BACKGROUND: Funding and the survival of the National Endowment for the Arts is at risk in a House Interior Appropriations bill. The bill determines the 1996 budget for the Department of the Interior and, thus, controls the amount of money given to such programs as the National Endowment for the Arts. The NEA would receive $99.5 million (as would the National Endowment for the Humanities) which is 39% less than its currently receives. This funding, though, would only be given if the House also passes another bill that authorizes the existence of agency that gives out the endowments. Furthermore, the bill also ends the NEA funding altogether in two years. Amendments to eliminate the $99.5 million in funds for the next year were defeated.

A Senate bill provides for the authorization of the NEA, and while it also cuts funding, it does not cut as much funding as the House. It also provides funds until the year 2000. The NEA would receive $153.9 million in funds next year under this bill. The bill would create three grant programs at the NEA: direct grants to groups or individuals whose work is culturally diverse and artistically excellent, partnership grants, and national significance grants to organizations that are culturally and artistically important.

KEY PLAYERS: The House bill (H.R. 1977) is sponsored by Rep. Ralph S. Regula (R-OH). The Senate bill (S. 856) is sponsored by A href=/politics/playbook/members/VT/Jeffords.html>Sen. James M. Jeffords (R-VT). The House appropriations bill (H.R. 1977) was passed through the House Committee on Appropriations and the House Subcommittee on Interior. The bill has also been sent to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The Senate's authorization bill (S. 856) has been referred to the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources.

STATUS: The House Interior Appropriations bill (H.R. 1977) was passed (244-181) on July 18, 1995. The bill went through the Senate Committee on Appropriations and was placed on the Senate's legislative calendar on July 28, 1995. The Senate's re-authorization bill (S. 856) was approved by the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources on July 19, 1995.

PRO: Those who support the cuts to the NEA say that balancing the budget has priority over financing the endowment. They also argue that the NEA funds some artwork that is pornographic, portrays homosexuality, and contributes no cultural value.

"Art, from the beginning, was intended to discomfort the middle class. The question is whether the middle class should have to pay for its own discomfort." -- Sen. Slade Gorton (R-WA)

CON: Opponents to legislation that cuts funding and the NEA, itself, argue that without this funding many artists and organizations that produce culturally important and valuable work will not be able to produce their artwork. On a more philosophical level, they state that the endowment is important for the nation's culture and diversity.

"I wholeheartedly believe that Government should support the arts. Americans highly value the arts and culture in their lives. Art is the symbolic expression of who we art. It is how we remember. Here in the Capitol, the history of our Nation is documented in its art and architecture. Cultural funding is a mere two one-hundredths of one percent of our multibillion-dollar budget. We spend 70 cents per person on the humanities and 64 cents per person on the arts -- on history, English literature, foreign languages, sociology, anthropology, comparative religion, and other disciplines." -- Rep. Constance Morella (R-MD)

WHAT'S NEXT: The House bill on Interior Appropriations (H.R. 1977) is on the Senate's legislative calendar and will probably be debated in early August. President Clinton may possibly veto the bill, though not necessarily because of the cuts to the NEA. The Senate bill (S. 856) is to be debated in the Senate after the Senate returns from its August recess.