"Clearly, government has a responsibility to support the arts. However, if that support is going to produce anything of value, government must place no restrictions on the art that is produced."


The issue of whether Goverment has an obligation to support the Arts is a controversial one. While many people feel that the Arts should be supported and regulated by Governement because Arts usually dont produce a profit, the opposite is actually true, if the government doesnt support the arts than they will have no reason to regulate the production and sale of art. Therfore, I disagree with the authors statement that goverment has an obligation to support the arts and only regulate those factors that are not valuable.

The primary reason for my belief is that currently the US goverment and many governments around the world are suffering from a large budget deficit. According to a recent article in the Economist, many school and Welfare programs are being cut in an attempt to drastically reduce goverment spending. When put into this context does it make sense to spend valuable funds to support the arts? Clearly not, when people are starving those funds should be allocated to areas where the quality of life can be improved for those in need.

Some may argue that without support of the Government the programs focused on the arts will not have enough funds to stay active. However, when the goverment allocates funds to a program they also reserve the right to regulate that program. For example, a recent article in the SF chronicle described how the goverment has increased its regulation of health insurance firms. The reason that the goverment can regulate health insurance firms is because the they provide insurance firms with funds for their Medicare members, without Government regulation insurance companies would be able to price and structure their products as they like. Based off of the previos example we can see how If the government did not regulate the arts, than the valuable art would have the option of being sold to the highest bidder, thus the sale of the art can produce high profits and eliminate the need for governement funding.

In sum, I must disagree with the authors opinion that the government has an obligation to support the arts and stay out of the way if something becomes valuable, because during tough economic times government funds should be allocated to programs that will improve the quality of life for their citizens rather than programs that are more for entertainment purposes.