The Arts & Government

Home , Harvey Lichtenstein, Kitty Carlisle

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 336 324 SO 021 658

for the Nineties. TITLE The Arts & Government: Questions Report of the American AssemblyConference (Harriman, New York, November 8-11,1990). INSTITUTION American Assembly, New York,N.Y. SPONS AGENCY AT&T Foundation, New York,NY.; Rockefeller Foundation, New York, N.Y. PUB DATE Nov 90 NOTE 24p. PUB TYPE Collected Works - ConferenceProceedings (021) -- Reports - Descriptive (141)

MRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. Government; *Financial DESCRIPTORS *Educational Policy; *Federal Support; *Fine Arts; Local Government;Music; Participative Decision Making;*Policy Formation; State Government; Theater Arts IDENTIFIERS National Endowment for the Arts

ABSTRACT The proceedings of a 3-dayconference, discussing the relationship between governmentand the arts in the United States, are presented. Issues thatwill confront the arts in the1990s were identified and policy recommendationswere suggested. Six basic principles were reflected in manyof the discussions: (1) a flourishing artistic life is inthe best interests of a democractic society and therefore governmentsupport is appropriate; 1,2) the principal selection criterion forgovernment funding should be excellence; (3) government policiesand private actions thatthreaten artistic freedom in U.S. societyshould be vigorously opposed;(4) government arts programs shouldsupport new works of promise evenif they may prove controversial;(5) public funding policies must be administered according to theprinciple that no artist's work maybe compromised, suppressed, orunrecognized because of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, orpolitical or religious belief; and(6) artists and arts organizationsthat receive public su?port mustbe responsible for creating thehighest quality work and educating audiences to become critically aware.Findings and recommendations for the National Endowmentfor the Arts (NEA) and stateand local arts support follow theseprinciples. The American Assembly participants recommended methods toimprove the case for the arts and its presentation to thepublic and how the government caneffectively New address the cultural requirementsof underserved communities. international cultural policies andtax policies also are recommended. The report concludeswith recommendations forimproving arts education. A list ofconference participants isattached. (KM)

*****$4:**********************'************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS arethe best that can be made from the original document. *********************k************************************************* U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and improvement ECUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) *This document has been reproduced as received from the person ororganization originating it O Minor changes have been mede to improve reproduction quality

Points& view or opinionsstated inthisdocu. ment do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy t,THE ARTS &

tY GOVERNMENT QUESTIONS FOR THE NINETIES

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTEDBY

el RAIL (2_ t

TO THE EDUCATIONALRESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

NOVEMBER 8-11, 1990 0(3 ARDEN HOUSE te) HARRIMAN, NEW YORK

IE AMERICAN ASSEMBLY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY (Z,L)

..a) sommimmminis...... mmonimmaum The volume, Public Money & theMuse: Essays on GovanmentFunding for the Arts,edited by Stephan Benedict, is anAmerican Assembly book developed for the AmericanAssembly on "The Arts ard Government: Questions for the Nineties," the contentsof which are listed on the following page. The book will be publisnedin early spring, 1991, by W.W.Norton & Company. It is available to youin hardcover at a 15% discountoff the list price of $22.95. To order. fill outthe Coupon below and send with your check or credit card order to:

W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. 500 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10110

Coupon Cour. 3n

Please send me copies of Public Money & theMuse: Essays on Gov- ernment Funding for the Arts.I am entitled to a discount price of$19.50 per in early spring, copy. I understandthatIwill receive my hardcover copy 1991 O I enclose my check for $ OCharge my 0 Visa El AMEX MasterCard

Signature

Account #

Exp. Date

CA and NY residents, please addsales tax.

Name

Address

City

State Zip

For SPRING 1991

Coupon- Coupon

Additional copies of this report areavailable fi ee of charge from: TheAmer- ican Assembly, 412 AltschulHall, Barnard College, ColumbiaUniversity, New York, NY 10027-6598.Telephone:(212) 854-3456. FAX: (212) 662- 3655.

-2- PREFACE On November 8, 1990, seventy-one menand women from government, business, universities,labor, media, the law, arts organizations, and the arts met atArden House in Harriman, New York for an American Assemblyentitled The Arts and Government: Questions for theNineties. For three days, the participants listened to paneldiscussions, an address by John E. Frohnmayer, chairman ofthe National En- dowment for the Arts, and viewed aperformance piece by Guillermo Gomez-Pena. In small groups, they alsodiscussed in depth the relationships between governmentand the arts in the United States, identified emergingissues that will confront the arts in the decade ahead, andsuggested policy recommendations that would address these needs.The participants came from all regionsof the country and represented a broad cross section of viewsand interests ranging from committed arts advocates to one participantwho believes the government has no legitimate interest insupporting the arts.

