Save arts funding

Trump should continue to support agencies that bolster the nation’s cultural wealth.

Economic growth is what pushes our country forward, and art is what it leaves behind for future generations. If you doubt this, go to the Museum of Fine Arts Houston to see its antiquities — the spectacular coffin of Pedi-Osiris or the exhibit of Frederic Remington paintings that helped to immortalize the American cowboy. These works of art from the past make history come alive.

Unlike most countries in the world, the U.S. relies heavily on private philanthropy to support and sustain its monumental art as well as local efforts. But the federal government does provide a tiny sliver of its budget to funding the arts through the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities.

Now President Trump has put that funding on the chopping block. The funding represents 0.0075 percent of the nearly $4 trillion federal budget, according to a Feb. 15 letter signed by 24 U.S. senators urging Trump to retain funding for the two endowments.

To put it in perspective, there’s a single house on the market in Los Angeles for $250 million, only $50 million less than the total federal funding for NEA and NEH combined.

The president should act immediately to repeal the drive to end the funding for these agencies. Although these two endowments get only crumbs in federal funding, they serve to increase the cultural wealth of this nation and act as drivers of “innovation and economic prosperity,” to borrow a description from the letter by senators, led by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis reports that the arts and culture sector is a $704 billion industry, or 4.2 percent of the GDP. This funding helps create jobs at arts organizations across the country.

The two national endowments collaborate with private groups and individuals to spur artistic activity. Each dollar awarded by the NEA leverages $9 from other sources, according to the senators’ letter.

At the national and local levels, works of living artists nurture a culture of creativity that also is a close cousin of the creativity resulting in entrepreneurship. It’s no coincidence that the nation that dominates the world in writing software also contributes a disproportionate share of the world’s writers and songwriters. The arts help prepare our students for the innovative thinking required for the 21st century workplace.

Conservatives have complained that the federal government should not pick winners and losers among the arts groups. They’re right. But the complaint reflects a false narrative. Federal grants have been based on peer review for many years now.

Houston’s vibrant arts scene is among the top reasons people commit to and love our city, and our city has much to lose from cuts in arts-based funding. These cuts will fall hardest on poor and minority communities, who benefit from subsidized programs that broaden access to arts programming.

Project Row Houses, which has helped revitalize the Third Ward community, expects to receive a combined $67,000 from the NEA and the NEH this year. The nonprofit organization is right now in the middle of a unique collaboration to help a significant portion of the Third Ward gain access to better amenities without pricing out residents.

In addition to art spaces, the organization provides housing for young mothers, tutoring and educational support, a community market, a food co-op and the historic Eldorado Ballroom and Dupree Park, which is located across the street from Project Row Houses.

The nonprofit would not be able to continue its important work in the Third Ward without these funds, unless they were replaced by private sources.

Even if the arts only gets crumbs from the federal budget, they are crumbs worth fighting for.