Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Just thought you'd like to see the response I got from my Senator.
Received: from mercury.house.gov (mercury.house.gov [126.96.36.199])
by wakko.efn.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA11964
for <judith>; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 12:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from msg10.house.gov (msg10.house.gov [188.8.131.52]) by mercury.house.gov with SMTP (8.7.1/8.7.1) id PAA02025 for <judith>; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 15:33:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by msg10.house.gov with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63)
id <01BC9845.F73D3400>; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 15:26:32 -0400
From: "Defazio, Peter" <Peter.Defazio>
To: "'judith'" <judith>
Subject: RE: NEA
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 15:26:28 -0400
X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63
Encoding: 69 TEXT
Dear Ms. Auslander:
Thanks for your note. As you may know, the House voted to eliminate NEA
funding. I voted to support continued funding for the arts. However,
the Senate voted for full funding for the NEA. It will now be up to a
House-Senate conference committee to agree on a final funding level.
I'll continue to support full funding for the NEA.
>From: Judith Auslander[SMTP:judith]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 1997 7:44 AM
>To: Defazio, Peter
>The Honorable Peter DeFazio
>U.S. House of Representatives
>Washington, D.C. 20515
>Dear Representative DeFazio:
>I urge you to support continued funding for the National Endowment for
>the Arts (NEA), at least at the level President Clinton requested in his
>1998 budget, $136 million.
>This year is a particularly pivotal one for the future of the NEA. As
>you know, on June 26, the House Appropriations Committee narrowly
>defeated an amendment to restore NEA funding to current levels ($99.5
>million). The funding stands at only a token $10 million for the
>Endowment, which amounts to a 90% cut in its budget. This is in
>addition to the 40% cut the NEA received in 1995. The agency cannot
>survive with this budget cut.
>Funding for the NEA represents just 0.01% of the federal budget.
>Eliminating the agency would contribute virtually nothing towards
>balancing the budget.
>Even though it is a small share of the federal budget, NEA funds are
>relied upon by arts organizations around the country to leverage
>much-needed additional funding from the private sector. Eliminating the
>NEA would destroy this delicate economic equation.
>The NEA brings the arts to communities all across America regardless of
>geographic location or level of income. Eliminating the Endowment would
>cut off access to the arts for thousands of people nationwide--
>especially in the more rural areas of the American West.
>NEA funding also supports lower ticket prices and free performances at
>arts organizations nationwide, increasing the availability of the arts
>to low- and moderate-income Americans. Eliminating this funding will
>make participation in the arts more difficult for many Americans and
>will make arts organizations more a domain of the wealthy than ever
>Recent research illustrates the benefits of arts education for our young
>people in helping them learn more effectively. For instance, according
>to reports by the College Entrance Examination Board, students with the
>arts in their curriculums significantly outperform their peers who do
>not study the arts on the SAT.
>Please help the NEA continue to receive the federal dollars necessary to
>ensure that the arts remain within the grasp of all Americans.