Stephen Benedict, former director of theProgram in Arts Administration of Columbia University, and StevenLavine, president of California Institute of theArts, acted as co- directors of this Assembly program. Mr. Benedictsupervised the preparation of papers used asbackground reading by the participants. Authors and titles of these papers,which will be compiled and published in the spring of 1991 as abook by W. W. Norton book entitled Public Money andthe Muse: Essays on GovernmentFunding for the Arts, are:

Stephen Stamas Preface

Stephen Benedict Foreword

Arthur Levitt, Jr. Introduction

Milton C. Cummings, Jr.Government and the Arts: An Over- view

Kathleen M. Sullivan Artistic Freedom, Public Funding, and the Constitution

Joan Jeffri The Artist in an Integrated Society

-3- 4 Dennie Palmer Wolf More than Minor Disturbances: Mary Burger The Place of the Art in American Education

Steven E. Weil Tax Policy and Private Giving

Robert Garfias Cultural Diversity and the Arts in America

Gerald D. Yoshitomi Cultural Democracy

Paul J. Di Maggio Devolution of Arts Funding from the Federal Governement to the States

The panel discussions heldduring the Assembly were:

"The NEA under Siege:Lessons for the Arts and Gov- ernment in the '90s." DorisDixon, Roy Goodman, Peter Kyros, Jr., and Bernice JohnsonReagon were panelists and William Strickland served asmoderator.

"1992: Fragments of aPerformance," a performance piece by GuillermoGomez-Pena. John Kreidler and Bernice Johnson Reagon werediscussants and Steven Lavine served as moderator.

"Art and the Public Good:Re-thinking the Case for PublicSupport."KinshashaConwill,William D. Grampp, and Stephen E.Weil were panelists and Anne Hawley served as moderator.

"Translating the Public Good:Some Enduring Issues and the Need for NewApproaches." John E. Frohnmay- er gave anaddress followed by a paneldiscussion with Michael O'Hare, DenniePalmer Wolf, and Gerald D. Yoshitomi, moderated by AndrewHeiskell.

"Who Decides?: TheGrantmaking Process, Artistic Freedom, and the Right toApply." Panelists were John Brademas, David Mendoza,Kathleen M. Sullivan, and J. Mark Davidson Schuster withSchuyler Chapin as moderator.

"Keeping the Arts on the Agenda:Collective Action by a Community of Interest." KittyCarlisle Hart, Charlotte Murphy, and Joel Wachs were thepanelists, and Arthur Levitt, Jr. served as the moderator.

"The Coming Competition for Resources" wasmoderat- ed by Raymond D. Nasher with RuthHirschman, Rob- ert Pease, and Michael Wooserving as panelists.

The complete list of participants withtheir affiliations appears at the end of this report.

Following the plenary panel sessions and thesmall group meetings, the co-directors and rapporteursproduced a draft of this report on November 11, 1990for discussion at the final plenary. A revised draft wassubmitted to all participants for review and, after further consultations and revisions,published.

We gratefully acknowledge the generous supportof The Rockefeller and AT&T Foundations, whichfunded this undertak- ing. They, as well as The AmericanAssembly, take no position on subjects presentedhere for public discussion. In addition, it should be noted that the participants took partin this meeting as private individuals, and spoke for themselvesrather than for the institutions or organizations with which they areaffiliated.

Stephen Stamas Chairman The American Assembly REPORT OF THE AMERICANASSEMBLY on The Arts AndGovernment: Questions For TheNineties

At the close of theirdiscussions, the participantsin The AmericanAssembly on The Arts andGovern- ment: Questions forthe Nineties, at ArdenHouse, Harriman, New York,November 8-11, 1990, reviewed as a group adraft of the following statement, whi6l wasthen revised in thelight of their comments. Thisstatement representsgeneral agreement; however, no onewas asked tosign it. Furthermore, it shouldbe understood that not everyone agreedwith all of it.

PREAMBLE

This AmericanAssembly on The Artsand Government met in the immediateaftermath of the mostserious challenge twenty-five year his- to direct federal supportof the arts in the tory of the NationalEndowment for the Arts(N.E.A.). An eighteen-month public andcongressional conflict hadbeen provoked by twoexhibitions assistedin part by the N.E.A. They included works ofart that membersof Congress and several privateorganizations seized uponto forward the argument that publicfunri'l were beingmisapplied to support obscene and blasphe:.:s materials.N.E.A. grant proce- and need- dures, some asserted, wereobviously not working carried the ar- ed to be overhauled.Some of the opponents gument a step farther,maintaining that theepisode proved the federal governmenthas no legitimaterole in funding the arts. This initial phase ofthe argument in1989 led the Con- guidelines on gress, forthe first time, toimpose content that fol- N.E.A. grantmakingprocedures. The controversy lowed soon became alightning rod thatexposed the wide variances among theAmerican people inpolitical, social, religious, and aestheticvalues, and raised anewbasic ques- support and the pro- tions about therationale for public arts cesses for itsadministration. Theunfettered artistic freedom

