Arts news and views : Congress slated to give NEA a raise

Congress slated to give NEA a raise

Posted by arts_reviews

Anchorage Daily News

Posted: December 20, 2007 - 2:46 pm

Last March, I wrote in this space about the first Congressional hearing on federal arts funding in a dozen years. The push was to return funding for the National Endowment for the Arts from $124 million to its previous high of $176 million in 1994.

Well, the preliminary Congressional budget passed earlier this week doesn’t quite go that far, but it does include a $20 million funding increase. If this funding makes it past President Bush’s veto pen, the sum will represent the largest NEA budget increase in 24 years.

Upcoming NEA-funded Anchorage arts projects include February’s world premiere of an Alaska-set “Othello” written by UAA theater professor David Edgecombe. The adaptation will focus the play’s racial tension between Russian colonists and Native Alaskans.

Grants allocated for Alaska arts organizations in 2008 include $15,000 for the Anchorage Museum to curate a comprehensive exhibit of Native and non-Native art from the circumpolar region, and $10,000 for Alaska Dance Theatre to bring in Outside choreographers and dancers for its Out of the Box series.

--Sarah Henning

For more background, here's the spring column:

Last Tuesday marked the first congressional hearing on federal arts funding in a dozen years.

It's slightly difficult to celebrate that without acknowledging some bitterness. Twelve years is a long time: If you had a kindergartner during the last hearing, he's graduating this spring. But the upside is that artists and arts advocates finally got to explain why National Endowment for the Arts funding should be returned to its 1994 level of $176 million, up from this year's $124 million.

The funding levels affect many Alaska organizations and artists that earn grants directly from the NEA each year, as well as the Alaska State Council on the Arts, which gets almost half of its $1.17 million budget from the NEA.

Here's a little background on why the March 13 funding hearings were significant.

After Republicans took control of the House in 1995, a group of them tried to eliminate the NEA, alleging that public funds were supporting "obscene" art.

The NEA survived, but its budget was cut by 40 percent to $99.5 million. Since then, budget increases have barely kept up with inflation. The Bush administration's proposed 2008 budget earmarks $128.4 million for the NEA.

If you're thinking "Well, I don't go to the symphony or museums, so this doesn't affect me," you're mistaken. Alaska's arts council supports art endeavors from Juneau to Nome, including many that are preserving and passing down Alaska Native culture. Even people who don't see the inherent reasons why this work is important can understand that Alaska Native culture is the butter on the bread of the Alaska tourism industry.

Sure, some of these grants help stabilize large arts institutions in the million-dollar-budget club. But most of the grants support individual artists and grass roots efforts, such as totem pole carvers trying to pass on their craft. Many of the council-supported organizations help fill the gaps in Alaska's arts education by providing artists-in-schools programs and youth theater productions.

Arts advocates who testified for the NEA budget increase included jazz superstar Wynton Marsalis, Black Entertainment Television co-founder Sheila Johnson and David Cicilline, mayor of Providence, R.I., the famous industrial city turned cultural mecca. (Inexplicably, the representative of the acting craft was "American Pie" doofus Chris Klein. Patti LuPone, where are you when we need you?)

Those who testified in Washington didn't just bring outstretched hands. And they didn't just wax poetic about how art defines great nations. Or how it promotes understanding. Or how art education is linked to innovation in fields like science and technology.

That's all true, of course, but this isn't the information elected officials need to hear during wartime to convince them to spend money on the arts in good conscience.

Legislators need hard evidence.

Some particularly compelling testimony came from James Raisbeck, chief executive officer of an engineering firm in Seattle and board member for Seattle Opera, Seattle Symphony and Pacific Northwest Ballet, among others.

Raisbeck spoke about the NEA's trusted vetting system as a catalyst for other contributions. Once an artist or project passes muster with the NEA, it's like a green light to other donors. Studies have shown that every dollar the NEA gives typically generates seven to eight times more in matching grants, donations and earned revenue.

As a businessman, Raisbeck said, he sees arts as a prudent investment. The federal government invests $124 million in the NEA, and in return the arts in this country generate $134 billion in economic activity annually, supporting 44.5 million full-time jobs and leading to $24.4 billion in tax revenue for the federal government, according to a national economic impact study done in 2002.

Those statistics show clear reasons for the federal government to invest in the arts. But there's also a valid case for corporations to match those federal dollars, according to Raisbeck. He pointed out that arts contributions result in a positive corporate image and that arts organizations spend a good chunk of their grant money with local businesses, buying necessities ranging from lumber to copier toner to advertising campaigns.

But the biggest perk of all is this: Culture improves the quality of life in a community, a competitive advantage that attracts good employees and reputable businesses.

Raisbeck and his fellow arts advocates made the compelling argument that federal support for the arts is not only meaningful, it's a smart investment in America's economy.

As the 2008 fiscal budget nears approval, let's hope Congress and President Bush know a good deal when they see one.

Arts news and views

You Be the Critic

Archive

Congress slated to give NEA a raise

Comments