no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

WND
Starving artists? Feds sending millions to billionaires
Study shows grants directed to 'well-heeled, asset-rich organizations'

Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially.




A new study indicates that contrary to the argument that without federal funding, those “starving artists” just won’t make it, the U.S. government sends millions of dollars every year to organizations that are worth billions.

Michael McGrady writes for the Heartland Institute of a recent audit of the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities, which is responsible for the National Endowment of the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities and the Institute of Museum and Library Services, gave more than $441 million to some 3,000 groups in 2016.

Seventy-one of those groups, which received about $20.5 million of the total, already had assets above $1 billion.

Each.

The audit of the agency was conducted and published by Open The Books, a project of the non-profit American Transparency, which aims to limit government by exposing how it spends taxpayer funds.

Adam Andrzejewski, the chief operating officer of American Transparency, said the “argument for public funding of the arts goes something like this: If you eliminate public funding of the arts, then the starving artists will go away, and you need this to have a vibrant culture in our country.”

Get “The Devil in DC: Winning Back the Country From the Beast in Washington” from the WND Superstore to learn how Americans can fight back against the establishment.

McGrady said the audit found that most of the grants don’t go to starving artists.

“They go to well-heeled, asset-rich organizations. In fact, about $8 out of every $10 go to organizations with high assets,” he said.

McGrady also cited Jonathan Bydlak, president of the Coalition to Reduce Spending, who said government bureaucrats use arts subsidies to tell artists what to say and how to say it.

“This opens up the door to all sorts of perverse incentives, and doesn’t exactly support true creativity,” he said.

The study states:

“Every year, celebrities such as Katy Perry, Pharrell Williams, Madonna, Alex Rodriguez and Jennifer Lopez grace the red carpet at the ‘Met Gala,’ a benefit for New York City’s Metropolitan Museum of Art. The star power helps the organization raise up to $300 million annual. Since 2009, however, the Met has received federal grants totaling $1.2 million from the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities (NFA-H). The Met can’t argue that it needed the money – it has more than $3.7 billion in financial assets.”

The full report is here.

The report said that in the arts community, there is “a stark contrast between the haves and the have-nots.”

“We found 71 charitable organizations – with at least $1 billion each in assets – received nearly $120 million in federal funding since 2009. Then, there were the ‘starving artist’ organizations – 1,027 organizations with assets under $1 million – that received just $41 million in federal grants (FY20160.”

The report noted President Trump wants to eliminate federal funding for arts and is getting resistance from wealthy arts organizations, raising several questions for the American public:

“Why are taxpayers funding nonprofits that have assets of at least $1 billion? Do charities have a right to public funding no matter how strong their balance sheet?”
“If the public purpose is to fund the starving artist, then why are small organizations (less than $1 million in assets) receiving just $1 of every $4 in NFA-H nonprofit grant-making?”
“Should prestigious universities receive arts and humanities funding despite their billion-dollar endowments?”
“Who can explain the public purpose in forcing working-class taxpayers to fund arts organizations that obviously don’t need the money?”

The study found there were 71 groups worth more than $1 billion each that got a total of $20.5 million, even though the groups have a cumulative worth of $366 billion.

Then there were 39 groups worth between $500 million and $1 billion each that got $4.8 million, even though their cumulative worth is $27 billion.

“Higher education institutions received $45 million in NFA-H grants (FR2016). These 258 institutes had existing assets totaling $428.3 billion, including their affiliated foundation or endowment,” the report said.

It also revealed that the average salary for staff members at the federal operation was nearly $100,000.

Among the recipients were the Art Institute of Chicago, Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Lyric Opera of Chicago and Lincoln Center.

“The Metropolitan Museum of Art is a public charity with $4 billion in assets. Yet, the Met received $1.22 million in grants and contracts from the NFA-H (FY2009-2016). Calendar year 2016 was the biggest year of NFA-H grants to the Met, which received $551,028,” the report found.

The New York Shakespeare Festival, the driving force behind the controversial “Julius Caesar” production that portrayed the killing of a figure representing President Trump, got $630,000 from the NEA since 2009, the report said.

