Inspired by John Kennedy, enacted by Lyndon Johnson, and expanded by Richard Nixon, the NEA has never come close to fulfilling their hopes that American government would invest in culture as it has in science. Indeed, since Nixon left office, the agency’s budget – now just under $150 million – has fallen far short of keeping up with inflation. Though it is the single largest funder of the arts in the United States, grants from local governments for arts projects are much greater.

Moreover, a series of controversies over awards the NEA made to artists and museums for works some viewed as obscene almost led to the agency’s demise. As a result, the agency now has to operate under several restrictions, including a prohibition on support for individual artists.

This record would not have surprised those who have long thought that practical-minded democracies would not give as much encouragement to the arts as once-aristocratic countries, with their more refined tastes. Even philanthropists, such as Bill Gates, are questioning giving money to museums instead of efforts to prevent blindness or other pressing problems.

But perhaps especially in a democracy, the arts matter a great deal, and not because of their economic value, which is debatable in any case. Rather, through the arts, citizens can find ways to express themselves, build cultural bridges across what divides them, and develop their imaginations. Over fifty years, the NEA has played a modest role in these important tasks, which is reason enough for celebration – and for doing more.

Sources:

Mark Bauerlein, with Ellen Grantham, National Endowment for the Arts: A History 1965 – 2008, National Endowment for the Arts, Washington, D. C., 2009.

National Endowment for the Arts appropriation history

Arts Funding: “Arts Funding Snapshot: GIA’s Annual Research on Support for Arts and Culture,” Grantmakers in the Arts, 2014.

Bill Gates: “An Exclusive Interview with Bill Gates,” FT Magazine, November 1, 2013.