accordance with the Congressional directive, we are monitoring our grant awards to make sure that no more than 15 percent is awarded to any one State, excluding the multi-State grants.
REACH OF MULTI-STATE GRANTS
I want to stress the importance of our multi-State grants. Congress asked us to establish a category to support grants that have a multi-State or national impact. This is one of the most important roles that the Ar