The idea of abandoning these agencies for state programs is even less
attractive on examination than it is on its face, and it is plenyt unattractive
on its face.  The $ we all get from Washington are leveraging dollars; they
help us to raise local dollars by validating what we do with the imprimatur
of a national peer review process.  No state agency can possibly duplicate
that.  In addition, the distribution of quality in the arts and humanities
does not follow population lines; a national process is precisely that:
it is national and distributes funds along criteria of excellence, with
the nice balancing effect today of money to the state programs that is
mandated in the legislation.  There are other reasons as well.  The United
States spends less per capita on culture than any country in western
Europe, Japan, etc.  We have no national cultural policy.  We should.
NEA, NEH, IMS are inadequately funded.  If they disappear, we are all in
for trouble because other sources of funding will dry up quickly thereafter
 
Oh.  The comments about humanities programs in the demonstrably wrong.  State
humanities councils are every bit as developed as state arts councils,
although not as well funded.  And New York's led by Jay Kaplan is one of
the best.  The one we have in Illinois ain't half bad either.
 
Douglas Greenberg
President and Director
The Chicago Historical Society
Clark Street at North Avenue
Chicago  Il.  60614-6099
Telephone 312 642 5035
FAX 312 266 2077 OR 312 642 1199
Bitnet U27777@UICVM
Internet [log in to unmask]