bills have been introduced in the House, priority in this report is generally given to sponsors who have supported a similar measure in the past or else who are members of the committee to which the bill has been referred and are therefore in a better position to forward it. In any case, the NCAG has no intention of implying favoritism of persons or party. It frankly supports some proposals far more than others but it endorses equally all identical bills. This report evaluates all major art bills introduced in both Houses to mid-February and also other bills definitely anticipated; 36 cultural bills and 3 joint resolutions have been submitted in the House by 19 Congressmen. In the Senate, where cosponsorship is permitted and where legislation concerning taxes is not initiated, nine bills have been introduced sponsored by 34 Senators.

The chairman of the committee or subcommittee to which each major bill has been referred is named. It is of primary importance that resolutions by organizations and letters from individuals about a bill should be addressed to him. Identical messages or postcards are distinctly worthwhile but less effective than a citizen's own statement, however brief. It is also very important for individuals to write to their own Congressmen and Senators, particularly the former. In such cases, the same communication may urge support for several different measures before House or Senate, preferably mentioned by the number of each bill. Address all Congressmen: House Office Building, Washington 25, D.C.; address all Senators: Senate Office Building, Washington 25, D.C.

1. Federal Advisory Council on the Arts

This basic legislation, which would establish a consultative body of specialists in the arts to advise Congress and the administration, is the only measure for the arts specifically endorsed by both candidates for President. The proposal, first made made by former President Eisenhower in 1955, was included in the Democratic Party platform last year. In view of the changed situation in the Rules Committee of the House, it has every expectation of enactment. The new chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor, to which this legislation has been referred, is Congressman Adam C. Powell, who has indicated his position toward the arts by introducing three cultural measures himself. Furthermore, he has appointed Congressman Frank Thompson, Jr., chairman of a new Subcommittee on Cultural Activities, which is good news indeed. Heretofore, art legislation was invariably delayed until after highly controversial legislation for education had been given lengthy attention. In view of this situation, the most effective way to advance this legislation is to write your own Congressman urging him to vote for it.

H.R. 4172 introduced by Representative Thompson (Democrat, New Jersey) is the only House bill to date identical to the Senate measure. Other House bills are H.R. 413 by Representative Kearns (Republican, Pennsylvania), H.R. 3510 by Representative Celler (Democrat, New York), H.R. 3640 by Representative Bolton (Republican, Ohio), and H.R. 3250 by Representative Daniels (Democrat, New Jersey). In the Senate, S. 741 was introduced by Senator Hubert H. Humphrey (Democrat, Minnesota), and is cosponsored by Senators Clark (Democrat, Pennsylvania), Cooper (Republican, Kentucky), Douglas (Democrat, Illinois), Javits (Republican, New York), Long (Democrat, Missouri), Morse (Democrat, Oregon), Neuberger (Democrat, Oregon) and Williams (Democrat, New Jersey).

If or when hearings are held on this legislation the NCAG hopes to call the attention of the respective committees or subcommittees to certain aspects of the bill that might be strengthened by committee action. However, the NCAG has no reservation about endorsing this measure as it stands. Senator Lister Hill is the chairman of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare to which S. 741 will be referred (erroneously originally assigned to the Committee on Rules and Administration as marked on bill). Senator Wayne Morse is chairman of the Subcommittee on Education. Since the Senate in 1956 unanimously approved Senator Lehman's bill for the same purposes, Senate confirmation would seem reasonably assured. However, it would be well to express your views to your own Senators.

2. National Cultural Development Act

When Senator Joseph S. Clark (Democrat, Pennsylvania) introduced S. 785, cosponsored by Senators Humphrey (Democrat, Minnesota) and Pell (Democrat, Rhode Island), he said: "In this century the United States has ceased to be a backward child in the arts and has become a leader. Our artists are in the first

rank of creative and performing ability. Not only do we not need to apologize for their quality: they have given impetus to many fresh directions in which the arts all over the world are moving today. But, though we may boast of topflight performers and creative artists, we are still confronted by the fact that cultural projects constantly run into economic difficulties which threaten their lives or make it impossible for them to reach fruition. Gifted students often do not have local artistic horizons which are sufficiently rich in opportunity for advanced training and performance. Compare what we spend nationally on scientific programs with what we spend nationally on the arts. Compare our concern with seeing to it that scientists are trained with the haphazard way in which we force artists to scramble for their training, and indeed for their careers. Compare the support we give to ongoing scientific projects to the always shaky future of artistic projects."

