CAA News Today
Know Your Rights: What to do if You’re Stopped by the Police
posted by admin — July 01, 2004
The ACLU has provided a advice regarding your rights if stopped or questioned by the police. To access this information please go to the ACLU Website.
Join CAA for Advocacy Days in Washington, D.C., in March
posted by admin — March 16, 2004
It’s not too late! You can still sign up to participate in Humanities Advocacy Day and Art Advocacy Day!
Once again, the College Art Association will be a national co-sponsor of Humanities Advocacy Day and Arts Advocacy Day; we strongly encourage our members to participate. Both events help to support increased funding for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH).
Participants in both Humanities Advocacy Day and Arts Advocacy Day will receive legislative and policy briefings and advocacy training before making group visits to members of Congress. CAA’s deputy director will be available to schedule all visits, and CAA staff members will accompany participants in Washington on congressional visits.
Humanities Advocacy Day will take place March 15-16, 2004. Held in Washington, D.C., this event provides a unique opportunity for concerned citizens to communicate to Congress the vital importance of federal support for research and education in the humanities.
Arts Advocacy Day will take place March 19-21, 2004. Also held in the nation’s capital, this event brings together a broad cross-section of America’s national cultural organizations to underscore the importance of developing strong public funding for the arts, humanities, and arts education, as well as other programs within the federal government that have an impact on the visual and performing arts.
For information on how to participate in Humanities Advocacy Day and Arts Advocacy please contact Marta Teegen at mteegen@collegeart.org.
Join CAA in Washington for Humanities Advocacy Day and Arts Advocacy Day
posted by admin — March 16, 2004
Once again, CAA will be a national co-sponsor of Humanities Advocacy Day and Arts Advocacy Day; we encourage our members to participate in both events.
Humanities Advocacy Day will take place March 15-16, 2004. Held in Washington, D.C., this event provides a unique opportunity for concerned citizens to communicate to Congress the vital importance of federal support for research and education in the humanities.
Arts Advocacy Day will take place March 29-31, 2004. Also held in the nation’s capital, this event brings together a broad cross-section of America’s national cultural organizations to underscore the importance of developing strong public policies and appropriating increased public funding for the arts, humanities, and arts education, as well as other programs within the federal government that have an impact on the visual and performing arts.
For information on how to participate in Humanities Advocacy Day and Arts Advocacy Day, please contact Marta Teegen at mteegen@collegeart.org.
Support Academic Freedom in Foreign Language and International Studies
posted by admin — March 15, 2004
Background – In October 2003 the House passed by unanimous voice vote HR 3077 to reauthorize Title VI — the section of the Higher Education Act (HEA) dealing with foreign language and international studies. It was referred to the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee which is likely take it up during 2004. The House bill contains several improvements over present legislation, but it also includes an advisory board for Title VI projects. The HR 3077 advisory board would have extraordinary powers to investigate individual faculty members and specific classes on campus that are of concern to many because of its significant potential for politicization.
The Senate HELP Committee staff is currently hoping to write and complete its own bill sometime early in the year. [Note that the Higher Education Act is scheduled to be reauthorized by the end of September 2004.] The Senate HELP Committee may or may not choose to incorporate the House amendments to Title VI in their own bill. However, since HR 3077 passed the House without significant dissent, several majority members are said to be giving the House amendments very serious consideration.
Appropriate actions to take now – Congress will reconvene in mid to late January. We understand that many in our community wish to express their views about the HR 3077 advisory board and other provisions in the House bill. The following are some suggested ways of acting on this:
1. Make calls to Senate HELP Committee staff briefly expressing your concerns to frame the debate. Below is a list of talking points for a conversation. [A contact list for Members and key staff follows.] If you have a Member on the committee, then call that office. If not, then call the committee offices of Senators Gregg and Kennedy, the chair and ranking minority members respectively. You might also contact your own Senators about this issue.
