A few days ago it seemed the $50 million that Barack Obama set aside for the National Endowment for the Arts in the U.S. stimulus package had been stripped from the bill entirely. But news surfaced today that the funding had been re-included in the legislation that will be voted on today (2/13/09).
Now – today – is the day to call your Senate and House Representatives. For instructions on how to do that, refer to our article, How To Influence U.S. Arts Policy. I just called my two Senators and my House Representative and you should too!
Let me repeat what I wrote earlier this week about why this funding is important to the arts industry in the United States:
1.) The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) is a federally funded organization that gives grants to help fund worthy arts organizations. Put another way, the job of the NEA is to give out money to stimulate OUR jobs in the economy’s arts sector.
2.) The budget of the NEA in the mid-90s was $180 million. The budget was slashed to $99.5 million in 1996 because of pressure from conservative groups, who criticized the agency for giving money to dirty, dirty, sleazy artist-types. Great hurrah was made in 2008 when George Bush finally increased the budget to a lousy $144 million.
3.) Giving $50 million of the stimulus money to the NEA would have represented just 0.00597% of the overall stimulus package, but will increase the NEA’s budget by over 30%.
4.) According to AmericansForTheArts.org: “National Endowment for the Arts funds, on average, leverage $7 in additional support through local, state, and private donations, for every one dollar in federal support. Fifty million in economic stimulus will leverage $350 million of investment in the nonprofit arts, which will help prevent 14,422 jobs from being lost.”
5.) The budget of a comparable organization in Canada, the Canada Council for the Arts, is US$122.3 million. Less than the NEA’s, of course, but the entire population of Canada is 33 million (about the same as California). Taking population into consideration, the Canadian government sets aside $3.68 per person for arts spending each year. The United States, with a population of over 303 million, spends $0.000473 per person on arts spending. The $50 million that Obama proposed to add to the NEA’s budget will raise that number to just $0.000474.
Now is the time – get on the phone. Congress votes on this bill today. Tell your representatives that you want them to support arts funding in the United States.
David J. Hahn
David J. Hahn is a Broadway conductor and keyboard player. He co-founded MusicianWages.com with Cameron Mizell in 2008. Visit his new project, Songwriter.fm and sign up for his songwriting newsletter.
While I appreciate the sentiment behind a stimulus for the arts, I’m a little apprehensive about teh practical aspect. It seems to me like a organizationtaht controlled money that went for the arts would have too much power in thier choices. If we relied on government funding, there would be no Clash, no Elvis, and no Marvin Gaye…
Hi Lorenzo, thanks for the comment.
I agree with you, federal governments shouldn’t be allowed to decide what art is worthy of funding. Eventually all art would be as inspiring as a mail office.
But at the same time, there is successful arts funding happening in other countries (I mentioned Canada in the article), so we know that the model can work.
I’d love to see an article about how it works in Canada, especially the selection process.
Even if gov’t funds don’t go directly to artists such as the Clash, Elvis, Marvin Gaye, or even me, it doesn’t mean the funds will be used to suppress the artists either. Providing funds for local symphonies, operas, and ballets, as well as programs to expose more people to that kind of art, will still inspire new artists to create, even if it means creating a counter-culture.
Plus I hope we can all agree that even the most bland art exhibit is more productive than dropping a bomb on somebody… though I suppose you could argue that bombs inspire artists to create, too.
All of your points are valid, and I agree with them. I’m just wary of giving any creative choices to the government, becuase they would never support anything subversive. And while a bland art exhibit is better than a bomb, it’s much worse than feeding a hungry kid…