This legislation would authorize the yearly allotment of not more than $100,000 to any State having a suitable art agency and proposing specific projects in any field of art for which the State will provide not less than 50 percent of the required funds. Such assistance would be limited to nonprofit undertakings which could include: inventory of existing programs, survey of need for additional facilities or projects, assist in construction of public and other nonprofit centers for performance, teaching, or exhibition, protection of historic sites, etc., training leadership, and conducting research and demonstrations in the various art fields. The Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare will determine whether projects proposed carry out one or more purposes of this act and the allotment within the limits of available appropriations. This plan would stimulate State and local initiative and participation in development of the arts. It would also double (at least) whatever is made available by the Federal Government to encourage the arts and public enjoyment of them in any State. This plan would not grant subsidies to individual artists except insofar as they might be employed or commissioned in relation to a State project or program. It would establish a coherent and continuing outlook and policy toward the arts while leaving to the States the initiative as to what specific projects and programs would be jointly assisted. The amount of Federal money involved is infinitesimal in relation to the stimulus this assistance would give to the arts throughout our country.

Congressman Emanuel Celler (Democrat, New York) introduced a similar proposal in the 86th Congress 2 years ago. The NCAG felt it was premature at that time but expressed in our report the hope that it would be resubmitted. By now this system seems timely and perhaps the best way to accomplish the most for the arts at least expense to the Federal Government. There is one objection that will almost certainly be raised: that this legislation would grant too much power to the Secretary of HEW. The NCAG, therefore, intends to suggest an amendment to the effect that the Secretary, before reaching decisions insofar as these concern projects or programs or policies for the development of the arts in any State with the exception of financial matters, shall request the advice of the Federal Advisory Council on the Arts and ask it to establish whatever special committees may be necessary for this purpose.

We consider this legislation which includes all the arts second only to the Federal Advisory Council on the Arts in importance (see section on "State Aid to the Arts" below). It is essential that both Senators and Congressmen should be sent evidence of vigorous support for it. S. 785 has been referred to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Senator Lister Hill, chairman. Communications should also be addressed to Senator Wayne Morse, chairman of its Subcommittee on Education. If they are typed, copies should be mailed to your own Senators.

Five identical bills have been introduced in the House: H.R. 4174 by Representative Thompson (Democrat, New Jersey), H.R. 1942 by Representative Kearns (Republican, Pennsylvania), H.R. 2227 by Representative Chelf (Democrat, Kentucky), H.R. 2275 by Representative Powell (Democrat, New York), and H.R. 3509 by Representative Celler (Democrat, New York). In priority Congressman Celler deserves to be the major sponsor (although Thompson had a similar bill in the 84th Cong.). Both Representatives Powell and Thompson are in the best position to forward this important legislation, and Representative Kearns is minority leader of the Committee on Education and Labor to which these bills are referred. Communications should be sent to Representative Frank Thompson, Jr., Chairman, Subcommittee on Cultural Activities, as well as to your own Congressman.

3. U.S. Arts Foundation

S. 936 introduced by Senator Jacob K. Javits (Republican, New York) would authorize the appropriation of $5 million the first year and $10 million annually thereafter to a U.S. Arts Foundation to consist of a Director and 12 trustees appointed by the President. Grants from the funds at the disposal of the Foundation would be made available only to nonprofit undertakings in the performing arts fields. There is no question that in large areas of our country the public rarely has the opportunity of experiencing live performances of high caliber theater and dance. As Howard Taubman wrote in the New York Times February 5: "Isn't it ironic that money can be found to send our theater to foreign lands while similar efforts for home consumption are regarded with suspicion, as if they might subvert the Republic? How many Americans have never seen the living theater with first-rate actors in fine performance?" There is also no question that it will take several years after the National Cultural Development Act has been authorized before Federal aid from this source will affect appreciably this situation and the need is pressing. As mentioned in previous NCAG reports, there are some who believe this purpose could be carried out through the two existing organizations with charters from Congress in the performing arts fields: the American National Theater and Academy and the National Music Council. Both might need to be somewhat revised for such responsibilities and it has been suggested that the Federal Advisory Council on the Arts should study this matter and recommend the best procedure. Senator Javits has claimed that his plan is akin to that of the Arts Council of Great Britain (by mistake called in United States "British Arts Council" which is comparable to our USIA), but its funds are applicable to all the arts. In any case, it is high time that the United States, like all other highly developed countries, should assist the arts, particularly the performing arts. Therefore, the NCAG, with some reservations as to method, warmly supports the purposes of the proposed U.S. Arts Foundation as a very valuable supplement to the proposed National Cultural Development Act. S. 936 has been referred to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Senator Lister Hill, chairman.