Points for a conversation:
a.) The House passed International Education bill (HR 3077), which is part of the Higher Education Act and would reauthorize Title VI. The Senate has not yet really started to deal with this issue but it is important that you know of concerns about the House bill.
b.) In general, there are many aspects of the bill that are quite good and merit support, not the least of which is that all Title VI programs are extended in tact.
c.) The House bill also creates what it calls an “advisory board” that, in fact, is much more. This board has the power to “investigate” individual faculty members and specific classes on campus and it can issue reports. An advisory board ought to be truly advisory. It shouldn’t have broad, nearly unlimited powers and it should not be free of reasonable supervision by the Department of Education. What’s more, the composition of the board is too narrow to reflect the broad range of needs in international education.
d.) The Senate may choose other, alternative mechanisms to strengthen how Title VI meets its mission. If the Senate chooses the advisory body approach, I urge a properly constructed advisory board: that its powers are well defined and simply advisory; and that it falls under the supervisory authority of the Secretary of Education, as do other advisory boards for comparable programs such as the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education.
e.) Please urge the Senator to make sure that any Senate bill addresses these concerns.
2. Write/fax letters to your Member on the Senate HELP Committee, or if your state is not represented on the committee, write to Senators Gregg and Kennedy with a copy to your two Senators. [Note: Because of security procedures, letters take unpredictable amounts of time to reach members of Congress. Therefore faxing letters before or instead of mailing is preferred.]
Points to make:
a.) As the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee prepares to act on the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, I write to share information about Title VI programs at [University of ____, or other institution] as well as some observations on the House passed bill, HR 3077, the International Studies in Higher Education Act.
b) Provide evidence of outstanding Title VI activities that contradict recent charges against Title VI, such as:
* alumni who have gone on to serve in high level government or business positions, including the Department of Defense and other
security agencies (identify where and who if appropriate, and/or numbers of students who went on to work for the federal government in the last few years);
* faculty consultancies or other service with government agencies (give a few examples listing agencies and world areas);
* strategic languages taught mainly or only in Title VI institutions;
* exemplary outreach and/or websites for K-12, government, media and business that present a multiplicity of viewpoints;
* other activities that address recent national strategic needs, etc.
c) Assert that Title VI programs do not promote any one intellectual paradigm, ideology, or political agenda, and if appropriate and
possible, indicate examples of intellectual balance.
d.) Make the point that there is much that is good in HR 3077, not the least of which is an extension of all programs in tact.
e.) Express your concerns about the HR 3077 advisory board (points noted above). Indicate that Title VI had an advisory board once before and that a new, properly constructed Title VI advisory board is not objectionable.
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee
Republican Members
Judd Gregg, NH
Chairman
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
393 Senate Russell Building
Washington, DC 20510-2904
TEL 202-224-3324
FAX 202-224-4952
gregg.semate.gov/body/e-mail.htm
Committee Majority Staff: Tracy Locklin 202-224-6770
Bill Frist, TN [Senate Majority Leader and members of the HELP committee]
461 Senate Dirksen Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4205
TEL 202-224-3344
FAX 202-228-1264
Staff: Andrea Becker
Michael B. Enzi, WY
379A Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-5004
TEL 202-224-3424
FAX 202-228-0359
senator@enzi.senate.gov
Staff: Scott Fleming
Lamar Alexander, TN
302 Senate Hart Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4206
TEL 202-224-4944
FAX 202-228-3398
Staff: Kristin Bannerman
Christopher S. Bond, MO
274 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-2503
TEL 202-224-5721
FAX 202-224-8149
kit_bond@bond.senate.gov
Staff: Julia Jolly
Mike DeWine, OH
140 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-3503
