Here's a theoretical question...
 
Supposing as a result of the current political and economic
philosophies a state decides to privatize what are currently
'state museums' (say... art, history, science/technology,
natural history....), what are the various ethical and legal
ramifications, limitations, complications, etc. relative to the
ownership of the collections?
For the sake of discussion, assume that ALL the collections
are currently state owned.  Is a state legally obligated to
continue ownership?  Would that vary from state to state?  If a
state is obligated to maintain ownership, are there any
precedents that would require a financial commitment by the
state with respect to the collections?
If it all boils down to the ethical issues rather than legal, what
role should groups such as AAM, AASLH, NIC, Art Museum Directors
Assoc., Assoc. Syst. Coll., etc. take relative to a state's
decision - (either if the state decides to divest itself
entirely of the collecitons, or if the state retains ownership
but doesn't intend to spend any money for care and maintenance)?
 
This is merely a HYPOTHETICAL situation.... I'm curious to know
the range of opinions, and any legal precedents that exist.
Thanks.
--
Paisley S. Cato, Ph.D.                          e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Curator of Collections                          phone:  703-666-8634
Virginia Museum of Natural History              fax:    703-632-6487
1001 Douglas Ave., Martinsville, VA 24112