Title: Ten Good Reasons to Eliminate Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts | The Heritage Foundation
Headings: Ten Good Reasons to Eliminate Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts
Ten Good Reasons to Eliminate Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts
Laurence Jarvik
Authors
Subscribe to email updates

Content: Ten Good Reasons to Eliminate Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts | The Heritage Foundation
Skip to main content
Ten Good Reasons to Eliminate Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts
Report Budget and Spending
Ten Good Reasons to Eliminate Funding for the National Endowment for the Arts
April 29, 1997 30 min read Download Report
Laurence Jarvik
Distinguished Fellow
...
Copied
Select a Section 1 /0
Toggle open close
As the U.S. Congress struggles to balance the federal budget and end the decades-long spiral of deficit spending, few programs seem more worthy of outright elimination than the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). Indeed, since its inception in 1965, few federal agencies have been mired in more controversy than the NEA. Nevertheless, steadfast partisans of "welfare for artists" continue to defend the Endowment, asserting that it promotes philanthropic giving, makes cultural programs accessible to those who can least afford them, and protects America's cultural heritage. In fact, the NEA is an unwarranted extension of the federal government into the voluntary sector. The Endowment, furthermore, does not promote charitable giving. Despite Endowment claims that its efforts bring art to the inner city, the agency offers little more than a direct subsidy to the cultured, upper-middle class. Finally, rather than promoting the best in art, the NEA continues to offer tax dollars and the federal seal of approval to subsidize "art" that is offensive to most Americans. There are at least ten good reasons to eliminate funding for the NEA: Reason #1: The Arts Will Have More Than Enough Support without the NEA
The arts were flowering before the NEA came into being in 1965.