Actors, musicians visit Congress for arts funding

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 20, 2012 8:48 p.m.

    way to sweep in at the ned of a thread and completely ignore all the comments before yours that already addressed your comment.

  • byu rugby Crystal Lake, IL
    April 20, 2012 4:52 p.m.

    Let's have a new ARTS and HUMANITIES Tax for salaries derived from art, acting, dancing, atheletic,performing, etc. Let them fund the arts if, it is so important. What part of we are broke don't these people understand? Nobody is preventing them from stroking checks to fund the arts!

  • George Bronx, NY
    April 20, 2012 12:34 p.m.

    there is no mandate to fund the arts but that does not mean that voters cannot choose to support the arts through their elected officials which is historically what has happened and as a society we most certainly do invest in things that we think will have a positive outcome art education and science to name a few, beyond that you are just running in circles and I feel no need to readdress arguments that have already been addressed.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    April 20, 2012 9:12 a.m.

    To "George" but it is a pet project. Where in the Constitution does it state that we have to have funding for an arts program?

    The NEA is one of the "nice to have" but not necessary.

    The government is not an investment firm, plus their investments rarely work.

    According to the NEA website, we don't all have a stake in it. Their funding for education is for afterschool programs and summer programs. What does not go for education typically goes to fund arts that the elites participate in, not the general public.

    So again, if congress does not have the money for the NEA, why should we, the taxpayers, pay for the pet project of these millionaires?

  • George Bronx, NY
    April 19, 2012 7:20 p.m.

    I think you are the one willfully not getting it, again proving Tolstoy right. As has been pointed out to you several times including my evidence. the fact is that it is not a "charity" project or simply a "pet project" it is an investment in our future and we all have a stake in it not just those that advocate for it. Why should he have to front extra money for something we all have a stake in? why should you get the rewards without helping paying?
    At the end of the day tolstoy is right you are the perfect example of why these programs are so important even in the face of evidence that your position is wrong you hold onto your myopic reasoning. these programs are important because they provide keys to unlocking peoples ability to find effective solutions complex problems well beyond the filed of art.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    April 19, 2012 3:54 p.m.

    To "Kalindra" you still don't get it.

    If you knew I had a bank account with $200 million in it, and I came to you asking that you and your neighbors to pay for an afterschool arts program in New York, would you do it even if I told you that I was not going to contribute 1 cent of my own money?

    Would you think that I am some great hero for asking others to pay for my charity project while I put nothing into it beyond asking others to fund it?

    That is what is going on here. Millionairs asking you to pay for their pet projects while they pay nothing for them.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    April 19, 2012 11:42 a.m.

    @ RedShirt: In many areas, art education is not included in the school budget and the only exposure to the arts comes through after school programs or separate funding for in-school classes.

    I'm sorry that you see no benefit to museums and the symphony and many other arts programs.

    I do. And since I know that the only way many lower income people have access to this is through public funding, I do not mind using my taxes to help fund it.

    However, if you wish to make it so that only those who have an interest in something fund it, go right ahead - I can almost guarantee it will save me a lot more on my taxes than it will save you.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    April 19, 2012 11:28 a.m.

    So if its is for after school, community education or even just exposure to the arts it is not worth the investment? education and exposure whether in the schools or community benefits all of society and should be funded by al of society. BTW it looks like you are the one that starred away by bringing up rome and greece, don't be made at Tolstoy for picking up the stick and beating you with it.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 19, 2012 9:27 a.m.

    To "Tolstoy" you are straying from the point I originally made. If this is so important to these millionaires, why are they not getting together with some of their buddies and funding the program themselves?

    As far as the education portion, that is part of the school system already and does not need the redundant funding. The funding that the NEA provies is typically for afterschool programs or summer programs. Very little goes to actual classroom instruction where it would be most beneficial.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    April 18, 2012 6:57 p.m.

    @ Tami: If education were being funded properly, there would be enough to teach the arts along with math, science, history, and reading/writing.

