January 29th, 2004


Bush to increase funding for the NEA?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/29/politics/29BUDG.html -- NYTimes will ask you to register if you haven't already.

I don't really get Bush at all. While this can't be a bad thing, the NEA is a ghost of its former self because of attacks by exactly the sort of people in Congress who are most loyal to Bush. The sad part is this increase in funding is from $15 million to $20 Million. $20 Million is like 7 cents per person in the US. Why isn't art a higher priority? Symphony Orchestras all over the country are going out of business, or pricing their tickets out of the reach of ordinary people. I think subsidizing orchestras, art galleries, and artists is a perfect use for public funds.

(no subject)

So I was confused about what that article said about the NEA budget. The agency's budget it an order of magnitude larger than what I thought it was. Of course, this means the increase Bush is proposing is an order of magnitude smaller, by percentage.


"The $18 million increase, a 15 percent hike in the NEA's funding, would be the largest in years. Last year, Congress increased the agency's funding to $122.5 million, up from $115.7 million but still well below what the agency received 25 years ago."