I, for one, do intend to write to my representatives and the new president. But my letter will not be one of castigation, but of encouragement. I think that encouragement works better in support of the arts - or anything else for that matter.

Encouragement sounds good. The new administration starts with a clean sheet and has a chance to establish themselves as a supporter of the Arts that will at least repeat the NEA increase seen in the past year.

I've consolidated the 'Prospects for the Arts under "Dubya"' topic with this one, as they were basically discussing the same issues.<P>*****************************************<P><B>Maggie</B> posted January 21, 2001 08:21<P>Prospects for the arts in Bush's term as reported in the Los Angeles Times.<P><BR><A HREF="http://www.calendarlive.com/top/1,1419,L-LATimes-Sear_ch-X!ArticleDetail-17922,00.html?search_area=Articles&channel=Search" TARGET=_blank>http://www.calendarlive.com/top/1,1419,L-LATimes-Sea r_ch-X!ArticleDetail-17922<BR>,00.html?search_area=Articles&channel=Search</A> <BR> <P>***************************************<P><B>Basheva</B> posted January 21, 2001 11:26 <P>From the article in the above post:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Despite such cronies, Team Bush may well leave the NEA be. Under Gov. Bush, the notoriously weak Texas Arts Commission increased its budget to a current $4.7 million. That's low, but an increase is an increase.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>So maybe this is encouraging? The new administration is due to send their budget to the congress in February so in meantime -<P>If you wish, here is how to reach your representatives by e-mail to make your opinions known:<P><A HREF="http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm" TARGET=_blank><B>UNITED STATES SENATORS</B></A><P><A HREF="http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html" TARGET=_blank><B>UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</B></A><P><A HREF="http://www.house.gov/writerep/" TARGET=_blank><B>IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHO YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IS</B></A><P>The new administration is due to send in their budget in February so this would be the time to write.<P>***********************************************<P><B>mom2</B> posted January 21, 2001 11:30 <P>Thanks for starting this thread Maggie!<P>Although I have been living in Canada for a number of years I am a US citizen - and so are my 2 dancing daughters. At some point any of us might wish to live in the states again...<P>My own views about the presidential election aside, I really am concerned about the effects Ashcroft's appointment might have on the arts community. I visited another board yesterday that presented some quotes of his (including something about dance being immoral) that were quite alarming indeed. <P>I can only hope that reason will prevail..and that next year's Kennedy Centre Honors will not be a tribute to only one genre! Perhaps we need to send Dubya a copy of Mr Holland's Opus, to remind him of the importance of the arts. MonicaD Member posted January 21, 2001 11:43 <P>I have been wondering about the new administration's stance on the arts, as well.<P>It doesn't seem to bode well that dancing is against Ashcroft's religion. Does this include "concert" dance, or just free-style social dance (which I've actually heard called "air sex")? <P>Monica<P>------------------ <A HREF="http://www.musikinesis.com/" TARGET=_blank>http://www.musikinesis.com/</A> <P>*********************************************<P><B>mom2</B> posted January 21, 2001 11:51 <P>I have just read the other thread (now closed) related to this topic. <P>Of course, I should have read that one first...mea culpa.<P>Of course I would hope that if Mr. Ashcroft is appointed he will be able to put his religious/moral beliefs aside and deal with the issues of the day. I guess I have to say from experience that this would be an exceedingly difficult task...<p>[This message has been edited by Stuart Sweeney (edited January 21, 2001).]

Here is some more meat for the stew:<P>I have just returned from an interesting lunch with three friends during which I brought up this issue of funding for the NEA. Two of them label themselves as very liberal and they are adamantly opposed to it. They state that as long as anyone is hungry, without medical insurance, or homeless, that the arts are peripheral. That government and society's first obligation are these basic necessities.<P>I pointed out that when I was in Port au Prince, Haiti, the arts in that very poor country literally pours out onto the streets; music, sculpture, carvings, painting (I didn't happen to see any dance.) That apparently art is VERY important to the Haitians. But my friends said the difference was that this art emanted from the people, whereas government's funding should go for basic necessities first.<P>The third friend labels himself a moderate and he is also against NEA funding because he says it should come from the state, that nowhere is there a mandate for it in the federal constitution. He also feels that attorney general designate Ashcroft is not a threat as the attorney general enforces existing laws, he does not fund or make funding policy decisions.<P>So it seems there is a widely divergent point of view across the entire political spectrum amongst our fellow citizens.<P>There is also some interesting information on the net regarding NEA funding that is worth reading - you can follow the links for some very specific information as to the grant and eligibility requirements:<P><B>GRANTS TO ORGANIZATIONS</B><P><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The National Endowment for the Arts recognizes, encourages, and supports the excellence and diversity of our nation's artistic creativity and accomplishments. These guidelines articulate the agency's commitment to support the core artistic and public service projects of organizations that are involved in the arts. Assistance is available to nonprofit organizations of all types and sizes, and for projects in all arts disciplines.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> <BR><A HREF="http://arts.endow.gov/guide/Orgs02/OrgIndex.html" TARGET=_blank><B>GUIDELINES AND APPLICATIONS</B></A><P><BR><B>ELIGIBILITY</B><P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Nonprofit, tax-exempt, U.S. organizations may apply. Applicants may be arts organizations, local arts agencies, arts service organizations, federally recognized tribal communities and tribes, official units of state or local government (including school districts), and other organizations that can help advance the goals of the Arts Endowment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR><A HREF="http://arts.endow.gov/guide/Orgs02/eligibility.html" TARGET=_blank><B>MORE</B></A><BR>

