Bush Is Said to Seek More Money for Arts [$15 million to $20 million for NEA]

New York Times ^ | January 29, 2004 | ROBERT PEAR

[yonif]

WASHINGTON, Jan. 28 — President Bush will seek a big increase in the budget of the National Endowment for the Arts, the largest single source of support for the arts in the United States, administration officials said on Wednesday.

The proposal is part of a turnaround for the agency, which was once fighting for its life, attacked by some Republicans as a threat to the nation's moral standards.

Laura Bush plans to announce the request on Thursday, in remarks intended to show the administration's commitment to the arts, aides said.

Administration officials, including White House budget experts, said that Mr. Bush would propose an increase of $15 million to $20 million for the coming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. That would be the largest rise in two decades and far more than the most recent increases, about $500,000 for 2003 and $5 million for this year.

The agency has a budget of $121 million this year, 31 percent lower than its peak of $176 million in 1992. After Republicans gained control of Congress in 1995, they cut the agency's budget to slightly less than $100 million, and the budget was essentially flat for five years.

In an e-mail message inviting arts advocates to a news briefing with Mrs. Bush, Dana Gioia, the poet who is chairman of the endowment, says, "You will be present for an important day in N.E.A. history."

Mr. Gioia (pronounced JOY-uh) has tried to move beyond the culture wars that swirled around the agency for years. He has nurtured support among influential members of Congress, including conservative Republicans like Representatives Charles H. Taylor and Sue Myrick of North Carolina. He has held workshops around the country to explain how local arts organizations can apply for assistance.

Public support for the arts was hotly debated in the 1990's. Conservatives complained that the agency was financing obscene or sacrilegious works by artists like Robert Mapplethorpe and Andres Serrano. Former Senator Jesse Helms, Republican of North Carolina, repeatedly tried to eliminate the agency.

Some new money sought by Mr. Bush would expand initiatives with broad bipartisan support, like performances of Shakespeare's plays and "Jazz Masters" concert tours.

Mrs. Bush also plans to introduce a new initiative, "American Masterpieces: Three Centuries of Artistic Genius." This would combine art presentations — from painting and literature to music and dance — with education programs. The program would give large numbers of students around the country a chance to see exhibitions and performances.

New York receives a large share of the endowment's grants. But under federal law, the agency also gives priority to projects that cater to "underserved populations," including members of minority groups in urban neighborhoods with high poverty rates.

The president's proposal faces an uncertain future at a time of large budget deficits.

Melissa Schwartz, a spokeswoman for the Association of Performing Arts Presenters, an advocacy group, said, "We'll be fighting tooth and nail for the increase."

Some conservatives, like Representative Tom Tancredo, Republican of Colorado, vowed to oppose the increase. Even without support from the government, he said, "art would thrive in America."

Representative Louise M. Slaughter, a New York Democrat who is co-chairwoman of the Congressional Arts Caucus, said she was delighted to learn of Mr. Bush's proposal.

"There's nothing in the world that helps economic development more than arts programs," Ms. Slaughter said. "It was foolish for Congress to choke them and starve them. We should cherish the people who can tell us who we are, where we came from and where we hope to go."

Mr. Tancredo expressed dismay. "We are looking at record deficit and potential cuts in all kinds of programs," he said. "How can I tell constituents that I'll take money away from them to pay for somebody else's idea of good art? I have no more right to do that than to finance somebody else's ideas about religion."

The agency has long had support from some Republicans, like Representatives Christopher Shays of Connecticut and Jim Leach of Iowa.

"Government involvement is designed to take the arts from the grand citadel of the privileged and bring them to the public at large," Mr. Leach said. "This democratization of the arts ennobles the American experience."

[rwfromkansas]

THAT would be something that would give the moderates hearts beating.

Not giving more money to the NEA.

[Torie]

Joe I can't believe you actually "said" that. LOL.

[Charlotte Corday]

Can George W. Bush, the man who was unafraid to take on Saddam and the Taliban, be kowtowing before the arts lobby?

Clearly the man does not lack political courage. Therefore, the only possible conclusion is that he likes this sort of spending.

[over3Owithabrain]

I don't know if you've noticed - but Bush still gets beat up every day on the education issue. This after playing kissy-face with Ted Kennedy and signing a $$$ whopper of an education bill. So now we have a Democrat budget on education and guess what - the Dems still have the education issue to bludgeon Bush with. Now they can add big deficits to the list too. In addition, moves like this do nothing but dishearten at least a portion of his base. There is no political or electoral gain from this NEA giveaway, just like there isn't with CFR, immigration, etc. Bush apparently just likes to spend our money.

[Yaelle]

the agency also gives priority to projects that cater to "underserved populations," including members of minority groups in urban neighborhoods with high poverty rates.

OK, we are a white, middle-class family that cannot afford to go to plays, musicals, concerts, kiddie shows, or sporting events. We just don't have the extra because we live off of one salary so that I can be home with the kids.

I thought we were the kind of people Bush wants to support. Apparently not. We have to struggle not to envy the poor AND the rich!

[nopardons]

You don't understand politics nor government at all, to say such things.

Forget about how the GOP Congress forced Slick's hand, re welfare reform.THAT TOOK YEARS AND WAS PASSED ON THE THIRD TRY. Think about what the almost majority of Dems, in the Senate is doing to Bush's Judicial nominees.Think about all of the really HORRID things, that Clinton did, skirting Congress. Remember, remember, REMEMBER what those 8 years were REALLY like; not just a few selective things, like the welfare reform and balanced budget.