-6- envisaged in the original N.E.A. legislation could nolonger be assumed inviolable. That government-aided art was not more widely supported by the general population came as a shock to many arts supporters. The realization grew that a much more concen- trated effort was needed to convey the positiveachievements of the N.E.A. to a far wider spectrum of the population,and that the arts programs themselves were stillreaching only a minority of the population. The content restrictions in theleg- islation raised their own set of Constitutional questions and brought about the direct involvement of a great manyindivid- ual artists, along with others, in political action to opposethe new provisions. When The American Assembly planned its meeting in the fall of 1989, the full extent of the challenge tofederal funding was yet to unfold. It was clearonly that further battles loomed and that significant issues were at stake. Thespring and summer of 1990 witnessed achain of dramatic and unpre- dictable events that left the outcome in constant doubt.The Assembly developed an agenda that sought toaccommodate the fluid situation in Washington, but also to lookahead to issues of arts pol!cy that wouldendure beyond the immediate crisis. As the calendar would have it, the legislativeresolution of the controversy occurred only two weeksbefore the As- sembly met. The House and Senate agreed on abill reau- thorizing the N.E.A. for three years and appropriatingfunds for the coming year at approximately the currentlevel. Understandably, therefore, the topicality of this Assembly, which included participants who were almost alldirectly in- volved in some aspect of the drama just concluded, resulted in a lively and sometimes contentious meeting.Even so, a degree of consensus emerged, most prominently expressed in a statement of basic principles that reflect manyof the discussions and underlie this report's Findings andRecommen- dations.

PRINCIPLES

A flourishing artistic life is in the best interestsof a democratic society.The arts and the artist contribute to the nation's identity and to the education and happiness of its citizens, lt is, therefore, appropriate that government at all levels

-7- join with the private sectoriO further the nation'sartis- tic life and to provide accessto the arts to allcitizens.

Excellence and the definingstandards of excellence, which exist for every cultureand for every art form, must be the touchstoneof all government fundingfor the arts and artists.

Constitutional principles offreedom of expression, essential to a democratic society, areof special importance to a thrivingartistic climate. Governmentpolicies and private actionsthat threaten to curbartistic "speech" or to constrictin any way the marketplaceof ideas for the arts have noplace in American society and must be vigorouslyopposed.

Government arts programsshould support new work of promise that may proverisky or unpopular.Some art has always beencontroversial and will continueto be, especially as culturesand art forms become more diverse and the boundariesof art continue to expand.

Public funding policies mustbe administered according to the principle that noartist's work may be compromised, suppressed, orunrecognized because of race, ethnicity,gender, sexual preference, orpolitical or religiousbeliefs.

With public support goespublic responsibility.Artists fulfill this responsibility bypursuing the highest quality work of which they arecapable; arts organizationsful- fill it by carrying out theirstated missions and bydevel- oping broader and morecritically aware publicsfor their work,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The National Endowmentfor the Arts

The National Endowmentfor the Arts, in itstwenty-five years of operation,has proved an effectivevehicle for promot- ing the support andappreciation of the artsin the United States. It has broadened access, bringing the arts for the first time to millions of Americans. It has provided encouragement and support to institutions old and new, large and small, and has become the largest single source of support for the creative work of individual artists across the land. The N.E.A., from its inception, has emphasized excellence in artistic achievement and the promise of achievement as the armature which connects all of its activities. The central mech- anism for judgements of quality and promise has been the grant advisory panels of peers and other professionals.The system has generally worked well to identify changingneeds and develop new programs. Proposals for the improvementof the panel system to make it more responsivedeserve attention and should be examined. But care must be taken that the N.E.A.'s integrity as an institution be maintained and efforts resisted that would weaken its role as the central vehicle for direct federal support for the arts and artists. At this particular time, the N.E.A. has a specially compelling responsibility to protect freedom of expression, not only for the artists it sup- ports but for every artist. This Assembly believes the N.E.A. should:

'Strengthen the institutiuns through which the arts are produced and presented to the public, reflecting in all its actions the full range of traditions and artistic forms that comprise this country's cultural vitality.

°Promote greater access to the arts by new and underserved communities and assist them in their efforts to build and stabilize their own institutions.

°Continuo to support, through grants, fellowships, and other assistance, artists of accomplishment and promise, whether working in traditional, non-traditional, ex- perimental, or innovative forms.

'Work lo increase appropriations to the N.E.A. so as to restore, at a minimum, the real purchasing power of its budget at the beginning of the 1980s.