Sorry if I come on too strong on this topic, but I feel really strongly about this. After 20 years in "the biz", I speak from a fairly informed perspective. I've been a dancer, artistic director, educator, choreographer and arts lobbyist! Of course, I realize that others have differing opinions. That's what CD is all about anyway!! There is room for everyone.<BR>As far as the controversial grants that you mentioned Basheva,we must remember that out of THOUSANDS of grant that have been given out over the years, there have been a grand total of approx. 20 that have been deemed "questionable". I think that's a fairly good record. Everyone talks about the horribly "obscene" grants which have been given, and not very much about the thousands of grants which have enlivened communities, helped children to find an expressive outlet, and changed lives.<BR>As far as giving money to art projects I don't agree with....I think the military/Dept. of Defense, for example, does many things I don't agree with, yet in the type of democracy we have, we recognize there is not going to consensus on every government agency or policy. I think the reason we get into such sticky territory are the areas where are art seems obscene, scary, offensive, etc. Dance and art deals often with the "body" which is a touchy subject for many of us....Remember our country was founded/settled by the Puritans and many other religiously based fundamentalists. WE have the precedence in our society of a dichotomy (and also crossover) between the government and religion. Although we talk about "separation between Church and State" this is not a uniform thing. What about our pledge of allegiane in which we talk about "one nation under God"? There are many gray areas where there is a "crossover" between these two areas.These controversial grants which have been awarded emphasize these issues and problems.<BR>I feel like many folks who would otherwise support the NEA are just sick of the whole controversy, and want to just chuck the whole thing and have the coroporations pick up the slack. Don't get me wrong..there are many private foundations and corporations who are contributing wonderful things to the arts....we need both public and private funding. <BR>As far as needing the basics of everyday life, before the arts (ie funding for the homeless, overseas aid),,,if you look at the history of modern dance in the US, you'll see that modern dance actually flourished and grew during times of great social upheaval and want...specifically during the Great Depression and in the 60's again. <BR><p>[This message has been edited by trina (edited January 22, 2001).]

Trina - I agree with you - again - a few controversial grants out of hundreds is a pretty good record. Unfortunately it is those few that get media attention and the public remembers. <P>As usual a few bad apples spoil the barrel or at least the public's perception of the barrel.<P>Let me repeat again - I am not against NEA funding..........

I'm not against any funding that goes directly from an individual to an organization.<P>If that individual wants to support "velvet sofa art" that's great. If a guy wants to spend LOTS of money making SURE that no SPOON with a welded joint can be sold within the limits of Manassas, VA, that's groovy too. (That is a true story btw. A poor tormented soul in Manassas was so worried about the potential for food poisoning that he lobbied suggessfully to have legislation passed that makes it a small crime to sell a welded jointed spoon in Manassas VA. That was passed through at taxpayer expense.)<P>I think that as individuals we have a responsibility to foster whatever pulls at our heartstrings. The arts. The hungry. The kid on our block that has to wear pants too sizes too small.<P>I am NOT in favor of funding a "bureaucracy" itself. It involves salaries just to ADMINISTER the money. And plane trips. And dinner for those flying around to MAKE all the decisions about who is worthy to get what. And the "judges and administrators" are most often selected by the arts community itself, and NOT by the "public" they serve (the "end user" so to speak.)<P>As a result what "trickles down" to the recipients might be less in proportion to what what was contributed by the tax payer than you might THINK it should be.<P>Plus, saying "I paid my taxes" salves a lot of souls. They feel GOOD 'cause they "fed the hungry" "supported the arts" and "took good care of my neighbor". When in FACT what they have very often done is support some very plush life styles of bureaucrats.<P>In some instances (the well off) they don't do "more" 'cause we've made it easy for them to let themselves off the hook. In some cases (the "have not's") they CAN'T support what they'd LIKE because their paycheck was taken from them.<P>I truly believe that human services and the arts should be taken care of at the grass roots level.<P>What is good, will endure. And what is fad will pass.

Jane, I believe, if I'm remembering correctly, that within the last 10 years, grants to individual artists has been severely limited, if not eliminated altogether by the NEA. The effect of all this controversy is that a higher percentage of money is now going to organizations and presenters (theatres, museums)than "trickling down" to the Artists themselves.

