By: Adam Simmons

The commencement of defunding grade school art programs started in 1990 when Measure 5 passed in Oregon. Measure 5 essentially passed a law to where the more the school’s property was worth, the more funding the schools obtained. This left art, dance, and music programs to be the first to go in poorer schools, which set the foundation for this issue. Though Measure 5 passed almost twenty-seven years ago, it is still affecting schools today, so much in fact that the Oregon Historical Society set this as a huge turning point for art programs and resulted in major cuts.

One institute in which critiques Measure 5 is the Oregon Cultural Advocacy Coalition (OCAC), which is a non-profit organization funded by the counties around the state of Oregon. On May4th, 2017, the OCAC addressed the faults behind measure 5. The article was titled Help Stop Cuts to the Arts in Oregon and touched on the fact that the Art Commissions budget is currently at a low of 12%, and threatens to be cut by 30% because of recent federal proposals and state and local government.

Regarding the federal level, the Omnibus FY 2017 Spending Bill has proposed major funding towards an abundance of programs for elementary and secondary education, but it does not include such funding for art programs. In fact, the Omnibus overview, created by the United States House of Representatives, stated that there would be ‘heavy’ budget cuts for school’s humanity and art programs. The idea that schools are already having problems funding art programs through state and local government and now could face even more at the hands of the Omnibus Bill shows how serious this issue is.

One could argue that art is not crucial to school funding, but in the journal Liberalism, Art, and Funding, Dale Francis Murray suggest that there is science behind aesthetic learning and it is crucial for brain development. Murray discusses how art helps with moral and aesthetic learning. Murray states that with the state funding art programs, they are then funding an aesthetic value. However, Murray also brings up the fact that tying liberalism and aesthetic value could perhaps be the reason for the contrast in opinion in funding art programs. For example, if one believes they are funding something in which contradicts their values (e.g., a painting of god) then they are opposed to the funding of art, which frames the issue at hand, and shows and opposing viewpoint.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Oregon Encyclopedia “Measure 5 on Property Taxes and Funding” November 15, 2015

 

Bauer, Mary “Help Stop Cuts to the Arts in Oregon” Regional Arts and Culture Council, May 4, 2017

 

House of Representatives “Omnibus Summary, Interior and Environment Appropriations” May 2017

 

Murray, Dale Francis “Liberalism, Art, and Funding” November 3, 2004