Trump Will Eliminate The National Endowment For The Arts
Posted: 1/19/17 at 10:31am
He will try. Reagan tried to do the same in 1981.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 10:32am
Someone remind him how much he really loves Evita.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 10:33am
did Reagan have a majority Republican house and congress then? (I'm not American, so I'm not too aware of American political history)
Posted: 1/19/17 at 10:43am
broadwayguy91 said: "did Reagan have a majority Republican house and congress then? (I'm not American, so I'm not too aware of American political history)"
Not a lot of Americans know their political history enough to know this off the top of their heads boo. You're fine. For that matter, not a lot of any nationalities know information like that off the top of their heads.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 10:46am
Terribly sorry to ask a question perhaps as basic as this, but what does the Endowment do directly for Broadway? I'm not as unequivocal in my support of President-elect Trump as some on here would like to believe, and I'm interested in learning what the implications of such a cut would be for Broadway...
Posted: 1/19/17 at 10:57am
If you visit the below link and select "Theater & Musical Theater" under the Disciplines / Fields section, you can see all of the recent grants to what specific organization and purpose. You can also filter by year, state, etc, and the organizations are listed in alphabetical order. I believe The Public has received quite a bit of support from the NEA.
https://apps.nea.gov/grantsearch/
Updated On: 1/19/17 at 10:57 AM
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:00am
broadwayguy91 said: "did Reagan have a majority Republican house and congress then? (I'm not American, so I'm not too aware of American political history)
No apologies necessary, this is a great question, and you're on point. But back then, interestingly enough, a lot of Republicans disagreed with his plans to abolish it. So it eventually flat-lined in Congress, with help from across the aisle as well. They actually ended up increasing the NEA's funding that same year.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:07am
And so it begins. Buckle up, folks, it's going to be a long four years under President Asshole.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:10am
It's downright shameful. I hope it does not come to pass. I am surprised that Reagan, a former actor himself actually attempted to make cuts to the NEA.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:13am
adamgreer said: "And so it begins. Buckle up, folks, it's going to be a long four years under President Asshole."
1) I don't think Trump will last four years. He'll either resign, die or be impeached.
2) I wasn't right about Clinton winning, so I'm probably not right about point number one.
3) If I am right about point number one, Pence would be President Asshole II, so your original post stands.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:19am
Somewhat reassuring thread here:
https://twitter.com/Celeste_pewter/status/822098028425138177
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:21am
BroadwayConcierge said: "Terribly sorry to ask a question perhaps as basic as this, but what does the Endowment do directly for Broadway? I'm not as unequivocal in my support of President-elect Trump as some on here would like to believe, and I'm interested in learning what the implications of such a cut would be for Broadway..."
Even if you feel this is stemming from a place of innocuous curiosity, I hope you realize how privileged you are to have this be the first question you ask.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:23am
Cupid Boy2 said: "Even if you feel this is stemming from a place of innocuous curiosity, I hope you realize how privileged you are to have this be the first question you ask."
...what?
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:27am
BroadwayConcierge said: "Terribly sorry to ask a question perhaps as basic as this, but what does the Endowment do directly for Broadway? I'm not as unequivocal in my support of President-elect Trump as some on here would like to believe, and I'm interested in learning what the implications of such a cut would be for Broadway..."
What PianoMann said. The funding to non-profit arts institutions helps support some of their most ambitious efforts.
And it is important to remember just how tiny the sliver of pie the NEA, NEH and PBS are in our federal budgets. Much like foreign aid, they are strawmen used by the GOP to frighten people into draconian cuts. In reality, the budget deficits are caused mostly by two areas, Defense spending and our social safety net.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:33am
Maybe Steven Roth can bail out the industry his wife and son work in.
Updated On: 1/19/17 at 11:33 AM
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:39am
Gotcha, thank you very much for the basics, PianoMann and BJR! That's exactly what I was looking for, and I'll be spending part of the afternoon reading more into this. Much appreciated.
Cupid Boy2, I'm increasingly irked by your comment. When you tell another person to check their privilege after he or she has simply asked a question, you stifle intellectual curiosity. You stifle dialogue and conversation.
Thanks again to the prior two users.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:43am
The NEA also supports arts program related funding for servicemen and women, in the form of free museum access and arts therapy. Even if one is a Trump supporter, I don't see how anyone who posts on this board would be against that.
Updated On: 1/19/17 at 11:43 AM
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:47am
Man, this guy is going to destroy America
Posted: 1/19/17 at 11:53am
It's more red meat for him to offer "the base" because they don't like the idea of their taxes supporting art they "don't agree with."