'Exercise leadership in exploring and developing the central issues of cultural policy by strengthening the N.E.A.'s research program, funding private research efforts, and convening conferences on major policy issues. -9- I () Of particular concern to allthose who participated inthis Assembly was the role of theN.E.A. and other levels of government in furtheringthe arts in education. 3ecauseof the special importance of thesubject, it is addressed in alater section of this report

State and Local ArtsSupport

As the N.E.A. developed,arts agencies in every stateand territory became significantpartners, encouraged in manyin- stances by the N.E.A.'sexampie. In addition, local arts agencies, both public andprivate, grew rapidly.They now number more than 4,000,and are receiving morethan $100 million a year in tax.:uods. Their contribution topromoting cultural plu- ralism and nurturingindividual artists has becomeincreasingly significant. While federal appropriations tothe N.E.A. stagnated in the 1980s, state arts agenciesexperienced dramatic growth.To- day tc;al state appropriations are60 percent greater than the N.E.A 's. The statutoryallocation to state arts agenciesof at least 20 percent of N.E.A. programfunds has substantially aided the efforts by otherlevels of government to supportthe arts. In the reauthorization ofthe statute in 1990, a newprovi- sion was adopted toincrease the allocation ofN.E.A. program funds to state and local artsagencies to 35 percent by Fiscal Year 1993. The long-termconsequences of thisaction by Congress, part of alast-minute compromise, were notade- quately examined. Theaction carries the risk ofdiminishing the national leadershiprole of the N.E.A. andproducing ad- verse resultsfor artists and artsinstitutions. State and local arts agency fundingshould continue to beincreased, but not at the expenseof the N.E.A.'simportant national role. This Assembly recommends that: The new provisionincreasing the N.E.A. allocation to the states should becarefully reviewed by the next Congress and modified,if necessary.

Any increased federalallocations to the states must not be allowed toreplace existing state arts agency funds. Considerationshould be given torequiring states to match anyincrease in federal fundswith new appropriations.

Ii -10- Advocacy and Political Action

To keep the arts on the public agenda, abroader constitu- ency must be found anddeveloped. The events of the past eighteen months forced supporters of the arts toconfront the political process head-on, but the artscommunity as a whole was not prepared to compete onequal terms with its adver- saries. The controversy also revealed vastdifferences among many Americans aboutthe nature of art and the role of the artist. The steady overall increase in fundingin the 1970s and 1980s from the private and public sectorshad tended to ob- scure the need tobring about better understanding among arts supporters, artists, and thepublic. In addition, it became clear that arts supporters had tobecome more politically so- phisticated in the techniques used bysuccessful claimants to public support. It was also the case that fracturesoccurred in the arts community itself as a result ofdiffering objectives and per- spectives. Arts advocacy can onlysucceed if all participants in the process refrain from assertingtheir interests at the ex- pense of others.Every group must benefit in anequitable way. Advocacy is strongerto the extent that coalition is complete. In future, while differences withinthe arts community must be acknowledged, ways must befound to coalesce around commonly shared goals and to pursuethem in a spirit of cooperation. To improve the case for the artsand its presentation to the public, this Assembly recommendsthat: Arts advocates improvecommunication to the public about ways that government-supported arts programs and projects are benefiting theeconomies of, and en- hancing the quality of life in, cities, towns,and other lo- calities.

Arts supporters explore moreeffective ways to olve citizens at the grassroots level inarticulating and working for cultural policies that benefit everyone.

Arts communities closely monitorproposed federal, state, and local legislation andregulations that have po-

9 tential application tothe arts. Artists and artsinstitutions should be prepared to support oroppose specific rneas- ures, asappropriate.

Arts communities,including the for-profit artsand enter- tainment industry,forge working allianceswith other groups thatintersect with the arts,including labor unions, educational andreligious organizations,chambers of commerce, andeconomic developmentcouncils.

Arts advocates initiate acoalition with corporatechief executive officers whounderstand the central roleof the arts in communitiesand are prepared to serve as advocates for the artswith all levels of government.

Arts professionalsdevelop a network of institutionsde- voted to the basicresearch, rigorous analysis,and con- tinuing exchange ofinformation needed to defineand reinforce advocacyobjectives.

Cultural Diversity andGovernment Support

This country's artisticlife has always beendistinguished by the remarkable rangeof cultures from whichits artists have drawn their inspiration.In recent years, thesecultures have been expanded andenriched by new wavesof immigrants. The historic problemsof adaptation andcommunity accep- tance are aschallenging and difficult now asthey have ever been. Our bestimagination- and understandingis required to minimize the socialdislocations and conflictsthat always ac- companyimmigrations from othercultures. In the clash of cultures,artists have always had aspecial capacity to illuminatethe differences amongpeoples and ex- pose the reasonsfor conflict. They maynot provide solutions, Out their insights canbe crucial in helping usunderstand and accommodate diversityand change. If the arts and artistsfrom the many specificcultures contributing to this country'sextraordinary diversity are tomake their full contributionto national life, theyneed help. Aided by in the a varietyof tax incentives togiving, the arts as a whole United States receivetheir primary financialsupport from the private sector individuals, foundations,and corporations.

