The Arts in America: An Economic Engine?

President Obama visited a museum in order to give the American economy a boost. On Tuesday, in the Museum of Nature & Science in Denver, Colorado, President Obama signed the economic stimulus bill, which only a couple weeks ago did not include funding in support of museums, art centers, or theaters. Even Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York voted against funding for the arts and culture. But mostly, it was his Republican colleagues who warned against spending taxpayer money on cultural pursuits, deriding it as a sign of leftist elitism. The Republicans were clearly voting on their party line.

Nonetheless, with a flourish of the pen, Obama gave the arts $50 million. Compared to the $787 billion stimulus package, this amount may seem like small change. However, for a country that spends very little on cultural institutions at the federal level, and even views support of the arts as un-American, $50 million is a considerable sum. The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), the only two federal cultural foundations in America have over $145 million of funding in the current year. Forty percent of the additional $50 million will be allocated at the state and local level, while the remaining sixty percent has been earmarked for individual projects, which is common practice at the NEA.

Arguments in Favor of the Arts

The surprising turn of events in favor of the arts was the result of the efforts of many. One of these supporters is supposedly Robert Redford, who called Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to convince her of the benefits of supporting the arts. Similar to Redford, 10,000 artists and cultural officials also put pressure on Washington. Arts lobbyist Robert L. Lynch, who heads the organization “Americans for the Arts,” considers the $50 million a huge win for the creative industry in America. He even believes that in these hard economic times, his fellow Americans have come to understand the inherent value of creativity. Naturally, that would depend on what Lynch means by “value.”

Redford and his compatriots referenced the economic value that the arts add to society. The star explained that the Sundance Festival, which he founded, brought in $60 million to Park City, Utah, where the festival takes place. According to the arts lobby, the creative industry created 6 million jobs, generated $30 million in federal tax revenue and added $166 billion to the economy. This amount is derived from such diverse areas as parking fees at garages, souvenir shops, or the popcorn counter found at multiplex movie theaters. The value of culture is therefore measured solely in economic terms. This seems to be the only way for the creative industry to assert itself against other more practical industries, which seem to have no trouble obtaining funding.

Perhaps there is no other way; perhaps politicians can only grasp arguments based on dollars. Given the critical state of affairs, the idea that the arts can be more than an economic engine is merely a second thought. Nonetheless, it is sad that artists are only recognized in society when they can justify the commercial success of their work, thereby undervaluing themselves. The next chairman of the NEA has his work cut out for him in terms of spreading awareness for the value of the arts.

After the resignation of the highly acclaimed poet and chairman of the NEA Dana Gioia, Obama has yet to appoint someone to fill the post. As with the broader economic stimulus plan, one can only guess how this injection of funds will affect the arts scene in America. The rejoicing over the $50 million cannot cover the gaping holes left behind by shrinking endowment funds and decreased donations from private patrons.