The National Endowment for the Arts:

A Domestic Treasure
Megan Hoots
University of Florida
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 2

Introduction
Since its creation by Congress in 1965, the National Endowment for the
Arts (NEA) has played an important role in advocating artistic excellence in
America. Born during a time of edifying reflection in America’s history, the NEA is
a true bipartisan effort to emphasize the cultural importance of the arts. Over the
course of more than five decades, the NEA has awarded billions of dollars in
grants to individuals and institutions that represent all facets of artistic
expression. Over the years, the NEA’s mission has been challenged by
controversies and political agendas, each threatening the organization’s
existence. Yet with each battle the NEA has endured, it continues to support
cultural initiatives across the nation. Perhaps the greatest threat to the NEA is the
current political landscape that threatens to defund and dismantle the agency
completely. It is important to remember the immeasurable value of arts and
culture, especially when these values are under attack.

The arts become a national priority

1960 ushered in a new decade for America with “rapid expansion of
government programs and policies across the federal government” (Shockley,
2001, p. 270). National optimism was waning while the ongoing Cold War
drained Americans’ morale and their confidence of a bright future. The political
climate of the Cold War created a need “to channel American affluence toward
fighting communism through an expanded public sector” (Saunders, 2005,
p.614), and funding public arts initiatives satisfied this national political agenda.
With the election of President John F. Kennedy in November of 1960,
“enthusiasm for America as a nation dedicated to the arts seemed poised to
become a widespread movement” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 1). President
Kennedy was a vocal supporter of the arts; abstract expressionist painters Franz
Kline and Mark Rothko attended his inauguration (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009,
p. 5). To “marshal affluence in the fight against communism” (Saunders, 2005, p.
597) by advancing the arts in America, Kennedy named August Heckscher his
special consultant on the arts and in May of 1963 Heckscher submitted a report
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 3

entitled The Arts and National Government to Congress which outlined the vital
importance of Federally funded arts initiatives. The untimely death of President
Kennedy six months later delayed plans for an official arts advisory council, but
his “vision for the arts did not perish with him” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p.
8). The youthful energy of the Kennedy Administration amplified a growing
interest in perfecting American society through the budding popularity of the fine
arts across the United States. Americans “far from the traditional centers of
culture, … were demanding a local presence for music, dance, theater, and
visual art” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 10) more than ever before to
enhance their quality of life. The incoming administration, under the leadership of
Lyndon B. Johnson, inherited the lofty endeavor to spread art and culture to
every corner of the United States as an “effective counterbalance to communism”
(Saunders, 2005, 597).

A new agency is born

Under President Johnson’s direction, newly appointed presidential arts
advisor Roger Stevens began drafting a set of Congressional measures to
realize the vision for arts advancement in America originally initiated by President
Kennedy. After a series of hearings, the National Endowment for the Arts was
created by an act of Congress and signed into law by President Johnson on
September 29, 1965.

The mission of the National Endowment of the Arts

The NEA’s mission is to “enhance America as a global exemplar”
(Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 18) by supporting initiatives that provide
Americans with opportunities to participate in the arts. In a cover letter to
President Johnson, Chairman Roger Stevens stated that the organizations’ two
major goals were “enlarging audience participation in the arts and providing
opportunities for wider professional activities training” (Urice, 2001, p. 19). On
October 31, 1965 the NEA’s first appropriations bill was signed, allotting the
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 4

agency with a budget of $2.5 million. With less than a dozen employees, the
newly minted NEA was fully funded and prepared to award its first grant.

The NEA’s inaugural grant was awarded to the American Ballet Theatre in
December of 1965 in the sum of $100,000. By 1967, the first complete set of
grants had been made with a budget totaling $8 million. For a young agency,
“these early grants illustrate the great range of projects the Arts Endowment has
supported since its inception, as well as reaching across the nation” (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 19). Early funding included projects within various disciplines
such as; architecture, dance, education, folk art, literature, music, public media,
theater and the visual arts. This marked the beginning of the NEA’s rich history of
funding culturally outstanding art endeavors across the nation.

Dance
The NEA continued to vigorously support dance programs over the next
five decades, awarding “more than $300 million directly to dance companies,
choreographers, presenters, festivals, historians, critics, workshops, and service
organizations” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 182). This unparalleled support
forever “transformed the place of dance in American culture” (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 182) and helped grow professional dance companies from
37 in 1965, to 157 by 1975 and an outstanding 600 in 2008. Today, the culture of
dance is “now a part of the landscape in all 50 states and the resources and
leadership of the NEA have played no small role in their advance” (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 183).