13-12- However, because private giving is voluntary, thereis no as- surance that every deservingneed in the spectrum of need will be addressed. Some communities, despite the richness andquality of their cultural achievements, have yet togain equal access to many private sources offunding Public agencies, on the other hand, are oftenin a position to identify and assist underserved populations. For communities stillseeking to share in the private philanthropy that is directedprimarily toward larger and better known institutions, public agencieshave a responsibility to address their unmet needs.Government recognition and support may also have the effect ofencouraging private giving and improving access to private sources.If the cultural requirements of underserved communities are to beeffective- ly addressed by government,this Assembly recommends that: Public arts agencies take the steps necessary to ensure recognition for every culture in our society. The statuto- ry definition of the arts mustbe revised, if necessary, to embrace activities, forms, and expressions that maynot be eligible for assistance according to currentdefini- tions.

Guidelines of public funding agencies bedeveloped, and staff and panel members selected, to ensurethat the criteria of quality and excellenceapplied to the art of all cultures reflect an understanding and awarenessof their specific values and traditions.

Public arts ag,,Acies encourage opportunitiesfor the professional development of artists and arts administra- tors from communities with a history ofunequal access. Programs should also be developed within such com- munitiesthatreflecttheirspecialcharacter and needs. International Cultural Policy

In the wake of the Cold War, the UnitedStates must adopt new internationalcultural policies for a transformed world. New needs and opportunities exist forthe arts as a means of representing this country's national character,its diversity,

-13-

61 ideals, and objectives tothe rest of the world. Abroad range of initiatives by theappropriate federal agenciesis required. This Assembly recommends: Expanded cooperative publicand private programsfor the full and free exchangeof art and artists withother countries.

Developing exchange programsthat tap the abundant cultural resources broughtby the waves of newimmi- grants in the past twodecades, as well asthose of A i- can Americans,Latinos, Native Americans,and Asian Americans.

A comprehensive studyof international culturalpolicy by the appropriate federalagencies, drawing onprivate as well aspublic sector resourcesand experience and recommeriding specific actions.

Careful considerationby the Administrationof the advantages to the UnitedStates of rejoining theUnited Nations Educational,Scientific and CulturalOrganiza- tion (UNESCO). Tax Policies

Tax policies are critical tothe stability of the artsin the United States.Exemptions, deductions, andother special rules affecting taxableincome, property, customs,and other taxes are indirectforms of aid that dwarfdirect support in overall amount. Taxprovisions that benefit thearts, as weil as education and othersocial needs, constitute anenlightened approach to publicpolicy that is distinctive tothis country. Tax law can provide valuableincentives to privategiving, decen- tralize decision-making,and establish adesirable counter- weight to direct support. Changes in the taxlaw often come aboutin response to broad political forces.Frequently the impact onarts and culture of suchchanges is not givensufficient attention. For ex- ample, the effect oncharitable giving of thedramatic reduc- By contrast, it tionin the top marginal taxrate is still unclear. soon becameevident that changedprovisions in the 1986 tax code affecting the fulldeductibility of the marketvalue of gifts of appreciatedpersonal property hadcaused a sudden and

1- 5-14- serious decline in gifts of art and manuscriptsto museums and other institutions. Vigorous advocacyby a coalition of museums and charityfederations has managed to restore, in part, the prior provision, thoughfor only one year. A variety of proposals for special taxtreatment of the arts continues to be advanced, including some newideas such as special assessment districts. Morethan other forms of aid, however, tax-based assistance may setthe interests of the arts against those of alarger society. In light of the above considerations,this Assembly recommends that appropriate researchbodies:

Analyze the advantages and disadvantagesfor the arts of present and proposed tax provisions.

Identify successful examples of the creative useof tax laws by arts institutions and publicagencies.

The Arts in Education

To those who have worked inthe field of arts education, the relevance of the arts tohuman development is unques- tionable. Only in recent years,however, has systematic research established that the arts are,in fact, special ways of krowing ways that are asessential to ...)asic education as the mastery of verbal andnumerical skills. It is also the case that for many children, school-bas3d arts programsprovide them with their first direct artsexperiences and are the beginning of a lifelong commitment. Artseducation, therefore, must be a priority for both the arts andeducation communities and should actively engage federal, state,and local arts and education agencies. Sequential artseducation must be encouraged, and such programsshould be supported by careful research and adequate resources. ThisAssembly recommends that: The National Endowment for theArts initiate action to achieve a consensus around nationalgoals for arts education.