TEL 202-224-2315
FAX 202-224-6519
senator_dewine@dewine.senate.gov
Staff: Lindsay Morris
Pat Roberts, KS
109 Senate Hart Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-1605
TEL 202-224-4774
FAX 202-224-3514
Staff: Jennifer Swenson
Jeff Sessions, AL
335 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-0104
TEL 202-224-4124
FAX 202-224-3149
senator@sessions.senate.gov
Staff: John Little
John Ensign, NV
364 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-2805
TEL 202-224-6244
FAX 202-228-2193
Staff: Lindsay Lovlien
Lindsey O. Graham, SC
290 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4003
TEL 202-224-5972
FAX 202-224-1189
Staff: Jessica Efird
John W. Warner, VA
225 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4601
TEL 202-224-2023
FAX 202-224-6295
senator@warner.senate.gov
Staff: J.K. Robinson
Democrat Members
Edward M. Kennedy, MA
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
317 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-2101
TEL 202-224-4543
FAX 202-224-2417
senator@kennedy.senate.gov
Committee Minority Staff: Jane Oates 202-224-0767
Alt: Kathy Kruse 202-224-4543
Christopher J. Dodd, CT
448 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-0702
TEL 202-224-2823
FAX 202-224-1083
Staff: Mary Ellen McGuire
Tom Harkin, IA
731 Senate Hart Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-1502
TEL 202-224-3254
FAX 202-224-9369
tom_harkin@harkin.senate.gov
Staff: Ellen Murray
Barbara A.Mikulski, MD
709 Senate Hart Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-2003
TEL 202-224-4654
FAX 202-224-8858
Staff: Rebecca Litt
Jeff Bingaman, NM
703 Senate Hart Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-3102
TEL 202-224-5521
FAX 202-224-2852
senator_bingaman@bingaman.senate.gov
Staff: Carmel Martin
Patty Murray, WA
173 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4704
TEL 202-224-2621
FAX 202-224-0238
senator_murray@murray.senate.gov
Staff: Jamie Fosteau
John F. Reed, RI.
728 Senate Hart Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-3903
TEL 202-224-4642
FAX 202-224-4680
jack@reed.senate.gov
Staff: Elyse Wasch
John R. Edwards, NC
225 Senate Dirksen Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-3306
TEL 202-224-3154
FAX 202-228-1374
Staff: James Kvaal
Hillary Rodham Clinton, NY
476 Senate Russell Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-3204
TEL 202-224-4451
FAX 202-228-0282
clinton.senate.gov/email_form.html
Staff: Susie Saveeda
Independent Member
James M. Jeffords, VT
413 Senate Dirksen Building
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4503
TEL 202-224-5141
FAX 202-228-0776
vermont@jeffords.senate.gov
Staff: Sherry Kaiman
NEA and NEH Receive Budget Increases
posted by admin — January 16, 2004
The House-Senate 2004 Interior Appropriations Conference Committee agreed on significant budget increases for the National Endowment for the Arts ($6.7 million) and the National Endowment for the Humanities ($11.2 million). The House and the Senate approved the conference report in the fall.
The $11.2 million increase for the NEH constitutes the largest dollar increase in thirteen years. Of the new funds, about $10 million is allocated to the NEH’s We the People initiative on American history and civics. Five million of the NEA’s increase is designated for Challenge America, an initiative that makes the arts more widely available in underserved communities across the country.
Update on State Arts Funding
posted by admin — November 16, 2003
With state budgets suffering, most state arts agencies have experienced cuts in funding in fiscal year (FY) 2004. Of the forty-two state arts agencies reporting a budget decrease for the current fiscal year, ten had reductions of more than 15 percent. Unfortunately, the cuts come after an already bleak FY 2003. The National Assembly of State Arts Agencies reports that forty-two states diminished their arts budgets during the last fiscal year, with California and Massachusetts alone accounting for $44 million in losses. State arts funding plunged from $410 million two years ago to about $350 million in FY 2003. Despite attempts by some state legislators to dissolve completely state arts agencies as a cost-saving measure, currently fifty state and six jurisdictional government arts agencies are still operating. The various arts agencies help to support both established and emerging local artists and art organizations through grants and programs. They also help to bring art to rural and other underserved areas of the country, providing art education in schools and, in some cases, spurring economic development through the arts.