NBC News said the actor “looks like Donald Trump … moves like Trump … is knifed to death on stage, blood staining his white shirt.”

The Feminist Press, which specialists in “classic LGBT titles,” recently got $55,000 to “support the publication of books of fiction and nonfiction,” the report said, and the NFA-H gave $15,000 to Fresh Meat Productions, a “transgender and queer arts dance producer.”

Ve'hoe

amazing,,,, isnt it... the swamp,,,, and what feeds there??

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

This type of malfeasance is common throughout the Federal bureaucracy. The NIH, which is responsible for billions in research grant money, has what they call a "peer review panel", which makes recommendations on which applications to approve. Looking at who, and who did not, receive NIH grants in the last decade, shows a decided preference for institutions and companies that excel at turning research into marketable product. Grant money has been released to institutions doing research that is already being conducted by other institutions who's applications were previously denied, duplicate research, to institutions that profit from multiple patents and copy rights, and to institutions who receive lavish corporate funding.

IMHO, any entity receiving public funding that turns the results of their research into profit, should be required to pay the tax payer back plus 10%. How many major breakthroughs in Medicine were funded by tax payer dollars, who are then expected to pay a premium price for gaining access to it? I am not anti rich, or against capitalism, but the preponderance of tax payer money inevitably finds it's way into the coffers of those who are more than capable of fending for themselves. Of course, it can be posited that this is why those individuals and entities ARE wealthy and remain so, having found the proverbial golden goose which is the US taxpayer.

Ve'hoe

that would be the "1% r's,,," mostly democrats,,, who have cracked the code on how to get paid from public coffers........

“When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” ben franklin,,,,,,

The entitlement crowd has figured it out,, and is in execution phase,,,,,,

At this point, from the last two weeks,,,, I would place the republicans in a phase "needing execution"

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

This has been going on a loooooooong time, facilitated by both criminal parties. The one thing we can always count on Dems and Repubs agreeing on, every single time, is that they'll pay themselves first......................and last.

That's why I favor forcing elected officials to release their entire tax returns every year to the public..............so that we can see for ourselves how they're profiting from our suffering...............and put a stop to it.

Some time ago the Congress got caught engaging in insider trading, a felony. With a speed that got folks heads a spinning, they wrote legislation exempting themselves from Federal law, making it retroactive, which was promptly signed by the sitting President. Little notice was taken back then, and those who tried to sound the alarm were silenced.

Ve'hoe

but cant repeal obamacare,, which is skyrocketing,,,,,,, tax reform,,, just aint got time,,,,,, it is time for a war,,, surround the beltway,, and fire inside it,, til all is still and destroyed

F.D.R.

This and projects like this are a waste of taxpayer money and there are so many important area's to spend that money. Art is a hobby. Wanna paint, sculpt, dance - fine ? Get a 9 - 5 job and practice your hobby in your spare time. When these 'artists' earn money with their 'art' do they reimburse the government? TRIM THE FAT !

S. Maturin

Good point.

I have no objection if someone wants to support some illogical, wacky, outfit that has members who fawn over repulsive things (Jesus in piss, Mary made of shit).. etc., as long as they are supporting that nonsense with their OWN money.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Oh, as soon as they figure out some way to profit from it personally.............they'll get it done so fast the earth will slow it's spin.

America 1 Loc: South Miami

They have figured it out, from 0 to 250 million.

PeterS

You are talking about socialism. Conservatives would go bananas. Conservatives like corporatism--that is government funding corporations and those corporations making billions in profits with then go to the share holders and the wealthy elite. Look at Trump infrastructure proposal. Talk about creating the swamp!!!

Ve'hoe

Sure but we will still have a high tax bill, no insurance, and all the crap,,,, nothing will be fixed,,,, never is

Ve'hoe

you're stupid,,,,, and that was not what he was talking about moron

PulletSurprise Loc: Columbus, GA

PeterS, good diversion from the topic and / or delusional thinking?

National Endowment of the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities and the Institute of Museum and Library Services are tax-payer sponsored corporations.

Louie27 Loc: Peoria, AZ

I have always believed that my companies that receive grant money on research in medicine used that money for their own products and never ever returned any of that money, from their profits, to the government.