Washington, D.c. At the end of January, President Donald Trump, year after year, ratified the renewal of the budgets of the two main federal agencies devoted to the arts and the humanities, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), renewal voted earlier by a very large majority by both houses of Congress. Each is allocated some $207 million (more than €175 million) for the 2026 fiscal year, an amount identical to that of the previous year.
Targets of Trumpian hostility since 2017, with the president having repeatedly expressed his wish to eliminate them, just like the Department (Ministry) of Education or the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (a structure financing public broadcasting), these agencies once again owe their survival to massive support from elected officials. “Congratulations, and thank you to all those who mobilized. Your calls, your emails and your meetings at the Capitol made the difference,” rejoiced Erin Harkey, of the Americans for the Arts association. But how long will this reprieve last?
In the United States, support for culture has historically been a matter of private initiative (foundations, philanthropy, individual patronage) much more than in Europe or France. However, in the post-World War II era, while America is forcefully engaging in the nuclear race, more and more voices are calling on the federal state to think about human becoming through culture and art, and not just science. “We cannot afford to drift physically, morally or aesthetically in a world where current currents are pulling us so quickly, perhaps towards an abyss. Science and technology give us the means to move forward at high speed. But which direction are we taking? That’s a question no computer can answer.” Glenn Seaborg, director of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, argued before a Senate committee.
Created in 1965, the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities, to which the NEA and the NEH fall, has since played a structuring role in the cultural development of the country. In nearly six decades, these agencies have awarded more than $10 billion in grants, providing thousands of projects not only with financial support, but also with decisive institutional recognition. A modest sum on the scale of the American federal budget and compared to the levels of support observed elsewhere, but considered essential by many cultural actors.
Modest but highly leveraged funds
“The overall scale of federal funding represents only a limited portion of the support many art museums receive,” acknowledges Christine Anagnos, executive director of the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD). But “These grants help validate the work of these institutions and can serve as a signal to other funders as to the value of the projects,” she explains to Arts Journal.
“Maintaining federal funding for the National Endowment for the Arts is the bare minimum we can do to ensure access to the arts for all Americans”estimates Tim Daly, head of The Creative Coalition. “The arts are not a luxury. They are an integral part of the cultural and economic heart of the United States. Exposure to the arts (…) promotes innovation and critical thinking. »
However, behind the renewal of credits, the NEH and NEA remain vulnerable. With each budget cycle, their existence is called into question, less for what these agencies cost than for what they embody, in a political climate where, since the second term of Donald Trump, symbolic debates often take precedence over whether or not to maintain old institutions.