To make up for lost income, state governors are urging arts groups to find alternative funding sources, but corporate, foundation, and individual charitable giving is drying up as well. Total gifts by the nation’s top sixty donors fell from $12.7 billion in 2001 to $4.6 billion last year, according to a survey in the February 20, 2003, issue of The Chronicle of Philanthropy. The following is a more detailed look at the status of state arts agency budgets around the country:
Arizona: Governor Janet Napolitano (D) signed a FY 2004 budget that cuts state arts funding to $1.8 million, a reduction of 16 percent from 2003. In signing, she used her line-item veto for thirty-five sections; three of those affected funding for the Arizona Commission on the Arts.
California: With the FY 2004 state budget approved, the California Arts Council’s funding has been slashed by approximately 86 percent, from $18 million in 2002-3 to $1 million. (The National Endowment for the Arts [NEA] is expected to provide a matching $1 million, and another anticipated $1 million in revenues will come in from designer license plates, bringing the expected state arts budget to $3 million.) The council reports that this total represents a contribution of less than three cents per Californian per annum, with the national average being approximately one dollar. Based on this drastic budget reduction, all of its grant programs will be suspended and half of its staff positions will be eliminated.
Colorado: The state legislature, facing a $1 billion revenue shortfall in FY 2004, reduced the Colorado Council on the Arts’ budget from $1.04 million to $200,000. After this 80 percent cut, the council took another hit when Governor Bill Owens (R) ordered it to reduce overhead costs to $40,000 a year, which meant that it was forced to vacate its office space and reduce its staff from seven to one. For a while it looked as if the state’s action would cost the council an additional $614,000 in federal funding, because the NEA only distributes its grants through viably functioning state arts councils. Fortunately, the NEA backed off their original threat to withhold the money and awarded the council $613,600, allowing it to use some of the grant money for operations expenses. However, the NEA warned that they will keep close watch to make sure federal standards are being met and made clear that the funding was not meant to set a precedent.
Florida: State lawmakers allocated just under $5.9 million for the Division of Cultural Affairs’ grants programs in FY 2004, which received $32 million last year. A $200,279 grant from the NEA boosted the total budget to just over $6 million. The division will continue some of its grant programs, though on a much smaller scale, while temporarily suspending others. The state legislature also voted to eliminate the Corporations Trust Fund (derived from corporate filing fees in the state), which until May functioned as a unique funding source for the division’s operating costs. Now, the division will be funded from nonrecurring general revenue, thus increasing the level of competition for state dollars with other agencies each year.
Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Cultural Council has been level-funded at $7.3 million for FY 2004. Last year, it suffered a 62 percent cut to its state appropriation, resulting in the elimination of eight funding programs and severe reductions to its five remaining grant programs. About 1/4 of council staff were laid off.
Michigan: The state legislature passed a FY 2004 budget that includes a 47 percent cut to art and culture grants awarded by the Council for Arts and Cultural Affairs. The council also saw a 13 percent cut to their administrative budget. That said, it could have been significantly worse, as many in the state legislature had called for a total elimination of arts funding.
Minnesota: Overall arts funding was reduced by 32 percent for the next two years. This included a 60 percent cut to the state money that supports the Minnesota State Arts Board’s operations budget, a 29 percent cut to the Regional Arts Councils, and a 30 percent cut to the board’s grant programs. The Minnesota Humanities Commission fared even worse’it lost all of its state funding for the next two years.