Media arts
The media arts have always been a central focus of the NEA. The agency
was formed at a time when “problems with film were particularly pressing and it
quickly made those problems a top priority (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 207).
To best address these issues the NEA partnered with The Motion Picture
Foundation of America to form the American Film Institute (AFI) in 1967. The AFI
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 5

was awarded an initial grant of $1.3 million by the NEA “to collect, preserve, and
archive nitrate films (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 24). Funding for the AFI
activities peaked in 1987 with awards totaling $3.5 million. Since then, financial
support for the AFI has decreased over the years, although the institute
continues to thrive, presenting more than 3,00 events annually (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 24). To this day, the AFI has played an important role in
preserving early films, training a new generation of filmmakers and presenting
the moving image across America and abroad.

Beyond the moving picture, the NEA is unwavering in its support of

broadcast media. A grant awarded to Garrison Keillor and Minnesota Public
Radio helped “launch A Prairie Home Companion, which has grown into one of
the most listened-to radio shows in the country (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p.
47). During a testimony before Congress in 1990 Keillor praised the seed money
provided by the NEA grants, crediting the agency for “a revolution - small and
lovely that the Endowment has helped bring about” (Bauerlein & Grantham,
2009, p. 48). From the beginning the NEA has “supported radio and television
programming that provides Americans with the best of their artistic heritage”
(Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 207) fully funding more than 140 hours of
television hours annually, reaching 350 millions viewers while broadcasting
countless hours of radio from coast to coast.

Literature
In 1967 the first literary grants were awarded by the NEA to twenty three
writers, at a time when “the literary eco-system was undergoing significant
change” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 185). The NEA is committed to identify
and support writers who might otherwise be unrecognized in an age of mass
media and has awarded an excess of $45 million in fellowships indiscriminately
to more than 3,000 emerging writers since 1967. The agency is famously
progressive, supporting writers that represent all backgrounds, races, genders
and socioeconomic statuses. Notable recipients of NEA literature grants include
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 6

some of America’s most celebrated authors, from Alice Walker and Norman
Rush to Sherman Alexie and Joyce Carol Oates (Electric Lit, 2017).

Music and opera

The NEA has championed great American voices through its music and
opera initiatives; supporting more than 11,000 music projects with funding in
excess of $375 million and 4,000 opera projects with funding in excess of $160
million since its creation in 1965. According to Bauerlein & Grantham early grant
recipients included the American Symphony Orchestra league, Boston Opera
Company, American Choral Foundation, Metropolitan Opera National Company,
San Francisco Opera, and the Boston Symphony Orchestra (2009). Over the last
50 years, “grant support from the Arts Endowment enabled music organizations
to support the creation and performance of musical works, increase
organizational capacity, and document and disseminate artistic works through
recordings” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 226). During that time the NEA has
“awarded thousands of grants for projects that celebrate artistic excellence in
communities nationwide” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 238) by investing
federal money in American opera companies, chamber music, jazz, choruses
and music presenters.

Theater
Throughout our great country’s history a national theater had never been
established “such as those in Russia, England, France and many other
developed nations in the world” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 241). By the
time the NEA was established, the theater world had prospered and produced
many talented artists “despite a lack of centralized support” (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 243) and federal funding. Emanating from New York City,
American theater had become a rich, vibrant tradition “primed for growth and the
potential of the Endowment’s influence was felt almost immediately in the theater
world” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 243). Very early, the agency established
an independent theater program under the guidance of Ruth Mayles in 1967.
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 7

Within the first four years, 26 theaters across the country were awarded a total of
$559,000 in federal funding. Notable projects include; The Guthrie Theater’s
1973 touring production of John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, and the Theatre
Development Fund which worked to create affordable ticketing structures for
“audience members from underserved and disadvantaged populations [which]
helped to ensure broader public participation in the art form” (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 247). Another important program is the 2004 initiative
“Shakespeare in American Communities program which brought professional
Shakespearean productions to military bases in fourteen states. In an
unprecedented partnership with the Department of Justice, $1 million funded the
program and accompanying educational workshops. Without question, the NEA
has been the “largest funder of nonprofit theater in the United States, and can lay
claim to playing a primary role in the expansion of nonprofit professional theater
of the last 40 years (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 251). The NEA has single
handedly grown American theater exponentially with 991 non-profit theaters in
1990 and more than 2,000 in 2009.

Visual arts and museums

Since its formation, the NEA “has supported and facilitated the creation,
exhibition, publication and conservation of the visual arts” (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 185). At first, both museum and visual arts programs were
managed under one umbrella initiative, but after realizing that the needs of
individual arts and large museum institutions greatly differ, the NEA formed an
independent museum program in 1972. The visual art program expanded rapidly
and by 1981 there were “as many as 15 categories of funding, including support
for public arts projects, workshops, exhibition programs, fellowships, artists
residences, publications and services in the field” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009,
p. 1209).

