We are very pleased to have with us this afternoon a panel composed of executive directors of State arts councils. The Chair understands that Mr. James Backas, the Executive Director of the Maryland Arts Council, Baltimore, will speak first and then present his colleagues. Mr. Backas. STATEMENT OF JAMES BACKAS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MARYLAND ARTS COUNCIL, BALTIMORE, MD. Mr. BACKAS. Mr. Chairman, we are here today on behalf of all State arts agencies throughout the country. Our appearance before you will be brief, and I feel compelled to tell you that some of my colleagues here today have traveled thousands of miles to speak to you. We have much to share with you, and we invite your questions and comments. I am disappointed that Mr. Javits is not here because at the L. B. J. symposium in Austin, Tex., he insisted on referring to me throughout the whole panel discussion as Mr. Barkis. I wanted to get that record set straight. Representative BRADEMAS. Can I quote some Dickins at you, "Barkis is willing." Mr. BACKAS. Splendid. As the surrogate of the chairman of the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, I will begin. Following in order will be Carl Bode, chairman, Maryland Arts Council, Baltimore, Md.; Michael L. Lomax, executive director of the Bureau of Cultural and International Affairs of the city of Atlanta, and a member of the Georgia Council for the Arts; Mrs. Louise Tester, executive director of the Arizona Commission on the Arts and the Humanities; and Mr. Peter deC. Hero, executive director of the Oregon Arts Council. Before I undertake the more impassioned part of my address, you should know that at its most recent meeting in Austin, Tex., the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies voted as follows regarding bill H.R. 7216, the Arts, Humanities and Cultural Affairs Act of 1975: (a) To recommend to deny the American Film Institute, or any other Endowment grantee, line-item status with the Endowment; (b) A neutral position regarding the establishment of State humanities councils, due to the lack of information available to the Assembly at the time of its discussion and vote; (c) To endorse the art indemnification portion of the bill; and (d) To recommend to deny that portion of the Museum Services Act that would result in a line-item status for museums with the Endowment. In addition, regarding appropriation levels for the Endowment and State arts agencies, the Assembly, after considerable discussion. voted to endorse the appropriation levels suggested by the Associated Councils for the Arts-that State arts agencies continue to receive 20 percent of the Endowment's appropriation, and that the Endowment's appropriation levels be $180 million in fiscal year 1977; $210 million in 1978; and $250 million in 1979; and that should national unemployment exceed 6.5 percent in any year, an additional $30 million. be added to that year's appropriation. Most State arts agencies are almost a decade old, and, like the Endowment, they are still struggling to understand and to respond to the complex world of the performing and creative arts in America. In a society where a shifting, popular taste in art has always ruled uncontested-where a teenaged kid with an amplified guitar and a handful of chords can make more money in a week than a museum curator makes in a year-but where great temples of traditional art abound as well and are in greater demand than ever before and where a rich indigenous art has somehow flourished despite centuries of public neglect, the task of forging a responsible public policy for support of the arts sometimes seems an almost hopeless affair. Yet, after 10 years of experiment and investment, and behavior that has often seemed arbitrary to one group or another, the combined efforts of the Endowment and State arts agencies emerge as one of the most impressive success stories of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. And the very fact that the determination persists to accommodate all of the arts-highbrow and lowbrow, traditional and experimental, professional and amateur-and that after 10 years the conviction is stronger than ever that we must arrive at a policy through this process of accommodation instead of merely imposing a ready-made policy in the manner of European governments, is the most encouraging indication we have that Federal and State arts agencies are facing in the right direction. When State arts agencies began they were easy to overlook. Despite the grand legislative language that accompanied their creation, they were not rich, influential, or well known. Most began with barely enough money or in-kind services to match the National Endowment grant of $50,000 or less. In some States, much less. Today, less than 10 years later, State governments appropriate some $26 million-excluding New York State-to their State arts agencies. This comes to an average of over $481,000 per State. Eleven States appropriate over $1 million for the arts, and over two-thirds of the States more than match the Endowment's block grant of $205,000 to all States. This will grow as the economic impact of the arts on each State's economy comes to be measured, and as the public response to arts programs continues to grow and to be heard. During the fiscal year 1975, the Maryland Arts Council, an averagesize State arts agency with a State appropriation of $450,000 and Endowment funds of a little over $300,000, awarded 126 grants ranging in size from $100 to $200,000; provided technical and consulting service to 111 organizations, including the National Endowment for the Arts, the Johns Hopkins University, and the Piscataway-Conoy Indians; administered nine major programs of its own, with 68 artists, teachers, and administrators under contract, generated $1,271,493 in matching funds from county and city governments and private sources, and reached an audience of 937,000-with a staff of seven. If there is a greater return on Government investment than that produced by the budgets of the Endowment and State arts agencies, my 6 years as a Government official have not informed me of it. A young