4. Expansion of the international cultural exchange program

As indicated in our 1960 annual report, the international cultural exchange program has been broadened by administrative order to include tours by performing groups developed at American educational institutions. These reach university towns and smaller cities abroad to which our professional performing artists are rarely sent due to the costs of such tours. ANTA has established panels to certify the standard of excellence of such groups and the results have been most favorable. In the United States we are apt to overlook the strong impact on the international attitude of a nation as a result of student opinions. The NCAG has most heartily endorsed this development but protests loudly that this should not be done at the expense of the tours of our professionals. Their performances have enormously increased the status of American culture overseas. They are the most valuable asset in the continuing cold war and directly reach the hearts and minds of millions. Mr. Howard Lindsay sent last June letters to every member of the Senate Appropriations Committee urging that the total appropriation should be increased if student tours were to be included since the House appropriation was based on tours by professionals only. In spite of favorable response by most of the members of that committee, appropriations were not increased and all our student tours during the current fiscal year are at the expense of tours by professionals. This should not happen again. It is really stupid policy to silence your most effective and biggest guns in the cultural war in order to supply light artillery. When we spend such vast sums on equipment for defense, surely our country can afford considerably more for the peaceful purposes of international cultural exchanges which are the best method to counteract the many millions of dollars spent annually by the Soviet Union for anti-American propaganda. Letters and resolutions on this point should be addressed to the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Representative Clarence Cannon, chairman, and to Senator Carl Hayden, chairman of the Appropriations Committee of the Senate.

A considerable increase in appropriations for the international cultural exchange program is all the more essential if Congress approves the bills submitted in House and Senate to broaden this program to make it in fact and not just in name an exchange program. S. 743, introduced by Senator Humphrey (Democrat, Minnesota) and cosponsored by Senators Williams (Democrat, New Jersey) and Long (Democrat, Missouri) would amend the International Cultural

Exchange and Trade Fair Participation Act of 1956 to authorize the President to provide for participation by foreign governments and citizens of other countries in artistic and cultural activities in the United States. While this is a commendable proposal and of considerable cultural value to our citizens, is this also to be carried out at the expense of our professional performing artists? S. 743 is technically an amendment to an enabling act and cannot appropriately propose appropriations. It would seem that some reference could be inserted requiring separate appropriations or augmented appropriations for this purpose, or else that the amount that the President may designate for foreign artists coming to the United States should be limited to a small percentage of the total appropriations available during any one year. If this proposed expansion of the program which in itself is worthy of support, is adopted, then all the stronger pressure should be exerted to increase the total appropriations for the international cultural exchange program. S. 743 has been referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations of which Senator J. W. Fulbright is chairman. An identical bill, H.R. 4173 has been introduced in the House by Representative Thompson (Democrat, New Jersey). It has been referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Representative Thomas E. Morgan (Democrat, Pennsylvania), chairman.

5. Architectural design and works of art for Federal buildings

In the 86th Congress a bill was introduced by Senator Clark (Democrat, Pennsylvania) to provide high standards of design and decoration of Federal public buildings. The bill included admirable provisions which would have enlarged the Commission of Fine Arts, required rotation of its members and their selection from nominations submitted by leading national organizations in the fields concerned, and broadened the area of its responsibilities. In the opinion of the NCAG, if the Commission of Fine Arts is to be given a share of advisory authority throughout the country, it is essential that sooner or later and the sooner the better, this Commission should be revised. Established primarily to be the "guardian of the L'Enfant plan" for the District of Columbia in 1910, it has had only three Chairmen, serving respectively 27, 13, and 21 years. The spirit of "new frontiers" has not yet penetrated the pillared bastions of the Commission of Fine Arts.

H.R. 4175, introduced by Representative Thompson (Democrat, New Jersey), proposes a new approach which would retain administrative controls under the General Services Administration with the Director of the National Collection of Fine Arts and the Federal Advisory Council on the Arts in addition to the Commission of Fine Arts, serving in advisory capacity. The inclusion of the Federal Advisory Council, which undoubtedly would establish a special subcommittee or subcommittees for that purpose, is in our opinion an admirable proposal. The purposes of this legislation also include preservation of historic buildings and sites throughout the country, restoration of works of art owned by the Government, commissioning of new works of art, as well as design of new Federal public buildings. We are glad to report that the new Administrator of the General Services, Mr. John L. Moore, is said to favor a new and more vital approach to architectural design and decoration. This bodes well for the advancement of architecture and its allied arts in America. The enactment of this measure will be greatly expedited if it receives strong support from organizations and individuals in the fields of art concerned. H.R. 4175 has been referred to the Committee on Public Works, Representative Charles A. Buckley (Democrat, New York), chairman. It will be considered first by its Subcommittee on Public Buildings of which Representative Robert E. Jones (Democrat, Alabama) is chairman and to whom communications about this important legislation shuld be addressed.