While the projects supported by the NEA’s visual art program over the
years are countless, the NEA’s first public art project is particularly compelling.
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 8

The revolutionary project was conceived in 1967 by Nancy Mulnix, vice chair of
Grand Rapids Michigan's women's committee. Grand Rapids was building a new
city hall and Mulnix reached out to the fledgling agency to request federal funding
to help the city commission a piece of public art. One of America’s most
distinguished artists, Alexander Calder, was chosen to complete the first civic
sculpture to be completed with both federal and private funding. The NEA
granted Grand Rapids $45,000 dollars and an additional $83,000 was raised
through private funds. In 1969 Calder’s 42 ton work arrived in Grand Rapids. The
piece, entitled La Grande Vitesse, consisted of 27 separate pieces that took 5
days to assemble, and stood 54 feet long, 43 feet high, and 30 feet wide after its
completion. The palpable excitement around the impressive project forever
changed the importance of public art structures in the community and greatly
contributed to the revitalization of Grand Rapids while cementing Calder as one
of America’s most important artists. Today, the landmark is one of the most
famous public art sculptures in the world and will forever symbolize Grand
Rapids, Michigan.

Working parallel to the visual arts program, the NEA’s museum funding
efforts over the years have proven to be highly impactful. Former director of the
Phillips Collection in Washington DC, Jay Gates, emphasized the success of the
NEA stating “as a direct result of the funding patterns and leadership of the
National Endowment for the Arts, art museums in America not only look different
but function differently, function better and serve a broader, deeper public than
any other time in our history” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 217).

Controversies
Despite all of the wonderful programming and initiates that the NEA has
supported, the agency has faced a string of controversies over the years, which
climaxed in the 1990s. The 1994 midterm election campaigns focused on one
major issue; the role of the Federal government and the responsibility of Federal
tax dollars. Democrats were labeled as the tax and spend party, while
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 9

Republicans “ran on a political platform called the Contract with America that
included a call for the elimination of the Arts Endowment” (Bauerlein &
Grantham, 2009, p. 116) among other federally funded institutions. The GOP
enjoyed massive wins, in what is known as the Republican Revolution, gaining
sweeping control in both the House and Senate for the first time in 40 years.

Defunding and threat of liquidation

The climate to end federally funded programing was increasingly hostile.
In an op-ed published by the Washington Post on January 8, 1995, conservative
talking head and columnist George Will implored Republican Legislators to end
the NEA entirely. Under the new leadership of Speaker of the House, Newt
Gingrich, major restructuring of the NEA began as soon as the new GOP
controlled congress was sworn in; with budget cuts from $174 million to $162
million along with agency staff reductions. Two years later in 1997, Gingrich
targeted the NEA for total elimination stating, “rich celebrities and entertainment
executives should donate their own funds to establish a private endowment”
(Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 121) rather than relying on public tax dollars.
The nineteen nineties marked a time when “the threat facing the Arts Endowment
was not longer simply more budget cuts” (Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 117)
the agency faced total elimination by a GOP controlled Congress that
fundamentally disputed its existence. By the end of the decade, lawmakers and
artists would clash over interpretations of the First Amendment culminating in a
landmark Supreme Court Case.

NEA v. Finley
In 1989 two controversial works of art were funded through NEA museum
program grants. A retrospective of Robert Mapplethorpe’s work at the Institute of
Contemporary Art at the University of Pennsylvania used $30,000 in NEA grants
to realize the exhibition and featured homoerotic photographs. That same year,
the Southeast Center for Contemporary Arts used $15,000 in NEA funds to
purchase Piss Christ by photographer Andres Serrano which featured a small
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 10

plastic crucifix submerged in urine. Lawmakers were outraged by the NEA’s

allocation of funds to such controversial images and as a direct response
Congress created an Independent Commission to review the NEA's funding
process to provide recommendations. Subsequently, Congress adopted an
amendment 954(d)(1) in 1989 that charges the NEA chairperson with evaluating
the artistic merit of grant applications while considering “general standards of
decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the American public”
(McInnis, 2009, para. 2).

As a direct result of the amendment, four performance artists including

Karen Finley were denied funding in 1990 by the sitting NEA chairperson John
Frohnmayer due to the nature of their performances which included graphic
nudity. The artists, commonly referred to as the NEA Four, sued the NEA arguing
that amendment 954(d)(1) which blocked their funding request was
unconstitutional. A federal district court and appeals court both ruled in favor of
the NEA Four in 1993; agreeing that the NEA wrongly turned down their
applications for grants and that amendment 954(d)(1) debased the First
Amendment.