The N.E.A. play an expanded rolein the advocacy of arts education, using the authority of theChairman's office to raise awareness at the federal, state,and local levels.

-15- 6 Federal, state, and local agenciesidentify and fund ex- emplary arts education modelsand recognize outstand- ing individual leadership in every areaof achievement.

All government artseducation support be based on equal access, especially to peopleof color and in less privileged communities, andreflect an awareness of this country's range of culturesand art forms.

Government programs at all levelsbe prepared to protect the work of artists,teachers, and other educators as they involvestudents in making and thinkingabout works of art that will sometimesbe at variance with community values.

A Final Word

The Assembly adjourned to anuncertain domestic and international climate. At home, aperiod of economic stringency was underwayand hard choices to deal withcompelling social needs would be required bythe country. Abroad, the crisisin the Gulf and its potential consequenceswere casting anomi- nous shadow. Throughout the di3cussions,Assembly participants recog- nized that in such a climate ofscarcity, the structures that sus- tain the arts will need allthe imagination and ingenuitythey can summon.Already limited resources willneed to be stretched even farther just tomaintain current levels of activi- ty. But despite theoutlook, the convictionremained that the power of the arts toheal and help, teach andquestion is as strong as ever. Now, infact, may be a time whenthey are needed more than ever.

-16- PARTICIPANTS

GEORGE H.J. ABRAMS MARY BURGER Special Assistant to the Director Research Assistant National Museum of the Harvard Project Zero American Indian Graduate School of Education Smithsonian Institution Harvard University New York, NY Cambridge, MA

MARIE ACOSTA-COLON CORA CAHAN Director President The Mexican Museum 42nd Street Ertertainment San Francisco, CA Corporation New York, NY ALBERTA ARTHURS Director for Arts & Humanities LUiS R. CANCEL The Rockefeller Foundation Executive Director New York, NY The Bronx Museum of the Arts Bronx, NY J. THOMAS BACCHETTI Executive Director o SCHUYLER G.CHAPIN Atlanta Symphony Orchestra Vice President, Atlanta, GA Worldwide Concert & Artist Activities Steinway & Sons STEPHEN BENEDICT New York, NY Founder and Former Director Graduate Program in Arts EUGENE V. CLARK Administration Representative of the Vatican Columbia University Museums in the United States, New York, NY Washington, DC Archdiocese of New York SUSAN S. BLOOM St. Agnes Church Vice President New York, NY Worldwide Cultural Affairs American Express Company DUDLEY COCKE New York, NY Director, Roadside Theater Appalshop, Inc. JOHN BRADEMAS Whitesburg, KY President New York University JAN COLLMER New York, NY President Co limed. Semiconductor, Inc. CAROL R. BROWN Dallas, TX President The Pittsburgh Cultural Trust KINSHASHA CONWILL Pittsburgh, PA Executive Director The Studio Museum in Harlem New York, NY

-17- MILTON C. CUMMINGS, JR. xx GUILLERMOGOMEZ-PENA Professor of Political Science Performance Artist Department of Political Science San Diego, CA Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD ROY M. GOODMAN New York State Senate GORDON DAVIS New York, NY Lord, Day, & Lord, Barrett, Smith New York, NY WILLIAM D. GRAMPP LEON B. DENMARK Professor of Economics Executive Director University of Illinois Newark Symphony Hall Chicago, IL Newark, NJ DONALD R. GREENE V1SHAKHA N. DESAI President Director The Coca-Cola Foundation The Asia Society Galleries Atlanta, GA New York, NY KITTY CARLISLE HART JOAN DILLON Chairman Board Member New York State Council American Arts Alliance on the Arts Kansas City, MO New York, NY

PAUL J. DiMAGGIO toANNE HAWLEY Associate Professor, Director Department of Sociology Isabella Stewart Yale University Gardner Museum New Haven, CT Boston, MA

DORIS DIXON o ANDREWHEISKELL Professional Staff Member Chairman Senate Labor and The New York Public Library Human Resources Committee New York, NY (Senator Thad Cochran) Washington, DC RUTH :IIRSCHMAN General Manager x JOHN E.FROHNMAYER KCRW Chairman Santa Monica, CA National Endowment for the Arts Washington, DC JOAN JEFFRI Director DONALD H. GAREIS Research Center Trustee for Arts & Culture Robert W. Woodruff School of the Arts Arts Center, Inc. Columbia University Atlanta, GA New York, NY

* JACKIE GOLDENBERG REATHA CLARK KING Editor President & Executive Director Independent Commission Report General Mills Foundation New York, NY Minneapolis, MN

