Skip to comments.
Bush Is Said to Seek More Money for Arts [$15 million to $20 million for NEA]
New York Times ^
| January 29, 2004
| ROBERT PEAR
Posted on 01/28/2004 8:29:35 PM PST by 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."
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: biggovernment; laurabush; nea; notconservatism; presidentbush; spending
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 1,001-1,004 next last
To: FairOpinion
Where in the Consitution is the authority granted?
This isn't about the money.
"Having the government finacially support that which you oppose is the worst form of tyranny". (paraphrase)
- Thomas Jefferson
141
posted on
01/28/2004 9:46:26 PM PST
by
Finalapproach29er
("Don't shoot Mongo, you'll only make him mad.")
To: yonif
"are you under the opinion that it will be a very, very close election?"
==
As a matter of fact I am concerned that it will be a very close election. The Dems will pull out all the stops -- every dead person, illegal alien, felon will be voting for the Democrat not once, but twice.
Wishful thinking is one thing, I hope Bush wins by a landslide, but you can't underestimate the viciousness, underhandedness, and determination of the Democrats.
That is why conservatives better think real hard about their votes -- they may be the once giving the election to the Dems, as they have given it to Clinton -- history repeating itself, making GW Bush a one term president.
The consequences will be too terrible to contemplate --- it will revive Al Qaeda -- but people will wake up too late.
To: Finalapproach29er
"This isn't about the money. "
==
No, it isn't. It's about an election.
To: DoughtyOne
Why not increase the NPR funding at the same time? Yikes.Don't give him any more ideas.
144
posted on
01/28/2004 9:47:47 PM PST
by
SAMWolf
(I am McMahon of Borg. You may already be assimilated.)
To: RLK
How many more insults must you receive to go through with it? It depends on how much I hate the RAT nominee. If I think he'll be ineffective and that our congress will keep him in check, then I'll be staying at home. Voting isn't easy as it requires me to drive somewhere and wait in line. I hate waiting in line and I hate leaving my house to go wait in line. So unless something motivates me to vote I will be sitting my arse on the sofa watching the election on TV.
145
posted on
01/28/2004 9:48:32 PM PST
by
for-q-clinton
(If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
To: Torie
..but we love getting off on irrelevant symbolic issues don't we? On to Mars...Brutal, Torie, but you nailed it. The Mars mission is this president's Sudanese aspirin plant.
146
posted on
01/28/2004 9:48:36 PM PST
by
Byron_the_Aussie
(http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/popup2.html)
To: Torie
Bush is flicking his middle digit square at moral conservatives with this move. You personally like that and find it refreshing - fine. But why do you think this will attract more people than it repels? What straw will be the last? I'm not talking about myself, but even people whom you might find loopy on the right supply much-needed votes. You're dreaming if you think the NPR crowd is going to leave Lake Wobegon for Bush because he threw a few taxpayer dollars their way.
To: F16Fighter
Freepers will get over it, except those that were on a final exit strategy anyway. Freepers that get fixated on this puppie are simply not in the game, politically. They are just ventilating, and probably most of those don't have much interest in "art" anyway. Art is for girlie men. OK, the issue is whether the government should subsidize it on the surface. But do you think that is really the source of the emotion over the spending of pennies? Of course not.
148
posted on
01/28/2004 9:49:06 PM PST
by
Torie
To: Hunble
"Once elected, a person becomes the President of the United States.
The President does not represent only Republicans or Democrats, but must move into a much more important job.
His one and only job, and that is to represent ALL citizens of the United States of America"
Nice try, but this is the actual oath - you know, the one where he put his hand on the bible and swore to:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
And I see not one damn thing about giving more money to artists who can't support themselves in the constitution.
149
posted on
01/28/2004 9:49:21 PM PST
by
flashbunny
(A corrupt society has many laws.)
To: Diddle E. Squat
This is all about Laura, She gave a speech to a group of people concerning the 'Arts' and children, she said that the "Arts" have been defunded over the years and that it's an important part of our culture and should be preserved. It's kinda hard to deny 15 to 20 Million to the "Arts" when we increased the Defense bill by Approx. 100 Billion in the past three years.
Not that I think we should fund the "Arts", but this is hardly deserves all the hand wringing and the standard "This is it, Bush has lost my vote" Where were all these people yesterday when the proposal to cut spending by over 100 million to the FAA?
150
posted on
01/28/2004 9:49:27 PM PST
by
MJY1288
(WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS, LIBERALS WOULDN'T HAVE ANY !)
To: yonif
Actually I much rather Bush used little token things like NEA funds to reach out to soccer moms, urban professionals, gays, whatever - than to completely sell-out the Country attempting to narrow his losing margin among Hispanics.
151
posted on
01/28/2004 9:50:32 PM PST
by
dagnabbit
(Tell Bush where to put his Amnesty and Mexico-Merger - - Vote Tancredo in Primary.)
To: FairOpinion
That is why conservatives better think real hard about their votes So to win, its ok to forgoe the conservative voters and go get some liberals on your side.....
152
posted on
01/28/2004 9:50:45 PM PST
by
yonif
("If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem, Let My Right Hand Wither" - Psalms 137:5)
To: Diddle E. Squat
Why Philly suburban wives? Do they even vote? Arent they too busy in the kitchen with cheesesteaks?
To: over3Owithabrain
Nope, Bush isn't going to win over the NPR crowd over this one. As Diddly said, it will attract some of those that irrationally fear that Bush is a captive of the religious right nutters, and thus he may do a bit better in the suburbs of the large urban areas where he ran so suck last time. The red meaters aren't going to vote for Kerry anyway.
154
posted on
01/28/2004 9:51:29 PM PST
by
Torie
To: FairOpinion
"That is why conservatives better think real hard about their votes"
Agree completely. Conversely, don't you think Bush ought to think long and hard about the conservative vote?
To: nopardons
...the UNAPPEASABLES on FR, has NEVER been his " base"!...Freepers aren't unappeasable, madame.
They'd settle for conservative crumbs from this president, in amongst his generous portions for the liberals. It's your ego that drives this back-to-the-wall attack on the President's critics, here. You just refuse to admit you've been wrong about him.
156
posted on
01/28/2004 9:53:00 PM PST
by
Byron_the_Aussie
(http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/popup2.html)
To: Byron_the_Aussie
LOL, good one.
To: Torie
I haven't read anyone getting upset about below market rate lease rates to ranchers who rent land from the feds for cattle grazing. Why don't we just charge them the full pop then. At the same time we can go back and charge full market rates for all the land that was homesteaded and nail the railroads for the sections that were granted to them. The cattle leases were designed to always be cheap land.
The government designated arable (and some not so arable) land for homesteading. When they got to the arid areas of Eastern Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming they knew that the land would never support dry farming. To encourage development they first considered Mexican style land grants to cattle growers. When they found out the vast acerages necessary for even minimal survival ranching they realized that the public would never go for the give away of such large tracts. As a substitute they settled on leasing, for a deliberately minimal amount, the same tracts. The leases were meant to be under market in perpetuity.
Jacking the lease rates now would be a breach of trust.
To: FairOpinion
Leaders teach, persuade people. This made Reagan great.
GWB just goes along with big government. Doesn't try to persuade people its no government role.
No change is brought. That's why we now spend $2 Trillon every 12 months.
159
posted on
01/28/2004 9:53:44 PM PST
by
Finalapproach29er
("Don't shoot Mongo, you'll only make him mad.")
To: Torie
nice rant, but it's about the constitution.
160
posted on
01/28/2004 9:54:25 PM PST
by
flashbunny
(A corrupt society has many laws.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 1,001-1,004 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson