First, a summarization of the argument on whether the NEA is needed or not should be discussed. The case against the NEA does not entail a story of how it will save the government a large amount of money. The NEA’s annual budget is about $150 million. The budget weathered significantly after the recession budget cuts. Their funding dropped 14 percent lower between 2010 and 2015. “The combined budgets of the NEH and NEA account for just over .002 percent of federal discretionary spending.” The United States actually loses money when it gets rid of the NEA. An article on Fortune states:
The Bureau of Economic Analysis recently released a report that attempts to put a dollar amount on the arts economy and its impact. They found that arts and cultural …show more content…
For cultural and economic prosperity, it is vital for the federal government to be involved in arts funding. Arts and culture contribute to local and regional economies, generating jobs and spending, attracting tourists, and making places attractive to businesses and their employees. The Americans for the Arts website states the following rebuttal:
The Federal government cannot afford to not support the arts. With only a $146 million annual appropriations, the NEA investments in the arts helps contribute to a $704 billion economic arts and culture economic industry, contributing 4.2 percent of the annual GDP and supporting 4.7 million jobs that yields a $24 billion trade surplus for the country.
Money-wise, it is extremely useful for the federal government to support the arts. Without the NEA, the United States loses out on jobs, culture, and international trading. The National Endowment for the Arts needs to exist. Therefore, if disbanded, years should be spent reinventing the government program to make it stronger. It can become stronger economically with a larger budget and with better branding and new image. Without the NEA, previous supporters will need to work together to inspire people to need it to be part of the federal government again. Even the constitution justifies the federal government to the support the arts, “Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution specifically authorizes Congress to ‘promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.’”
The Bureau of Economic Analysis recently released a report that attempts to put a dollar amount on the arts economy and its impact. They found that arts and cultural …show more content…
For cultural and economic prosperity, it is vital for the federal government to be involved in arts funding. Arts and culture contribute to local and regional economies, generating jobs and spending, attracting tourists, and making places attractive to businesses and their employees. The Americans for the Arts website states the following rebuttal:
The Federal government cannot afford to not support the arts. With only a $146 million annual appropriations, the NEA investments in the arts helps contribute to a $704 billion economic arts and culture economic industry, contributing 4.2 percent of the annual GDP and supporting 4.7 million jobs that yields a $24 billion trade surplus for the country.
Money-wise, it is extremely useful for the federal government to support the arts. Without the NEA, the United States loses out on jobs, culture, and international trading. The National Endowment for the Arts needs to exist. Therefore, if disbanded, years should be spent reinventing the government program to make it stronger. It can become stronger economically with a larger budget and with better branding and new image. Without the NEA, previous supporters will need to work together to inspire people to need it to be part of the federal government again. Even the constitution justifies the federal government to the support the arts, “Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution specifically authorizes Congress to ‘promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.’”