-18- JOHN KREIDLER VAL A. McINNES Program Executive Director of Development & The San Francisco Foundation Director of Judeo-Christian San Francisco, CA Studies, Tulane University PETER N. KYROS, JR. South Dominican Foundation General Partner New Orleans, LA Potomac Invtistment Associates Westlake Village, CA CHARLES L. MEE, JR. Playwright and Historian New York, NY o STEVEN LAVINE President DAVID MENDOZA California Institute of the Arts Executive Director Valencia, CA Artist Trust Seattle, WA FRED LAZARUS President RICHARD MITTENTHAL The Maryland Institute Partner College of Art The Conservation Company Baltimore, MD New York, .NY

LEONARD LEIBOWITZ, ESQ. ELIZABETH MURFEE Attorney President New York, NY EMC Company New York, NY o ARTHUR LEVITT, JR. Chairman of the Board, CHARLOTTE MURPHY Levitt Media Company Executive Director Board Member, National Association The Rockefeller Foundation of Artists' Organizations & New York, NY National Campaign for Freedom of Expression t HARVEY LICHTENSTEIN Washington, DC President and Executive Producer o RAYMOND D. NASHER Brooklyn Academy of Music President's Committee Brooklyn, NY on the Arts and the Humanitites Dallas, TX VICTOR MASAYESVA, JR. Filmmaker-Artist MICHAEL O'HARE Is Productions Lecturer in Public Policy Hotevilla, AZ John F, Kennedy School of Government RUTH R. MAYLEAS Harvard University Program Officer, Cambridge, MA Education & Culture Program The Ford Foundatior ROBERT PEASE New York, NY Executive Director Allegheny Conference * TIMOTHY J. McCLIMON Community Development Vice President Pittsburgh, PA AT&T Foundation New York, NY BERNICE JOHNSON REAGON Curator KATHLEEN M. SULLIVAN National Museum of Professor American History Harvard Law School Smithsonian Institution Cambridge, MA Washington, DC BARBARA L. TSUMAGARI REBECCA RILEY Executive Director Director The Kitchen Special Grants Program New York, NY John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation MARTA VEGA Chicago, IL President & Executive Director Caribbean Cultural Center PEDRO RODRIGUEZ New York, NY Executive Director Guadalupe Cultural Arts Center JOEL WACHS San Antonio, TX Second District Los Angeles City Council STEPHEN L. SALYER Los Angeles, CA President & Chief Executive Officer LEWIS WALDECK American Public Radio Director, Symphonic Minneapolis, MN Services Division American Federation * SUZANNE M. SATO of Musicians Associate Director for New York, NY Arts and Humanitites The Rockefeller Foundation STEPHEN E. WEIL New York, NY Deputy Director Hirshhorn Museum t J. MARKDAVIDSON and Sculpture Garden SCHUSTER Smithsonian Institution Associate Professor Washington, DC Department of Urban Studies & Planning DENNIE PALMER WOLF Massachusetts Institute Senior Research Associate, of Technology The Development Group Cambridge, MA Harvard Project Zero Graduate School of Educaation RUTH SHACK Harvard University President Cambridge, MA Dade Community Foundation Miami, FL MICHAEL WOO Thirteenth District t RICHARD E.SHERWOOD Los Angeles City Council Partner Los Angeles, CA O'Melveny & Myers Los Angeles, CA t GERALD D.YOSHITOMI Executive Director o WILLIAMSTRICKLAND Japanese American Executive Director Cultural & Community Center Manchester Craftman's Guild Los Angeles, CA Pittsburgh, PA

tDiscussion Leader * Rapporteur Panehst 21 o Panel Moderator xDelivered a Formal Address xx Presented a PerformancePiece -20- ABOUT THE AMERICAN ASSEMBLY The American Assembly was established by Dwight D. Eisenhower at Columbia University in 1950. It holds nonpartisan meetings and pui-"shes authoritative books to illuminate issues of United States policy. An affiliate of Columbia, with offices in the Helen Goodhart Altschul Hall on the Barnard College campus, theAssembly is a national, educational institution incorporated in the State of New York. The Assembly seeks to provide information, stimulate discussion, and evoke independent conclusions on matters of vital public interest.

American Assembly Sessions At least two national programs are initiated each year. Authorities are re- tained to write background papers presenting essential data anddefining the main issues of each subject. A group of men and women representing a broad range of experience, competence, and American leadership meet for several days todiscuss the- Assembly topic and consider alternatives for national policy. All Assemblies follow the same procedure. The background papers are sent to participants in advance of the Assembly. The Assembly meetsin small groups for four or five lengthy periods. All groups use the same agenda. At the close of these informal sessions participants adopt in plenary session a final report of findings and recommendations. Regional, state, and local Assemblies are held following the national session at Arden House. Assemblies have also been held in England, Switzer- land, Malaysia, Canada, the Caribbean, South America, CentralAmerica, the Philippines, and Japan. Over one hundred sixty institutions have cospon- sored one or more Assemblies.