Great posts, Trina. On a wicked note of light humor about whether monies should go to help the poor, or the arts. Many of those people in the arts *are* the poor! Hey, we can kill two birds with one stone via arts funding!

<BR>Are you saying that's a "better" scenario Trina?<P>Why would that be "better"?<P>

Give my pastor a call Maggie. <P>He's a softie with that benevolence fund of his (I contribute to THAT fund 100% now since we paid off our mortgage, elected NOT to expand and have a surplus in the operating expenses budget. I NEVER contribute to the "general fund". I don't contribute to synod benevolence. I trust his responses to "immediate concerns" more than I do our synod's "general social concerns".)<P>He doesn't care if you aren't religious. He never asks. And very often the money just goes to folks in the middle of the night and they never KNOW where it comes from. It passes from him to an agency.<P>The end user never knows where it came from. <P>And seems like ONE time, there was a story of a little boy whose parents couldn't make those last few payments on his TROMBONE.<P>He'll take care of ya baby.

woo-hoo! And I bet you don't have to fill out grant application!

No grant applications at all Maggie. <P>I hope that kid really enjoyed that trombone. It was supposed to have been really important to him. His parents had just hit a hard time. Suddenly. Happens all the time where I live. Didn't mean he needed that trombone any LESS, just because his parents hadn't hit rock bottom yet.<P>You know, lots of folks never KNOW that these government agencies (that are WELL funded) very OFTEN and routinely call the religious organizations and volunteer community service groups(usually at ungodly hours) for emergency assistance.<P>Their shelters are full, but they have a woman that has two kids that just got beaten up. And the church or civic group will spring for a couple of weeks in a motel for her and the kids until they figure something out. Sometimes they ASK who came to their assistance, but most often they don't. And that is ok. Might even be preferable.<P>Sometimes the groups give DIRECT assistance. Like finding somebody that will give them a servicable car to get to work or something.<P>Or do something that a government agency CAN'T do. Like pay the last payments on that trombone. Or pay the last college tuition payments after your average Joe loses his job.<P>Yeah, I LIKE donating to a "pool" like that. Immediate needs met with no qualifying factors. And no long waits. <P>And often it is given to folks that need it, that you might not like. but that's ok too, if they need it.<P>One case was a guy that had undergone AWFUL cancer treatments. He was abusive to his family, and nasty in general. But the guy still needed the money. <P>But my pastor doesn't receive a special "perk" for administering this stuff. Matter of fact, we LOVE him, cause he required no Parsonage be provided for him and his family. His wife is a "brain of the century" that works for NHS and he is a published author. <P>And he does this stuff ROUTINELY in the middle of the night all the time. Christmas eve he rushed a woman to Walmart MINUTES before closing 'cause she came in zero hour and wanted coats for her kids. And he convinced Walmart to let her shop at the last minute.<P>And he has a family of his OWN that he ditched Christmas Eve for a few hours to do that.<P>You would have a HARD time convincing me that people will NOT contribute unless they ARE MADE TO, to the general welfare of this nation. Arts, education or whatnot.<P>I see evidence to the contrary everyday. Individuals make a BIGGER difference than any government agency or mandated program.<P>I think we should give folks back a little of their money and see what they will do with it. Not just assume they are greedy off the bat.<P>Lord knows this country was generous with each other during the depression.<P>

Americans are individually amongst the most generous people in the world, as I understand it. And the government does encourage it with tax write-offs for charitable giving.<P>But, when I give - I don't think about the tax write-off, I give because that charity is important to me. Like the library - I intend to buy the furniture for the new branch library when it is built. I have no idea if that is tax deductible or not. The city is building the new branch library but will not furnish it. I have pledged to do that- and happily. I can't wait for construction to begin.<P>I think there is a place for both, government and individual. But lots less paperwork individually and administrative overhead.

JaneGrey, I don't think you will find many people here to argue with you about the merits of people and companies giving to good causes or the Arts. I'm going to stick with the Arts, because I don't think this is the right place to broaden the discussion to poverty, health care etc.<P>The issue is whether a wholly private or a mixed private/public model is the best way of supporting the arts. I don't want to repeat the arguments that I made earlier, but I think that there are many reasons why a mixed model can be advantageous especially for the small scale arts without social cache. <P>Maybe I should keep quiet. I'm really pleased that we see world leading US artists, like William Forsythe in cutting edge ballet and William Christie in baroque music who choose to work in Europe because of the different financial circumstances that allow them to follow their artistic vision in a more focussed way. <P>Another angle on the issue. I read a lot of ballet reviews. The most uniformly admired company worldwide for standard of dance combined with exciting rep. is Paris Opera Ballet. The annual grant to POB alone is about 50% higher than the total annual NEA budget. <P>[This message has been edited by Stuart Sweeney (edited January 23, 2001).]<p>[This message has been edited by Stuart Sweeney (edited January 23, 2001).]