Senator John Sherman Cooper with Senator Clark and possibly others as cosponsors will introduce an identical bill in the Senate shortly. It will be referred to the Senate Committee on Public Works, Senator Dennis Chavez (Democrat, New Mexico), chairman.

H.R. 3940, introduced by Representative Thomas L. Ashley (Democrat, Ohio). proposes for the same general purposes a far less satisfactory solution in our opinion. The program would be under the Secretary of Interior and advisory opinions would be obtained from five Government officials, which seems inadequate. It has been referred to the Committee on Public Works.

Another measure, H.R. 3939, which concerns Federal buildings and works of art in the District of Columbia, has been introduced by Representative Ashley (Democrat, Ohio). The important feature of this bill is that it would set aside

an amount not to exceed 1 percent of the total sum appropriated during the same fiscal year for the design and construction of public buildings within the National Capital region, which amount would be expendable for suitable works of art for such buildings. The Administrator of General Services would be responsible for the selections with the advice of the Commission of Fine Arts. Some cities have these or similar provisions but often do not carry them out. H.R. 3939 has been referred to the Committee on Public Works, Representative Charles A. Buckley (Democrat, New York), chairman.

6. Importation of education, scientific, and cultural materials

H.R. 2537 has been introduced by Representative Daniels (Democrat, New Jersey) to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 so as to exempt from any import tax: books, publications, documents, music (manuscript or reproduced), architectural designs, works of art, films of certain categories, scientific instruments, articles for the blind, materials for exhibition, etc., provided they come within the scope of the Florence Agreement ratified by the United States last year. This legislation has been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, Representative Wilbur D. Mills (Democrat, Arkansas), chairman. Interested persons should urge prompt and favorable action.

7. Tax legislation of concern to the arts or artists

(a) Special tax provisions for self-employed persons (artists included).—In the 86th Congress a bill sponsored by Representative Keogh (Democrat, New York) for this purpose passed the House, ran into a threatened filibuster by Senator Long (Democrat, Louisiana) and was dropped. A considerably revised version, H.R. 10 (the same number as in 86th Cong.) has been submitted by Representative Eugene J. Keogh and is titled "Self-Employed Individuals Re tirement Act." This 55-page measure is far too complex to outline or even for the ordinary person to understand. Copies may be requested from Representative Keogh. This legislation is actually of very considerable importance to artists who are apt to have drastically fluctuating incomes. It would permit them to set aside voluntarily portions of their income any year when these exceed their usual tax bracket and invest such funds for their retirement either in restricted trusts, insurance or annuity policies, or in custodial accounts, U.S. bonds, etc., within certain limits and stated provisions. The artist does not have to "retire" to benefit from this arrangement since he can withdraw such funds, within certain limits, at his discretion (presumably during a low-income year) which will be taxed as ordinary income when received. This legislation would substantally correct the flagrant unfairness of the present income tax regulations as they apply to artists, writers, and other self-employed persons of all professions with highly irregular incomes. Support for this proposal should be addressed to Representative Wilbur D. Mills, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee to which it has been referred.

(b) Admission taxes.-Three bills have been introduced to remove taxes on admissions as follows: H.R. 2043 by Representative Lindsay (Republican, New York) for any live dramatic performance (whether musical or not). The same measure has been introduced in the Senate by Senator Javits, S. 924. H.R. 746 by Representative McDonough (Republican, California) for certain benefits for religious, educational, and charitable organizations. H.R. 3557 by Representative McDonough for moving picture theaters. In our judgment, whatever the merits of the case, the above bills are not apt to be approved. They have been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.

(c) Excise taxes.-H.R. 635 by Representative Boggs (Democrat, Louisiana) to remove excise tax on musical instruments. H.R. 4236 by Representative Davis (Democrat, Tennessee) to exempt musical program services from excise tax on communications. These bills also sent to Ways and Means.

8. Preservation of historic sites, buildings, works of art, etc.

S. 742 sponsored by Senator Humphrey (Democrat, Minnesota) and cosponsored by Senator Long (Democrat, Missouri) would amend the Historic Sites Act of 1935 to preserve sites, areas, buildings, and objects of national, regional, or local historical significance which are threatened by federally financed programs. The Secretary of the Interior would act upon petition from a State, community, or certain national organizations concerned with this field. This worthy bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Senator Clinton P. Anderson (Democrat, New Mexico), chairman.

H.R. 175 introduced by Representative Curtin (Republican, Pennsylvania) would prevent the use of Federal funds for highway purposes if such con