Last year, struggling to control a ballooning budget deficit, state legislators in Arizona reduced funds for the arts. This year, facing an even larger deficit, they are proposing a simpler approach: cutting arts financing altogether.

A legislative committee has recommended eliminating the state arts agency in Arizona and its $5.1 million annual budget. It has also recommended that a $7 million fund established as an endowment for arts programs be dissolved, so the money can be used for other purposes.

Arizona is not the only state taking such a radical step. Gov. James E. McGreevey of New Jersey, who is grappling with a $5 billion deficit, has proposed cutting the entire $18 million budget of his state's Council on the Arts and canceling a planned $10 million payment to a cultural trust fund that supports small arts groups. Missouri is also planning to eliminate its entire arts budget. Other states may follow suit as they confront daunting fiscal challenges.

Leaders of arts advocacy groups nationwide have begun what is likely to be a long and difficult campaign to restore at least some financing. Earlier this month, for example, more than 700 supporters of the arts from across Arizona gathered on a lawn next to the State Capitol for a picnic that was also a protest against plans to end state financing for cultural programs.

About 60 state legislators stopped by for barbecue sandwiches, and each was steered to protesters from his or her district. Most gave their constituents the same message: we sympathize with your concerns, but the state is broke and can no longer afford what it could a few years ago.

"They threw down the gauntlet," said Rebecca Gaspar, executive vice president of Arizonans for Cultural Development, sponsor of the protest. "There are very hard times ahead for arts organizations, that's clear."

Arts advocates sounded an alarm last year when several states approved sharp cuts in their arts budgets. California cut its support for arts and cultural programs by 41 percent. Massachusetts went even further, with a 62 percent cut. Even those reductions, however, seem almost modest compared with some recent proposals.

With tax revenues slumping because of the weak economy, governors and state legislators are telling arts groups that they must now rely on private rather than public donors. The economic downturn, however, has meant that private funds are also harder to come by.

Studies conducted over the last few years have shown that spending on arts programs produces handsome economic returns, and many state officials have come to agree that supporting these programs is a wise investment. But they now say their preferences are irrelevant because state coffers are bare.

"There is broad bipartisan support for arts programs in most states, but that doesn't matter anymore," said Kimber Craine, spokesman for the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies. "The states are facing one of their worst budget crises since World War II. The deficits they are facing are huge."

Mr. Craine said that many arts administrators considered the new cuts to be opening gambits in what may be long negotiations. "People are tense, but we all recognize there's a way to go before this is all sorted out," he said. "Some governors may want to spread the alarm so people will realize how serious the situation is. It may be a way to bring legislators around to approving new revenues, which is really going to be the only way out of this."

Arizona is typical. With a state budget deficit of $1.3 billion, legislative leaders are proposing the elimination of 13 state agencies and programs. Besides the Commission for the Arts, they include the Department of Commerce, the Office of Tourism and KidsCare, a health insurance program for children.

"This is the biggest challenge we've faced in 25 years," said Shelley Cohn, executive director of the Arizona Commission on the Arts. "If we want economic growth here, we have to fight the perception that this is a cultural wasteland. This budget takes us in the opposite direction. It's not what the people of this state want, and I think we're going to be able to show that very clearly."

In New Jersey Ellen Mellody, a spokeswoman for Governor McGreevey, called his proposals "a question of mathematics." "The governor has been forced to make cuts to programs that were near and dear to his heart," Ms. Mellody said.

Jeffrey Woodward, president of ArtPride New Jersey, an arts advocacy group, said the proposed cuts "were unexpected, a complete surprise, and many of us are still in shock."

"We haven't been asked to take a proportionate cut," continued Mr. Woodward, also managing director of the McCarter Theater in Princeton. "We've just been eliminated. That we find incredibly shortsighted and wrong."

He said his group had begun a lobbying campaign aimed at state legislators. "We're mobilizing our audiences, our vendors and everyone who realizes the effect that culture has on the quality of life here," he said. "Curtain speeches are being made at theaters around the state. At the McCarter we've put a flier in our programs urging people to contact their legislators. There's a lot of activity."

The New Jersey cuts were announced only days after Gov. Bob Holden of Missouri issued a budget proposal that included eliminating the state arts council, which last year had a budget of $3.9 million.

Even state arts councils that are assured of survival are suffering major cuts. The new budget proposed by Gov. Mark Warner of Virginia, for example, includes a cut of nearly 50 percent in support for the arts. Pressure for similar cuts in other states is likely to intensify as the fiscal year approaches its end on June 30.

As a result of these cuts, many arts councils and nonprofit cultural groups will lose matching funds from private donors and the federal government. The $3.9 million cut in Missouri, for example, will mean the loss of about $1 million in federal matching funds.

While this year's cuts and those proposed for next year are not expected to cause the collapse of many arts organizations, they are forcing them to reduce their scope. The Springfield Regional Opera in Missouri, for instance, is offering one main-stage production this year instead of two, and is using fewer costumes, less scenery and a smaller orchestra. It has also moved into a smaller theater.

"The effect I'm really worried about is the downtown revitalization, which has been a huge success here," said Susan Brummell, the opera's executive director. "Arts groups bring people downtown, and if we can't do that, this tremendous growth we've seen downtown could be undermined. We're going to have to work harder to convince the restaurant owners and other business people that it's in their interest to help keep us going."

Marc C. Duff, policy director for Taxpayers Network, a Wisconsin-based watchdog group, said he expected the rash of cuts in state arts budgets to continue for at least several more years.

"When you're facing a budget crisis of this magnitude, art just isn't a priority anymore," Mr. Duff said.

Fuente: The New York Times
Febrero 2003