What do the National Art Council, National Endowment for the Humanities, and National Endowment for the Arts have in common? They are 3 of the 17 agencies that Trump wants to defund and destroy. These agencies typically are the target of Republicans who do not value the arts. Tr– wants the money for his military budget. I assume the arts agencies are also on the hit list of “Agencies that are bureaucratic nightmares and need to be streamlined.” I agree with the spirit of paring down big government; however, for many of us, the arts and a climate of creativity are sacred.

Creativity is at the core of everything; it is at the core of all human progress. –Larry Robertson

We know that painters, musicians, writers, sculptors and other artists are creative souls. However, creativity includes all innovation and inventiveness. The discoveries of electricity, combustion engines, even the wheel, were acts of creativity. Science, which seeks to understand the world around us, employs creativity. To look at birds on the Galapagos Islands and begin developing the theory of evolution is creativity. Marketing, even economics is creativity in action. We would not be technologically advanced without centuries of innovation.

Now, some government leaders have an uneasy relationship with public displays of creativity and creative minds. I think about Chairman Mao, who mandated that the Chinese people wear the same bland, uncreative uniform.

Tr– has already commanded that women staffers in government should “dress like women”

How about governments who exile writers? Here, I think about Solzhenitsyn (Russian) and Salman Rushdie (Iranian). More recently, hostile governments forced 452 journalists into exile.

Tr– has already banned certain news outlets from press briefings and called journalists nerds.

So, my first response to the potential demise of federal funding for the arts was negative. Not my president shall not touch my arts! I have learned, however, that digging into the nature of government agencies and their inner workings usually reveals interesting gems. This week I looked into the nature of the governmental arts agencies mentioned above and found my brain twisting in new ways. The following are insights about how the National endowment of the Arts functions.

The National Council of the Arts (NCA) directs and oversees the NEA. From their website:

The Council was established through the National Arts and Cultural Development Act of 1964, a full year before the federal agency was created by Congressional legislation. Its first members were appointed by President Lyndon Johnson and included noted artists such as Ralph Ellison, Paul Engle, Elizabeth Ashley, Gregory Peck, Oliver Smith, William Pereira, Minoru Yamasaki, George Stevens Sr., Leonard Bernstein, Agnes de Mille, David Smith, and Isaac Stern.

The Council also recommends individuals and organizations to receive the National Medal of Arts, a Presidential award in recognition of outstanding contributions to the arts in America.

National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities:

The National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965 established the NEA and provided for 26 citizens to serve as advisors to the agency as members of the National Council on the Arts. Members are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate for six-year, staggered terms. Congress has since enacted legislation that reduced the membership of the Council. Currently, there are 18 members of the National Council on the Arts and an additional six members of Congress to serve in an ex officio,non-voting capacity for two-year terms

The National Endowment of the Arts (NEA)

The stated purpose to the NEA: Established by Congress in 1965, the NEA is the independent federal agency whose funding and support gives Americans the opportunity to participate in the arts, exercise their imaginations, and develop their creative capacities. Through partnerships with state arts agencies, local leaders, other federal agencies, and the philanthropic sector, the NEA supports arts learning, affirms and celebrates America’s rich and diverse cultural heritage, and extends its work to promote equal access to the arts in every community across America. Visit arts.gov to learn more about NEA.

Turns out that the NEA’s primary focus is providing grants to state arts agencies and individuals. Furthermore, the NEA requires matching funds from those state and philanthropic partners. A recent NEA fact sheet reports that $1 of direct NEA funding leverages up to $9 in private and other public funds, resulting in $500 million in matching support in 2016. So, we could say that the NEA provides “seed” money to get things going on the state level. Furthermore, today, state legislative appropriations for the arts comprise 88% of total state arts agency revenue, whereas NEA dollars comprise 10.5%.

Would defunding NEA truly cause our national arts programs to dwindle? We do not need 3 federal agencies, as listed above to dole out grant money. Beside, most of the money for arts programs come from states.  Could agencies at the state level tighten their administrative budgets by the 10.5% contributed by the NEA? Most definitely. In my opinion, by definition, state and federal agencies are bloated.

Another important question: Does state and philanthropic funding makes more sense? Well, they already fund the arts, with a little help from Uncle Sam. Why stop now? Perhaps it’s not that simple. Perhaps with seemingly everything being thrown back to states, they will decide the arts are less important when the next budget session convenes.

All of this has so far ignored the underlying and critical question: Are the arts worth government support? The National Assembly of State Arts Agencies (NASAA) –the folks who do all the work –has documented the benefits of supporting the arts, as follows:

Economic Benefits: creating jobs that produce tax revenue, attracting tourism revenue sustainable strategy for revitalizing rural areas, inner cities and populations struggling with poverty.

Educational Benefits: The arts cultivate young imaginations and facilitate success in school, enhancing students’ academic achievement in multiple subject areas. They provide the critical thinking, communications and innovation skills essential to a productive 21st -century work force

Benefits on Health and Wellness: The arts foster physical, mental and emotional health, aiding recovery processes and contributing to well being; the arts can be effective tools for achieving and maintaining wellness for aging adults and people suffering from trauma, including military combat personnel and veterans.

Cultural Legacies: The arts preserve culture and heritage, passing along a state’s unique character and traditions to future generations of citizens.

My conclusions? Lack of NEA grants won’t kill arts programs, and why are so many federal-level agencies involved, anyway? Whoever is Chairman of the Board at the NAC is also top dog at the NEA (currently Jane Chu). In fact, they are so intertwined, that when I search for NAC, I get NEA information. If they must be cut, so be it, although I hate to see the money fund a military build-up. And, in the process I do not want our government to downplay the role of arts and the freedom of speech that comes with democracy. Creativity is innovation and that is what drives everything we hold dear.