Missouri: Earlier this year the state removed the Missouri Arts Council from general revenue funding, meaning the council will receive none of the $3.9 million it did last year. In just two years, state support has gone from $5.3 million to zero. Despite these cuts, the council has not yet been forced to reduce its operations drastically because it is partially funded by the Missouri Cultural Trust, an endowment for the arts funded by an income tax on nonresident athletes and entertainers. A total of $3,942,520 will be used for the council next year. Of that amount, $1.3 million comes from interest on the trust fund and $700,000 is federal funding from the NEA. Unfortunately, the trust money is also in danger, because the state legislature is using the athlete-and-entertainer tax revenue to fund other state programs in an attempt to close the state’s estimated $1 billion deficit.
New Jersey: Tens of thousands of New Jersey residents spoke out against a proposal by Governor James McGreevey (D) to eliminate the New Jersey State Council on the Arts by cutting its entire $18 million budget, to help close the state’s $5 billion deficit. State legislators listened. They passed a FY 2004 budget with $16 million appropriated to the council, $2.7 million to the New Jersey Historical Commission, and $500,000 for the New Jersey Cultural Trust. As part of the budget bill, a hotel/motel occupancy tax, which provides FY 2004 cultural revenue and dedicates funding in FY 2005 for these three organizations, was also passed.
Oregon: The Oregon Arts Commission lost all of its legislative funding in March as a result of emergency cuts in FY 2003, which applied to all state services other than health and safety. In August, Governor Ted Kulongoski (D) asked that the commission and the Oregon Cultural Trust merge their administrations as a cost-saving maneuver, a suggestion that was endorsed by both organizations as well as state legislators. As a result, the commission was kept alive with a budget of $1.2 million, which represents a 50 percent decrease. The trust will continue to be funded largely by the special tax credit set in place in 2001.
Tennessee: Despite statewide fiscal problems, Tennessee has been able to raise its level of arts funding for FY 2004. The Tennessee Arts Commission’s overall budget will increase to $5.25 million, nearly 17 percent from last year, because the commission’s main funding source is derived from nontaxpayer revenue, mainly the sale of specialty license plates.
Virginia: Due to the state budget crisis, the Virginia Commission for the Arts’ grant funds were slashed by 45 percent in FY 2004. The cut follows two budget reductions ordered in FY 2003 that had already taken away $1 million from the commission’s budget. In total, the accumulated cuts have decreased the commission’s annual budget from $4.9 million to about $2.7 million.
Although states across the country have made drastic reductions to a wide variety of programs and services in order to balance their budgets, cuts to state arts agencies are especially troubling, as they will result in the loss of matching funds from the federal cultural agencies and private donors alike. Furthermore, it is often very difficult to restore an agency’s budget to the funding level it had prior to the cuts, which means that any future budget increases to state arts agencies will most likely be based on these newly reduced figures. A good source of information on state arts funding can be found on the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies (NASAA) website at www.nasaa-arts.org.
NEH and NEA Funding Update
posted by admin — September 16, 2003
At press time, the fiscal year 2004 budgets for the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) had not been finalized. In mid-July the Congress-ional Arts Caucus introduced an amendment, sponsored by Representatives Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Chris Shays (R-CT), Norm Dicks (D-WA), and Jim Leach (R-IA), to increase funding for the NEH by an additional $5 million over the House Appropriations Committee’s mark of $137 million (for a total of $142 million). The amendment also sought to increase funding for the NEA by $10 million above the committee’s mark of $117 million (for a total of $127.5 million). Thirty-five Republicans joined Democrats in passing the Congressional Arts Caucus amendment a few days after it was introduced.
House Reauthorizes IMLS
posted by admin — March 16, 2003
On March 6, 2003, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the Museum and Library Services Act of 2003 (H.R. 13), a bill to reauthorize the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). The authorization allows up to $35 million for the Museum Services program and $210 for the Library Services and Technology program.
NEA/NEH Funding Update
posted by admin — March 16, 2003
In early February, President George W. Bush’s fiscal year 2004 budget was released, which calls for increases to both the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) over their 2003 amounts.