music teacher at a community college in a rural county of Maryland came to the Council 5 years ago asking for our help in setting up a local chorus of townspeople. Unemployment in this coalmining area of the State was 25 percent. We helped him with a small grant, and gave him advice about bookkeeping, fundraising, and publicity. Today, almost unbelievable, this same young man is the president of the Regional Cultural and Educational Development Association of Garrett County, Md., with private, corporate and local government funds of over $1 million. He tours throughout Maryland, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and part of New York State with a fully professional Equity drama company, 16 touring art exhibits, and a crack opera company. A few months ago, five officials of the AFL-CIO of greater Baltimore came to my office. They informed me that they represented 94,000 dues-paying union members in 213 locals in five counties, and they wanted to introduce their membership to professional-level music and theater. They had experimented with small ensembles of symphony musicians playing chamber music in two of their locals, which had resulted in these locals buying 39 season subscriptions to the Baltimore Symphony-which they now resell to union members at $1 a ticket-and they were ready to expand this program to 45 locals, plus 12 courses in music appreciation. Before I could ask what was in it for us, they asked me how I would feel about letters supporting the arts from their membership to the General Assembly of Maryland and to the U.S. Congress. My assistant director has been working with them steadily ever since. These are dramatic examples, to be sure, but the point is this there is a genuine grassroots movement in the arts across the country. It is real, it is positive, and it has a profound effect on the Nation. And our professional institutions are the better for it. Five years ago, Maryland had one second-rate professional opera company and one third-rate summer opera. Today, five cities in Maryland have resident opera companies, with fervent community support, and our Baltimore opera has become a superb major company, playing to sold-out houses. The major professional arts institutions of Baltimore will spend over $21 million next year, and will generate an additional $30 million in the business community. This is a major industry, and if this is true for Baltimore, imagine what it amounts to in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. We are probably not responsible for most of this activity, but we are there to respond to it, to assist it, and to encourage it. And to see that Federal and State dollars are invested wisely. We are professionals and we are in touch with the people. The only way this country will ever have the broad-based support for the arts that it needs and wants is to have broad-based resident artistic activity. And the best way to develop that activity, responsibly and equitably, is through the Endowment and our network of professional and flexible State arts agencies, which we will continue to be if you provide us with the money to get on with the job. Thank you. [Prepared statement of James Backas follows:] PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES BACKAS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE MARYLAND ARTS COUNCIL LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: We are here today on behalf of all state arts agencies throughout the country. Our appearance before you will be brief, and I feel compelled to tell you that some of my colleagues here today have travelled thousands of miles to speak to you. We have much to share with you, and we invite your questions and comments. As the surrogate of the Chairman of the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, will begin. Following in order will be Mr. Michael Lomax, Director of the Bureau of Cultural Affairs of the City of Atlanta, and a member of the Georgia Council for the Arts; Mrs. Louise Tester, Executive Director of the Arizona Commission on the Arts and Humanities; Mr. Peter Hero, Executive Director of the Oregon Arts Commission; and Dr. Carl Bode, Professor of American Literature at the University of Maryland, and Chairman of the Maryland Arts Council. Before I undertake the more impassioned part of my address, you should know that at its most recent meeting in Austin, Texas, the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies voted as follows regarding Bill H.R. 7216-the Arts, Humanities and Cultural Affairs Act of 1975: To recommend to deny the American Film Institute, or any other Endowment grantee, line-item status with the Endowment; A neutral position regarding the establishment of state humanities councils, due to the lack of information available to the Assembly at the time of its discussion and vote; To endorse the Art Indemnification portion of the bill; and, To recommend to deny that portion of the Museum Services Act that would result in a line-item status for museums. Regarding appropriation levels for the Endowment and state arts agencies, the Assembly, after considerable discussion, voted to endorse the appropriation levels suggested by the Associated Councils for the Arts-that state arts agencies continue to receive 20 percent of the Endowment's appropriation, and that the Endowments appropriation level be $180 million in Fiscal Year 1977; $210 million in 1978; and $250 million in 1979, and that should national unemployment exceed 6.5% in any year, an additional $30 million be added to that year's appropriation. Most state arts agencies are almost a decade old, and like the Endowment, they are still struggling to understand and to respond to the complex world of the performing and creative arts in America. In a society where a shifting, popular taste in art has always ruled uncontested-where a teen-aged kid with an amplified guitar and a handful of chords can make more money in a week than a museum curator makes in a year-but where great temples of traditional art abound as well and are in greater demand than ever before, and where a rich indigenous art has somehow flourished despite