Arden House Home of The American Assembly and scene of the national sessions is Arden House, which was given to Columbia University in 1950by W. Averell Harriman. E. Roland Harriman joined his brother in contributing toward adaptation of the property for conference purposes. The buildings and surrounding land, known as the Harriman Campus of Columbia University, are fifty miles north of New York City. Arden House is a distinguished conference center. It is self-supporting and operates throughout the year for use by organizations witheducational objectives. The American Assembly is a tenant of this ColumbiaUniversity facility only during Assembly sessions.

-21- AMERICAN ASSEMBLYBOOKS 1951 U.S.-Western Europe Relationships 1952 Inflation 1953 Economic Security for Americans 1954 The U.S. Stake in theU.N. The Federal GovernmentService (revised 1965) 1955 United States Agriculture The Forty-eightStates (State Government) 1956 The Representation of the UnitedStates Abroad (revised 1964) The United States and the Far East(revised 1962) 1957 International Stability and ProgressAtoms for Power 1958 The United States and Africa (revised1963) United States Monetary Policy (revised1964) 1959 Wages, Prices, Profits, and Productivity The United States and Latin America(revised 1963) State 1960 The Federal Government andHigher Education The Secretary of 1961 Arms Control: Issues for the Public Outer Space: Prospects for Man andSociety (revised 1968) 1962 Automation and TechnologicalChange Cultural Affairs and Foreign Relations(revised 1968) Middle East 1963 The Population Dilemma (revised1969) The United States and the (rev. 1973) 1964 The United States and CanadaThe Congress and America's Future 1965 The Courts, the Public, and the LawExplosion The United States and Japan(revised 1975) 1966 -- The United States and thePhillippinesState Legislatures in American Politics A World of Nuclear Powers?Challenges to Collective Bargaining Government? 1967 The United States and EasternEurope Ombudsmen for American World Hunger 1968 Law in a Changing AmericaUses of the Seas Overcoming 1969 Black Economic DevelopmentThe States and the Urban Crisis United States and the Caribbean 1970 The Health of Americans The Public Workers and Public Unions 1971 The Future of AmericanTransportation 1972 The Future of FoundationsPrisoners in America 1973 The Worker and the Job Choosingthe President Companies 1974 The Good Earth of America(ALUnderstanclingAattlumal Global Women and the American Economy 1975 Law and the American Future 1976 The Nuclear Power ControversyJobs for Americans Capital for Productivity and Jobs 1977 Ethics of Corporate ConductTheaerfaimjnaktaslatiAmekao_apsiedy Race for the Presidency 1978 Running the American Corporation Disorders in Higher Education 1979 Energy Conservation and PublicPolicy Policy The Economy and the President 1980 Youth Employment and Public The Farm and the CityMexico and the United States 1981 The China FactorMilitary Service in the United States --Ethnic Relations in America Regrowing the American Economy 1982 The Future of American PoliticalParties Innovation in the Eighties 1983 Financial Services Technological 1984 Alcoholism and Related ProblemsligAa,aostelthit Canada and the United States East-West Tensions in the ThirdWorld 1985 The Promise of Tax Reform 1-lealth Care and Its Costs 1986 World Population and U.S. Policy Global Competitiveness 1987 A Workable Government? TheU.S. Constitution The 1990s 1988 America's Global InterestsU.S. Global Economic Interests In 1989 The Global Economy Tort Law and the Public Interest 1990 Perserving The Global Environment --Public Money & the Muse (forthcoming) 1991 Redefining America's Security;forthcoming) Available frbm The AmericanAssembly 23 (I.&AmericanAssem6Cy

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

Trustees

ARTHUR G. ALTSCHUL New York CHARLES BENTON Illinois WILLIAM BLOCK Pennsylvania RICHARD BLUMENTHAL Connecticut HENRY G. CISNEROS Texas JEWEL PLUMMER COBB California BRADLEY CURREY, JR. Georgia MEYER FELDBERG New York ROBERT H. FINCH California ELLEN V. FUTIER New YOrk ROBERTO C. GOIZUETA Georgia CLIFFORD M. HARDIN Missouri B. R. INMAN Texas SOL M. LINOWITZ District of Columbia KATHLEEN H. MORTIMER New York FAYEZ SAROFIM Texas ISABEL V. SAWHILL District of Columbia DANIEL A. SHARP, ex officio Connecticut ELEANOR BERNERT SHELDON New York MICHAEL I. SOVERN, ex officio New York STEPHEN STAMAS, Chairman New York PAUL A. VOLCKER New York CLARENCE C. WALTON Pennsylvania

Officers DANIEL A. SHARP, President DAVID H. MORTIMER, Vice President ELEANOR H. TEJIRIAN, Secretary-Treasurer

Trustee Emeritus J. ERIK JONSSON Texas