    Unfortunately, however, often there is not enough money provided to schools to teach those things properly - let alone things that are "to decorate your house".

    Because so many people are unable to see the influence that art and music has on the ability to learn other subjects and the importance art has in advancing knowledge by increasing the ability for creative problem solving, art and music are the first things cut when budgets are tight.

    If the arts are not funded by outside sources, they often are not funded or taught at all.

  • George Bronx, NY
    April 18, 2012 2:11 p.m.

    Why is art important? read the following references.

    Michael Posner, Ph.D., University of Oregon—How Arts Training Influences Cognition

    John Jonides, Ph.D., University of Michigan—Musical Skill and Cognition

    Elizabeth Spelke, Ph.D., Harvard University, Effects of Music Instruction on Developing Cognitive Systems at the Foundations of Mathematics and Science

    * Brian Wandell, Ph.D., Stanford University—Training in the Arts, Reading, and Brain Imaging

    * Scott Grafton, M.D., University of California, Santa Barbara—Dance and the Brain

    * Mark D’Esposito, M.D., University of California, Berkeley—Developing and Implementing Neuroimaging Tools to Determine if Training in the Arts Impacts the Brain

    Kevin Niall Dunbar, Ph.D., University of Toronto at Scarborough (formerly at Dartmouth College)—Arts Education, the Brain, and Language

    Laura-Ann Petitto, Ed.D., University of Toronto at Scarborough (formerly at Dartmouth College)—Arts Education, the Brain, and Language

    Helen Neville, Ph.D., University of Oregon—Effects of Music Training on Brain and Cognitive Development in Under-Privileged 3- to 5-Year-Old Children: Preliminary Results

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 18, 2012 12:22 p.m.

    there are several studies that show that study of music and the visual arts increases not only critical, flexible and creative thinking across many disciplines but actually raises test scores for children. Funding by the Nation endowment for the arts does not just go to a bunch of millionaires it helps fund art education and artist across the political and economic stratus the last thing we need is more people like you that lack critical thinking, flexibility and creative thinking as this is how we end up with the grand ideas that all of our problems can be solved with over simplified solutions like simple cutting all spending or simply drilling our way out of our oil dependency. It is interesting that you bring up Rome and greece actually because if you look at their history they fail after moving away from the arts and into a more aster posture for fear of losing their power. Sound familiar?

  • Tami Herriman, UT
    April 18, 2012 11:18 a.m.

    While I firmly believe the arts should be as much a part of our childrens' education as much as math, science and reading, it should be funded the same way. So, no special funding from the feds and we certainly should not be funding special projects for adults to help them provide arts for the rest of us.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    April 18, 2012 7:52 a.m.

    To "Tolstoy" I don't think you understand what a metaphor is. The government is broke and is spending us into oblivion. Now we have a group of millionaires asking congress to fund their pet project that does not create jobs or feed people, and you have no problem with this? Doesn't it bother you that much of the funding will go to things that benefit the wealthy, and do not go to things that the poor will be included in?

    The fact is that spending must be brought under control. Once that is taken care of, then lets fund some arts programs.

    It is your type of thinking that brought Roman and the Greek empires down into ruin.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 17, 2012 4:47 p.m.

    sorry ever not every

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 17, 2012 4:22 p.m.

    do you think you could have proven my last comment any more if you tried? The value of the arts to a culture goes well beyond pictures on your wall a concept I really don't expect you would every want to even try to understand.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 17, 2012 1:16 p.m.

    To "Tolstoy" if you have to borrow money to meet your monthly living expenses, should you be going out and buying pictures and art to decorate your house?

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 17, 2012 12:42 p.m.

    why are you to cheap? Never mind I forgot who I was talking to of course you would see no value in the arts.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 17, 2012 12:24 p.m.

    If all of the highly paid actors put a small portion of their yearly salaries together, they could fund the NEA with more money than what they are asking congress to do. Why is it that wealthy actors such as Alec Baldwin are too cheap to pay for something that they deem is necessary?