However, on June 25th, 1998 the United States Supreme Court

overturned the appeals court decision with an overwhelming majority. Justice
O’Connor delivered the ruling that amendment 954(d)(1) “did not violate the First
Amendment because it imposed no specific categorical requirements that could
be seen as viewpoint based discrimination” (McInnis, 2009, para. 4). Justice
Souter was the lone dissenter arguing that the NEA’s requirement to take into
account “general standards of decency amounted to viewpoint based
discrimination” (McInnis, 2009, para. 5) and was a violation of the artists’ rights.
Thus the nineteen nineties came to a close with a stunning, high profile defeat for
artists and waning public support for federally funded art. NEA grants had fallen
from 4,000 in 1995 to just 1,100 in 1997 while “interest groups and political
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 11

leaders of diverse ideologies continued to target Arts Endowment for elimination”

(Bauerlein & Grantham, 2009, p. 124) into the next decade.

Present-day funding under the Trump administration

Over the next two decades conditions for the NEA under presidents
George W. Bush and Barack Obama were tenuous but marginally improved.
When President Obama took office in 2009 he stressed the importance of arts in
America stating that “Our art and our culture… that's the essence of what makes
America special, and we want to protect that as much as possible in the White
House” (Stoilas, 2009, p. 10). In signaling his commitment to the arts and culture
one of his first directives as president was signing into law a $155 million budget
for the NEA, cementing the 44th president of the United States as an invaluable
champion of the agency.

With the election of Donald Trump in 2016, the NEA once again became
vulnerable to defunding. Although the “combined budget for the National
Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities is under
$300 per year” (Lalami, 2017, p. 10) making up less than .008 percent of the
federal budget the arts and humanities are without fail a popular target of
conservatives. In March of 2017, the Trump administration unveiled their first
federal budget proposal calling for the complete elimination of the NEA, making
Trump the first president to seek its total liquidation since its creation in 1965.
However, with the help of key Republican senators, Congress passed a budget
which included funding for the NEA through the next fiscal year. Trump’s second
annual budget proposal in 2018 again called for cutting NEA funding, but
Congress once again rebuffed the president and saved the agency with an
increase in funding by $3 million bringing the total budget to $153 million.
President Trump has made his intentions to defund the agency clear and without
a doubt the NEA will continue to be a target in the Trump administration's annual
budget proposals.
 The National Endowment for the Arts: A Domestic Treasure 12

Conclusion
Since its establishment in 1965, the National Endowment for the Arts has
patronized artists and artistic programming across all of the art disciples.
Initiatives in dance, media arts, literature, music, opera, theater, visual arts and
museums have all enjoyed opportunities to grow through grants provided by the
NEA. Over the last five decades, the agency has survived political agendas,
public pressure and controversies that threatened to end the endowment entirely
and the Trump presidency embodies a new hazard for the NEA. Art is neither
inherently Democratic nor Republican, and should be a bipartisan enterprise
because artists “cultivate new forms of knowledge and consciousness” (Chang,
2009, p. 16) in the American public.

References
Bauerlein, M., & Grantham, E. (Eds). (2009). National Endowment for the Arts: A
History 1965-2008. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts.

Chang, J. (2009, May 4). The creativity stimulus. The Nation. Retrieved from
https://www.thenation.com/article/creativity-stimulus/

Electric Lit. (2017, March, 21). 14 authors on the life changing impact of the NEA.
Retrieved from https://electricliterature.com/12-authors-on-the-life-
changing-impact-of-the-nea-af6b4b1c0598

Heath, Karen P. (2017). Artistic scarcity in an age of material abundance:

President Lyndon Johnson, the National Endowment for the Arts, and
great society liberalism. European Journal of American Culture, 36, 5-22.

Lalami, L. (2017). Save the arts, save America. The Nation. Retrieved
from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.lp.hscl.ufl.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?v
id=2&sid=a5edd803-53bf-4112-b8fb-3d12b0720643%40sdc-v-
sessmgr06that

McInnis, T. (2009). National Endowment for the Arts v Finley (1998). Retrieved
from The First Amendment Encyclopedia website: https://mtsu.edu/first-
amendment/article/314/national-endowment-for-the-arts-v-finley

Redaelli, Eleonora. (2016). Creative placemaking and the NEA: Unpacking a

multi-level governance. Policy Studies, 37, 387-402.

Saunders, Shauna. (2005). The case for the National Endowment for the Arts:
Federal funding for the arts in American in the 1960s and 1970s. History
of Political Economy, 37, 593-616.


Shockley, Gordon E. (2011). Political environment and policy change: The

National Endowment for the Arts in the 1990s. The Journal of Arts
Management, 41, 267-284.

Stoilas, H. (2009). Obama’s pledges for the arts. Art Newspaper, 18, 7. Retrieved
from http://lp.hscl.ufl.edu/login?url+http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx

Urice, John K. (2001). An iconoclast’s view of the National Endowment for the
Arts and K-12 arts education. Arts Education, 103, 19-22.

Urice, John K. (2003). Three contemporary reports that influenced the creation of
the National Endowment for the Arts: A retrospective. The Journal of Arts
Management, Law, and Society, 33, 5-16.