The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) was created in 1965 by Congress. It is a sub-agency of the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities, along with the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities, and the Institute of Museum and Library Services.
Its budget in 1966 was a little less than $3 million. In 2024, the bloat had grown to $207 million.
It's absolutely incredible what the NEA spends taxpayer funds on and calls "art." The most famous example in the NEA's controversial history was the execrable "Piss Christ," a photo by Andres Serrano of a crucifix suspended in a vat of urine. He received a $15,000 award from the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art (SCCA) in 1989 for his "art." The SCCA was partially funded by the NEA.
Shortly after Serrano's "triumph," a young gay artist named Robert Maplethorpe was asked by a Pennsylvania art gallery to assemble a collection of his photographs. The "collection" included graphic depictions of gay sex and photos of naked children in sexually suggestive poses. The gallery was able to keep its doors open because of a grant from the NEA.
If some rich, bigoted pervert wanted to fund these "artistic endeavors," he would have been perfectly free to do so. The argument for the existence of this garbage is, and always will be, "art is in the eye of the beholder."
In a free, capitalist society, if someone wants to buy this crap, they are welcome to it. If an art gallery wants to display this filth, that's their free choice. It's one of the tradeoffs we make in a free society that for every Maplethorpe we're forced to endure, we're allowed a Monet to be charmed by.
One thing is certain: We don't need a government-funded NEA to bring fantastic painting, sculpture, theater, symphony, or museums to the American people. It's arrogant and elitist to suggest that the government needs to fund these artistic and cultural endeavors when, for the last thousand years, rich people have been sponsoring artists and artistic endeavors throughout the Western world.
The Trump administration is in the process of dismantling the NEA and its sister organizations. It's not going to save a large amount of money. But the statement that it makes about the arts in America is far more important than the savings of taxpayer funds.
When the government gives grants for art, it puts it's stamp of approval on it. The vociferous denials of the NEA's defenders notwithstanding, the government is not a neutral observer and the perception will be that if it's funded by the NEA, the government approves it. It's inescapable.
Defenders of taxpayers funding the arts say that "it promotes philanthropic giving, makes cultural programs accessible to those who can least afford them, and protects America's cultural heritage." according to the Heritage Foundation.
That's simply not true.
Art can survive and thrive without public funding. The US arts and cultural sector contributed $1.1 trillion to the economy in real value added in 2022, accounting for 4.3 percent of GDP.7 Private philanthropy alone injected over $23.5 billion into the sector in 2023, with individuals, corporations, and foundations funding everything from local theater productions to world-class museums.
This shows strong demand for the arts, and that great art flourishes without being dependent on federal financing. Hollywood, the most successful film industry in the world, was built through studio financing, ticket sales, and private backers, producing classics like Gone with the Wind, The Godfather, and others without taxpayer support.
Broadway operates on the same model, with hit productions relying on ticket revenue and private investors. Institutions such as the Metropolitan Opera, the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, and the J. Paul Getty Museum thrive primarily through endowments, private donations, and memberships, proving that world-class art institutions don’t need the NEA to stay afloat.
The point is simple. The American people decide what is art and what isn't. Good artists who don't want to produce art for the masses can always find a benefactor. Lousy artists like Serrano and Maplethorpe need gimmicks to make a living.
Taxpayers also won't need to support wacky art like $495,000 to create medieval smells in a museum or $20,000 to support a series of public art presentations “on the theme of climate change” in Minneapolis, per the Washington Times. There are literally thousands of grants like this that don't bring art to the inner city or promote the arts in any meaningful way.
Finally time to give the NEA the ax.
Help PJ Media continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration's accomplishments as we continue to usher in the Golden Era of America. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member