Republicans Try to Abolish Arts Groups

[The_Dude 1,142]

Republicans Try to Abolish Arts Groups

A group of Republican lawmakers has called for the elimination of the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, each of which received $167.5 million in the last federal budget. The group, called the Republican Study Committee and comprising about 165 House Republicans, also called for eliminating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which got $430 million. The proposal, made Thursday, is part of the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, which aims to reduce federal spending by $2.5 trillion over 10 years. Senator Jim DeMint, above, a South Carolina Republican who is chairman of the Senate Steering Committee, said in a statement that the bill “begins the difficult task of shrinking the federal bureaucracy that threatens our future prosperity.” Robert L. Lynch, president of Americans for the Arts, a lobbying group, said in an interview on Monday that the arts provide 5.7 million jobs in the United States that generate about $30 billion in taxes, nearly $13 billion of which goes to the federal government. “If they’re serious about jobs and they’re serious about income, they would invest more in the arts,” Mr. Lynch said.

Source

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to see some accounting of those figures quoted at the end. But if they are true, then Mr. DeMint et al are just as disingenuous as they are accused of being.

ETA: Found a 07 study about this, it seems to verify that claim. Study

[mawilson 2,133]

each of which received $167.5 million in the last federal budget.

Which is, what, 0.03% of the budget?

About damn time someone addressed the root cause of the deficit - the Arts and Humanities!

[The_Dude 1,142]

Which is, what, 0.03% of the budget?

About damn time someone addressed the root cause of the deficit - the Arts and Humanities!

Every time they bring up cutting funding to the NEA or any arts program, I think back to the 90's when they wanted to defund it because money had been used to fund a painter who dared depict jesus as black

[luckytxn 2,263]

Shouldn't be subsidized in the first place.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Shouldn't be subsidized in the first place.

Run along.

[faust-yusov 103]

Shouldn't be subsidized in the first place.

It's always nice when arguments counterpoint to your own are being made by people who equate homosexuality with paedophilia.

[^_^ 5,021]

Which is, what, 0.03% of the budget?

About damn time someone addressed the root cause of the deficit - the Arts and Humanities!

Yes, cutting out 0.03% of the budget doesn't even qualify as window dressing. It's like trying to reduce weight of a sinking canoe by throwing out your pocket lint. It's nothing more than red meat rhetoric for the conservative base which misunderstands what it means to be cultured - NASCAR and SPAM do not culture make.

That said, if it's only 0.03% of the budget, how hard could it be to find private financiers (this country has many wealthy individuals who care deeply about the arts) who would be willing to fill in the gap?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Elimnating their funding does not eliminate the groups.

Artists are free to form, and fund, any art groups they want.

[mawilson 2,133]

Elimnating their funding does not eliminate the groups.

Right... because artists don't need money - it's just a hobby for them.

[Danno 1,228]

Right... because artists don't need money - it's just a hobby for them.

The vast majority of artists, are good enough to make it without gov welfare... time to cut these slackers off.

[luckytxn 2,263]

Elimnating their funding does not eliminate the groups.

Artists are free to form, and fund, any art groups they want.

Exactly. They want to subsidize things that don't need it. If it is good enough to sell and make money then great. If no one wants it and artists go hungry then maybe they should find a new line of work. Our tax dollars do not need to be funding any arts. Cut off public broadcasting now. Is is used as a Socialist medium to get a narrow viewpoint out and if that viewpoint is so needed then they wouldn't need our tax dollars to stay around.

The article stated that the arts bring in loads of money and jobs so we do not need to subsidize it. If at the local community level wants to fund the local arts scene then let them but the Feds need to go away and get the budget under control.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Art is evil.

[luckytxn 2,263]

Art is evil.

Need to start looking at different art.

[TBoneTX 43,004]

Elimnating their funding does not eliminate the groups.

Artists are free to form, and fund, any art groups they want.

, man.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Exactly. They want to subsidize things that don't need it. If it is good enough to sell and make money then great. If no one wants it and artists go hungry then maybe they should find a new line of work. Our tax dollars do not need to be funding any arts. Cut off public broadcasting now. Is is used as a Socialist medium to get a narrow viewpoint out and if that viewpoint is so needed then they wouldn't need our tax dollars to stay around.

The article stated that the arts bring in loads of money and jobs so we do not need to subsidize it. If at the local community level wants to fund the local arts scene then let them but the Feds need to go away and get the budget under control.

#######.