The NEH in particular has received the largest requested increase in several years’ Bush is asking for an additional $25 million for the endowment’s We the People initiative on American history, culture, and civics. The president has also requested a total of $117 million for the NEA in the coming year, which is a very modest increase in the endowment’s budget over the previous year, and will only account for mandated cost-of-living increases.
Congress will draft its own version of the president’s budget over the next several months, with the goal of having it finalized in October 2003.
Report From Washington: Humanities Advocacy Day and Arts Advocacy Day
posted by admin — March 16, 2003
CAA cosponsored Humanities Advocacy Day (February 25, 2003), hosted by the National Humanities Alliance, and Arts Advocacy Day (March 26, 2003), hosted by Americans for the Arts, in Washington, D.C. Both events brought together a broad cross-section of national cultural organizations, academics, and grassroots arts leaders to promote the arts, arts education, and humanities to Congress through increased support for the federal cultural agencies.
CAA representatives Susan Ball, Richard Selden, and Marta Teegen visited the offices of several key members of the Senate and House Interior Appropriations Subcommittees, which deal directly with funding for the federal cultural agencies, and met with other legislators during both advocacy events.
For Humanities Advocacy Day, an event that focuses on increased support for the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), Ball and Teegen called for Congress to support President George W. Bush’s budget request of $152 million for the NEH, a $26 million increase over the current fiscal year. Much of the proposed increase will go to fund the NEH’s We the People initiative to advance understanding of American history, culture, and civics. It is very important to note the program is currently administered within, but not officially funded by, the NEH. Should We the People be properly funded, it will become its own program at the NEH-grant applications dealing with American history, culture, and civics will go to this new program instead of the various other program divisions at NEH, as is currently the case. Consequently, a properly funded We the People will free up money for other NEH programs, including Preservation & Access and Research Grants.
At Arts Advocacy Day, CAA representatives Ball and Selden focused on several important arts policy matters during visits to Capitol Hill. They urged Congress to appropriate $170 million in funds for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), $53 million above the current fiscal year. The NEA has never recovered from the 40 percent budget cut it received in 1996, and its programs are woefully underfunded. Moreover, CAA’s representatives called on Congress to support President Bush’s budget request of $34.43 million for the Office of Museum Services, a division within the Institute of Museum and Library Services.
Ball joined members of the New York delegation to Arts Advocacy Day on visits to the offices of Charles Rangel (D-NY) and Amo Houghton (R-NY), both of whom serve on the House Ways and Means Committee (Rangel is the ranking member), which has jurisdiction over all tax policies, including proposed legislation calling for fair-market-value tax deductions for artists. Identical bills have been introduced in the House and Senate again this year to allow artists to deduct contributions of their artworks at full market value. Representatives Houghton and Ben Cardin (D-MD) introduced H.R. 806 Artists’ Contribution to American Heritage Act of 2003, and Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Robert Bennett (R-UT) introduced S. 287 Artist-Museum Partnership Act. Both bills continue to have strong bipartisan support, though it is still unclear when in the coming year either of them will be voted on.
Other issues raised on Arts Advocacy Day concerned improving the visa process for visiting international artists and scholars. Many nonprofit organizations confront untenable delays and uncertainties while getting approval of visa petitions for international guest artists and scholars. While current law requires a maximum fourteen-day process, it now takes the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) up to 120 days to process visa petitions in the categories most used by visiting artists. Delays began in June 2001, when the INS adopted a Premium Processing Service, which guarantees processing within fifteen days upon payment of an additional $1,000; however, most nonprofit organizations cannot afford such a fee. Arts advocates called on Congress to urge the INS to adopt immediate reforms that will ensure timely processing of visa petitions related to nonprofit arts groups.
CAA’s representatives also advocated for an increase in appropriations for cultural exchanges through the U.S. Department of State. They specifically urged Congress to boost funding by $10 million for the Cultural Programs Division, which currently receives only $2 million. This division funds international educational exchange and training programs and supports partnerships among museums around the world.
-Marta Teegen, CAA director of governance and advocacy