Posted: 1/19/17 at 12:41pm
I'm SO done...it may be a Repub controlled congress, but I'd like to believe and hope that the Democrats along with the true moderates on both sides as are enough to fight this nonsense. and of course the arts community itself. Were the most outspoken group of people to ever exist, and I know we won't let this specific instance go down without a darn hard fight.
BTW, I only use these terms to make a point. I'm neither, I believe in whatever damn works for society and humanity on whole, systematically.
Oh and along with this, possibly the privatization of PBS...can we say DANGER WILL ROBINSON?? I just can't...I won't lie in saying I had plenty of problems with the current admin, but DAMMIT WHY TRUMP. Good grief, it's almost not even about him anymore, it's about who he's appointed and surrounded himself with. I absolutely agree that gov't spending like a drunken sailor has got to stop, we can't continue on this path, but THESE ARE NECESSARY ENTITIES! I can't even fathom that it was called wasteful, make cuts elsewhere!! GGGAAHHH
Updated On: 1/19/17 at 12:41 PM
Posted: 1/19/17 at 12:59pm
I of course would love to see much more arts funding by the federal government and despise the idea of it being reduced for any reason, it is important to put it in context: the federal contribution to NFP arts programs is about 1.2% of the total revenue they receive. Compared to some other ideas being bandied about, this is survivable even though on an individual basis it will be devastating to some. But not getting a grant in the first place devastates arts organizations every year under even the most generous fed budgets.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 12:59pm
BroadwayConcierge said: "
Cupid Boy2, I'm increasingly irked by your comment. When you tell another person to check their privilege after he or she has simply asked a question, you stifle intellectual curiosity. You stifle dialogue and conversation. "
Stifling conversation was not my intention, and revisiting my post, I can see how it could have been misconstrued. For that, I apologize. With the introduction of Broadway into the dialogue, I was merely trying to point out that any effects a business that primarily caters to an elite portion of the population feels as a result of this must be kept in perspective. And I should've done so more eloquently.
After all, Broadway is primarily for privileged people, and I recognize the privileges in my life that allow me to indulge in its offerings. This is verging on going off-topic, but I just wanted to give context to my use of that word.
Posted: 1/19/17 at 1:34pm
HogansHero said: "I of course would love to see much more arts funding by the federal government and despise the idea of it being reduced for any reason, it is important to put it in context: the federal contribution to NFP arts programs is about 1.2% of the total revenue they receive. Compared to some other ideas being bandied about, this is survivable even though on an individual basis it will be devastating to some. But not getting a grant in the first place devastates arts organizations every year under even the most generous fed budgets.
"
While you strike a good point, will the arts in general survive if this were to happen?? Art on a whole has never been all that valued in the good' ol U.S. of A because our population for many reasons, some explainable some not, has tended to view them as unnecessary/frivolous/an extracurricular activity rather than the backbone of any society that they really are. They're treated like careers or even silly hobbies, that aren't as important as careers/hobbies in math, science, IT, etc are, especially now. I'm glad there's been an upsurge in interest in the arts recently, but just because interest is there, doesn't mean the money is, and I'm not even talking about the NEA or any federal level spending on them with that, I'm talking about how it's still almost like pulling teeth to get someone to spend money on an "art" of some kind rather than spending the same amount of money they would normally spend on something that practically has no benefit to society or just humanity in general. ART IS THE EYE INTO THE SOUL OF HUMANITY AND THINGS UNSEEN. I'm not saying other fields aren't important, we need ALL fields and occupations for society to thrive, not just survive, but art is what helps the thriving. There's a reason why controlling regimes of any kind target the arts first. Because they educate, they emulate humanity in some way, they connect the dots to real life.
There's also a reason why shows have never been able to be fully funded by ticket sales. Because America has never valued art in any form as they should. That's partially why why the NEA was created. It's why theatre companies/shows have donors and investors. People still are wary of spending their money on a show ticket, but will spend the same amount on a sporting event.
And since it IS such a small amount in comparison to everything else in the budget, think about this...why do they feel the need to call it wasteful spending and attempt to dismantle it, hmmm? THINK...this absolutely targeting the arts, because it won't stop with just the NEA, PBS, and the Humanities. Here's to the next four VERY bumpy years y'all. Then again, we were gonna come to our demise no matter who we elected, it was just a matter of who we'd come to it faster under...My only hope is we get info the fastest we've ever gotten in in human history and therefore because of that we can stop **** before it even starts.
