Harris, Leslie

Kropp, Arthur J.

English

DigitalCommons@URI

University of Rhode IslandDigitalCommons@URIDesign Arts: National Academy of Design (1994) Education: National Endowment for the Arts andHumanities, Subject Files I (1973-1996)1994Design Arts: National Academy of Design (1994):Correspondence 10Leslie HarrisArthur J. KroppFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_I_23This Correspondence is brought to you for free and open access by the Education: National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities, Subject Files I(1973-1996) at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Design Arts: National Academy of Design (1994) by an authorizedadministrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@etal.uri.edu.Recommended CitationHarris, Leslie and Kropp, Arthur J., "Design Arts: National Academy of Design (1994): Correspondence 10" (1994). Design Arts:National Academy of Design (1994). Paper 31.http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_I_23/31http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/pell_neh_I_23/31•• PEOPLEFOR '~ THE AMERICAN WAY ACTION FUND Your Voice Against Intolerance Deat~tQr: Juiy 25, 1994 Qn behalf of the over 300,000 Il\~~s Qf People For the Ainetitafi Way A~on Fund, we urge you to support the Jeffords Amendment to restore fun~Qing for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) at the Admini.Stration's teqM.ested level of $170 million when the~~ c:onsiders the Interior Apptoptiatio:ns bUI. We also hope that you Will oppose ~y attempts by Sena.tot Helms to offer amendments whieh would w~ the NEA and undetmihe fteecioro of expression. The Senate Appropriations CoI1'lJ:IYtt~'s recommendation of a 5% ted1.1,ctic:m w~mld decrease the NEA' s budget by $8.5 million, rolling it back to a level bdow that for FY '84. The actions of the Appropriation's Committee. were Dot pased on fiscal concern, rather, the c;:ut are a straightforward measure ai!ned at expressing displeastite With the ~cmtent of specific grarttS. ThiS 5% r~u~tic;m will have a sigriificant itnpaet on many of this country's rote cultqr~ mstitutions and projectS which benefif ru.ral and @c:lerserved cominuhities, at-risk yo11th pre>grams, arts education, and neighboi:hQc;>d art centers. 5ehator He~, as in past years, .i.S threatening to offer at least three weakening arnencl:rnents whi~ would further restrict the content of grants, reviSe the NEA gran.troaking procedure5, and provide addition~ pi~ to the Endowrnent'S budget. Sm~e pecorning NBA Chili~ Jane AI._e_Xfil\9.er has taken a .number of steps to reform the grantrnaking process and]nc;rease the accountability of the agency. Grantees are now required to sub:gi.jt ap .interim report before receiVing the final third of the grant award. Revi,sg<:i reporting requirements demand written permission ifi advance if a grantee ciestres to change the grant act:lvities from what has been. previously approv~. Additional review of the ag¢Dc;y's-program structure and operation M~ ne>w underway. AJ\ ~~dment to restrict the cont~t of works funded by the NEA is urmec~$ary and unconstitutional. The NEA is already prohibited ftom ftIDding works which are obscene. Th~ only constitutionally permissible standa.rci for judging artistic wotkS must be cgtistic; merit and excellence. A:ii.y amendment which would reqllire the agency to make deterrninatioi.'\S on the basis of a content-pased subjective sta:ndatd wowd violate the First Amendment. The c;cmrts have rw~ in numerous inStances that tbe gc>Vemmentmay not regulate the ~Qntent of the speech when federal hi_nd~ are involved. --The NEA is ju5t beginning to regait:l it$ footing under Jane Alexander. Ce>11gress must not allow attacks on the NEA-by politic:al groups to paralyze the agency anc:l gipple the arts in America. Ove:r the la$t thirty years, the NEA has re:volytjonized the arts by making them roQre accessible to more of the Afile:tic<Pl p~l::>li~. The arts are an lrnport:rnt jpv~trn~t in this country's future by bridging our diversity and helping to icientify shared values. We 1Jrge you to support full furtdifig ail.4 pppose all weakening arnendro_e_IJ.t:l). / - 1/ ~- .. ---wt>4/!~ o· Leslie H_~~ _ Oir~tor, Public Policy 2000 M Street NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20036 202 467 4999 ?02 293 2672 I Fax Sincerely, @O 

Design Arts: National Academy of Design (1994): Correspondence 10

https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1039&amp;context=pell_neh_I_23

Design Arts: National Academy of Design (1994): Correspondence 10

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@URI