centuries of public neglect, the task of forging a responsible public policy for support of the arts sometimes seems an almost hopeless affair. Yet, after ten years of experiment and investment, and behaviour that has often seemed arbitrary to one group or another, the combined efforts of the Endowment and state arts agencies emerge as one of the most impressive success stories of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. And the very fact that the determination persists to accommodate all of the arts-highbrow and lowbrow, traditional and experimental, professional and amateur-and that after ten years the conviction is stronger than ever that we must arrive at a policy through this process of accommodation instead of merely imposing a readymade policy from above in the manner of European governments, is the most encouraging indication we have that federal and state arts agencies are facing in the right direction. When state arts agencies began they were easy to overlook. Despite the grand legislative language that accompanied their creation, they were not very rich, influential, or well-known. Most began with barely enough money or in-kind services to match the National Endowment grant of $50,000 or less. In some states, much less. Today, less than ten years later, state governments appropriate some $26 million-excluding New York State-to their state arts agencies. This comes to an average of over $481,000 per state. Eleven states appropriate over a million dollars for the arts, and over two-thirds of the states more than match the Endowment's block grant of $205,000 to all states. This will grow as the economic impact of the arts on each state's economy comes to be measured, and as the public response to arts programs continues to grow and to be heard. During the fiscal year 1975, the Maryland Arts Council, an average-size state arts agency with a state appropriation of $450,000 and Endowment funds of a little over $300,000, awarded 126 grants ranging in size from $100 to $200,000, provided technical and consulting assistance to 111 organizations, including the National Endowment for the Arts, The Johns Hopkins University, and the Piscataway-Conoy Indians; administered nine major programs of its own, with 68 artists, teachers, and administrators under contract, generated $1,271,493 in matching funds from county and city governments and private sources, and reached an audience of 937,000-with a staff of seven. If there is a greater return on government investment than that produced by the budgets of the Endowment and state arts agencies, my six years as a government official have not informed me of it. Five years ago a young music teacher at a community college in a rural county of Maryland came to the Council asking for our help in setting up a local chorus of townspeople. Unemployment in this coal-mining area of the state was 25%. We helped him with a small grant, and gave him advice about bookkeeping, fund-raising, and publicity. Today, almost unbelievably, this same young man is the president of the Regional Cultural and Educational Development Association of Garrett County, with private, corporate, and local government funds of over a million dollars. He tours throughout Maryland, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and part of New York State with a fully professional Equity drama company, 16 touring arts exhibits, and a crack opera company. A few months ago 5 officials of the AFL-CIO of Greater Baltimore came to my office. They informed me that they represented 94,000 dues-paying union members in 213 locals in 5 counties, and they wanted to introduce their membership to professional-level music and theatre. They had experimented with small ensembles of Symphony musicians playing chamber music in two of their locals, which had resulted in these locals buying 39 season subscriptions to the Baltimore Symphony-which they now re-sell to union members at a dollar a ticket and they were ready to expand this program to 42 locals, plus 12 weekly courses in music appreciation. Before I could ask what was in it for us they asked me how I would feel about letters supporting the arts from the members of 42 unions to the General Assembly of Maryland and to the United States Congress. My assistant director has been working with them steadily ever since. There are dramatic examples to be sure, but the point is this-there is a genuine grass-roots movement in the arts across the country. It is real, it is positive, and it has a profound effect on the nation. And our professional institutions are the better for it. Five years ago Maryland had one second-rate professional opera company and one third-rate summer opera. Today five cities in Maryland have resident opera companies, with fervent community support, and our Baltimore Opera has become a superb major company, playing to soldout houses. The major professional arts institutions of Baltimore will spend over $21 million dollars next year, and will generate an additional $30 million in the business community. This is a major industry, and if this is true for Baltimore, imagine what it amounts to in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. We are probably not responsible for most of this activity-but we are there to respond to it, to assist it, and to encourage it. And to see that Federal and State dollars are invested wisely. We are professionals and we are in touch with the people. The only way this country will ever have the broad-based support for the arts that it needs and wants, is to have broad-based resident artistic activity. And the best way to develop that activity—responsibly and equitably—is through the Endowment and our network of professional and flexible state arts agencies, which we will continue to be if you provide us with the money to get on with the job. Representative BRADEMAS. Thank you very much, Mr. Backas. Mr. BACKAS. Very well. Dr. Bode. STATEMENT OF CARL BODE, CHAIRMAN, MARYLAND ARTS Dr. BODE. I am Carl Bode, Congressman Brademas. There is a certain amount of virtue involved in telling how pleased I am to be here and how grateful I am. Nevertheless, it is true. I |