Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prevent any funding from going to the Lewis Center for Educational Research in Apple Valley, California.
Mr. Chairman, the Lewis Center has hosted more than 100,000 students, teachers, and parents participating in educational activities. The center's Web site contains a wish list for funding for three log cabins for third graders, an amphitheater, a schoolhouse shed, a large water wheel for panning gold during the gold rush educational fourth grade outreach program, and similar activities to that.
Mr. Chairman, these are undoubtedly worthy educational tools. My question is this: Why are Federal tax dollars intended for our national defense being used to fund this type of institution? It seems that corporate sponsors of the center abound, including corporations like JPL, Allied Signal, Boeing, Verizon, Lucent Technologies, Lomac Information System, Mitsubishi, RFG, Rockwell Rocketdyne Aerospace. Surely these donations can keep the center in good stead.
The center has already received $3 million in earmarked funds in fiscal year 2004 and an additional $2.5 million in 2005. It looks as if the center is back for more in this bill to the tune of $4 million.
The description of the earmark in this bill provides no detail on how the $4 million is to be spent on the Lewis Center. If there is a defense angle for this earmark, I am simply not seeing it. Again, it seems as if we are debating the Labor-HHS bill at this point or some other education bill and not the defense bill. These may well be worthy programs, but should we be funding them with defense dollars?
I would like to hear justification for the Federal defense function in this case. Again, why are we doing this in the defense bill? These are clearly educational functions. Why should we be taking money that could be spent for the troops and for the operations in the military for things like this?
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, earlier this evening Mr. Lewis talked extensively in support of projects and made I think the relationship between education for our youngsters in math and science and the work of the U.S. Department of Defense, and I believe that his comments are on the record and I would like to resubmit them in case they are not.