New Hope for More Funds for the NEA

Following statements supporting the arts in last week’s State of the Union address--coupled with a call for increased federal arts funding in his fiscal 1998 budget--arts supporters in Washington expressed hope that President Clinton’s bold public stance would result in a rebuilding of the National Endowment for the Arts, which was hobbled by aggressive congressional budget-slashing in 1995.

In his fiscal 1998 budget, presented to Congress last Thursday, Clinton requested a $36.5-million increase in the NEA’s annual appropriation, raising it to $136 million from the $99.5 million the NEA received in fiscal 1996 and 1997. The request followed comments during the State of the Union address that read in part: “Instead of cutting back on our modest efforts to support the arts and humanities, I believe we should stand by them . . . so that we can remain the world’s beacon not only of liberty but of creativity long after the fireworks have faded.”

Yet, Clinton’s request for $136 million is still substantially lower than the $162.3 million the arts agency received in 1995. A White House spokeswoman confirmed that Clinton also asked for $136 million last year.

NEA spokeswoman Cherie Simon said: “I think the two things happening in the same week is a remarkably strong statement from the White House that they are going to continue to support the federal role in the arts. Although he has spoken fairly eloquently on the subject at arts-related events, this was a major public address to the nation, and he chose to link [the arts] to the millennium.”

*

Simon, as well as other arts observers, believe that the NEA’s potential role in millennium-related arts projects may play in the agency’s favor in upcoming budget hearings (no final decision will be announced on NEA appropriations until September). Artists’ applications have already gone out for millennium projects, she said.

Simon added that it is too soon for the NEA to say how it might use additional dollars, but said the agency would maintain its current structure. Following the 1995 budget cut, the agency consolidated its grants categories into four areas, eliminated most individual artists grants and limited arts organizations to one grant application per year.

Melanne Verveer, deputy assistant to President Clinton, said both Clinton’s pro-arts statements and his increased arts budget request show “a continuing recognition by the president that the arts are not marginal in our society. . . . I think that’s what both the budget request [and the address comments] mark in this time of diminishing resources and his verbal commitment.”

Although Verveer acknowledged that Clinton stopped short of directly asking for more money for the NEA in his address, she said his remarks reflect “a recognition that the endowments have been incredibly cut, and we are feeling the impacts across our country.”

Verveer said that though Clinton’s budget request is the same as it was for fiscal 1997, she believes Clinton has an improved chance of getting Congress to support the expenditure this time around. “I think we recognize that it is a time for challenge; it will be important for all of us to think about the contribution that the endowments make [to society] and be hopeful that the Congress will see fit to support them,” she said.

Verveer added that the fact that Clinton did not make a similar statement in his 1992 State of the Union address does not mean he was less committed to the arts during his first term as president.

“He has been eloquent on this issue in any number of appearances in the past four years,” Verveer said. “Hillary [Rodham Clinton] has also been incredibly active in support of our cultural life. Many of our cultural institutions are thinking about the millennium and preparing for it now, and I think what the president is saying is, it’s very important that we do it.”

*

Conservative members of Congress who have traditionally attacked the arts agency, as well as members of the religious right who have lobbied Congress to de-fund the NEA, did not return repeated calls for comment since the speech.

Changes in Congress have been cause for some optimism. Bob Lynch, president of Americans for the Arts, a national arts advocacy organization, points to a few very vocal NEA foes who have been voted out, including Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garden Grove), who lost his seat to Democrat Loretta Sanchez. Dornan had referred to some artists funded by the NEA as “porno freaks.”

“Bob Dornan is a key one, because he was so loud about it,” Lynch said, adding that gains may be offset by losses, since some strong arts supporters, including Rhode Island Democrat Sen. Claiborne Pell and Kansas Republican Sen. Nancy Kassebaum have retired.

Lynch also believes that the recent restructuring of the NEA may help win over conservative Congress members. The new structure excludes the often-controversial individual artists grants, as well as denying general arts agency support without individual project approval. “Congress made known some things that it had questions and concerns about, and [chairwoman] Jane Alexander and the NEA responded brilliantly,” Lynch said. “I think Congress has to think that this agency listened, and was sincere, and has to reward that.”