[FairOpinion]

I am glad you put the numbers in the title for context.

Out of the 2.2 trillion dollar budget, he adds $5 million to it the NEA.

While I also think that the Federal Government shouldn't be in the business of funding the arts, but this sure sounds like the smallest token increase imaginable,

0.00023%!!! of the budget. The entire funding of the NEA with the increase will be 0.0009%, i.e. less than one 1/1000th of a percent of the budget.

[InvisibleChurch]

why not just make it a google dollars? arty t*rds will be larger this year

[yonif]

While I also think that the Federal Government shouldn't be in the business of funding the arts, but this sure sounds like the smallest token increase imaginable,

Still doesn't matter. If a Democrat was proposing this, we would be sickened.

[Map Kernow]

Of course the dirty little secret, is that red meat types only get REALLY upset about government spending on stuff that they cannot relate too. I haven't read anyone getting upset about below market rate lease rates to ranchers who rent land from the feds for cattle grazing. I really haven't read much about government spending on the big ticket items either, ie medicare, medical subsidies, and social security, that made any sense. I haven't read any rants about spending on ethanol, and agricultural subsidies in general. I haven't read much about the maintenance of wasteful domestic military bases.

What makes you think we like that stuff instead? Haven't you heard??? Conservatives are mad at Bush over OVERALL OVER-spending. You want us to cherry-pick so we don't look "uncultured"?

This isn't about spending. It is about folks' splenetic over-reaction to a culture war they want to fight, with targets that prove so ever elusive, that they really can't get satisfaction from the fight. So they seek enemies anywhere that they can possibly be found, and then go ballistic.

Garbage. Why the HELL is a Republican President coming out now and increasing the budget for this particular boondoggle? You don't think there's political calculation behind it, however bone-headed? And yet you want to begrudge conservatives the right to react politically to this Clintonesque, Dick Morris inspired "mini-intiative" designed to appeal to the cultural and political left---you think it's going to appeal to conservatives or that it's meant to???

[inchworm]

Here's the points Bush has given for Liberal Govt:
1. CFR, and limitations on the 2nd Ammendment
2. Passing Medicare drug coverage.
3. Engorging the Education Bill
4. Even the mere though of encouraging more illegal aliens
5. Increasing the NEA funding
6. Going to Mars. This really isn't a Liberal thing but it sure is stupid so I put it here.

Here's the points Bush has given for Liberal Govt:
1. The war
2. An antiabortion Bill
3. The Tax cut (Forgot about this one just added it).

[Torie]

Bush apparently just likes to spend our money

No Bush really cares about ghetto kids being warehoused in educational dumpsters. On this issue, Bush is right, and the usual and unusual suspects are all wrong. Bush should go after them all, again and again, starting with the Pubbie perps in the Virginia House of Delegates. But he should do it gently, since they are Pubbies, and just being bitch slapped by the whinning teachers in their districts, who can't take the heat. There should probably be a government subsidy for early teacher retirement. The stables need to be cleansed. They stink.

[FairOpinion]

As I said, I disagree as well.

But the way to look at it, is that Bush took one bullet out of the gun of the Democrats, which is aimed at him.

[Diddle E. Squat]

You don't know Philly suburban moderate females well, do ya? Its almost never about one single issue, but a series that leads to a 'sense' about someone. He's trying to develop a trust with swing moderates, those who don't necessarily think like you. This does matter, it may be just a ripple, but it adds up.

The same reason why its a good idea to occasionally bring your gal flowers, a box of chocolates, send a surprise happy e-mail, put a sweet note under her windshield wiper, etc. Those little things add up, make a difference, and go a long way towards defining that 'sense', breaking down her natural cautiousness, developing trust, wooing, etc. This NEA thing is about softening the edges, breaking down the 'threat' that the Dems always try to portray the GOP as being.

I can assure you that Bush is far from 'dumb as a box of rocks'...

[TheAngryClam]

Some stated goals of Bush from 2000 included stopping CFR and shrinking the size of government too.

[for-q-clinton]

I understand politics all to well. I'm not saying Clinton was great...he was horrible and rotten. Hell just read my screen name--when you figure it out you'll no that I'm not fond of him at all.

By my saying that, I'm expressing how strongly I'm opposed to this spending increase.

But I will give this to Bush he's a master politician. I was worried the first 2 years, but I said I'd reserve judgement until the mid term election. If we won both houses I'd be happy (thinking he'd turn conservative with the proper backing). But he turned more liberal. So I tell myself that's just to get elected after the election he'll turn conservative.

You know the saying...fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. Bush does not need to increase their funding. Unless he knows it won't pass congress (meaning he has it in writing on not just assumes it like he did with CFR and the courts) he should not be talking about spending more money. He needs to be talking about cutting $$$.

[rock58seg]

We are in a Sci-fi book and an evil sorceror has taken over the mind of the President????? Some trusted advisor, must have the goal of losing the next election.

[Keith]

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think Laura is the bomb, and perhaps this is an area she feels she can affect some good. It's not like she is trying to inflict us with some multi-trillion dollar govy health care system...

...like you-know-who...

[Torie]

It appeals to me, because I think I got it right. It is not meant to persuade those that are not subject to persuasion. It is meant as commentary. I appreciate you don't like it. Fair enough.

[Finalapproach29er]

I'm starting to believe Maddy Albright.

Maybe we do have Osama stashed until October.

Nothing else explains the brazeness and cockiness of this action. Giving the finger to conservatives when your @54% seems otherwise foolish.