additional commentary by Rep. Timothy Horrigan; February 28, 2012
HB-1285 is a bill introduced by Rep. Dan McGuire, who is a first-term rep who has quickly risen to the upper reaches of the House Republican caucus's leadership. He is a smart guy who is a pretty good rep, and his meteoric rise is not just because he is the spouse of a respected veteran rep (Carol McGuire.) But, not of all of his bills are so wonderful: for example, this one would get rid of the state art fund. This allocates up to $75,000 of certain state building projects to the purchase of art (and to the curation of existing art.) This bill is well on the way to being enacted: the House Executive Departments & Administration Committee's "Ought to Pass" report was approved 214-108 by the whole House on February 1, 2012, and the House Finance Committee is expected to endorse the bill when they vote on it on March 20, 2012.
This bill is part of a larger campaign against public art, including at least one bill which would eliminate the Department of Cultural Resources.
Here is my February 21, 2012 testimony:
Testimony against HB 1285
|
|
I urge the House Finance Committee to kill HB 1285-FN, "an act repealing the state art fund." The amount of money saved by this bill would be miniscule: in Fiscal Years 2007 through 2011, the fund spent less than $250,000 total. Given the way budgets are arrived at, it is probable that the cost of the art fund is literally zero: the money which goes into the art fund would, in the absence of such a fund, simply end up being spent on something else. Instead of putting up to $75,000 per project into the art fund, state agencies would use that money on other decorative elements (e.g., furnishing, carpeting, etc.)
There are some who believe that government is a sordid business which should only be carried out in strictly functional surroundings with no artwork— but those people are shortsighted. Government, like any other institution, functions best in beautiful surroundings, and artwork is an integral part of a beautiful and functional building. Also, art is an asset which keeps its value forever when chosen wisely and curated appropriately: an artwork is fundamentally different from a paperclip or an automobile.
The art fund serves a larger purpose beyond merely buying the art: it also maintains, catalogs and repairs the art. No one would be responsible for these curatorial duties if HB 1285-FN is passed, since RSA 190A:11 is one of the paragraphs this bill would delete from the lawbooks. This currently reads:
Another unintended consequence of the bill as written is that it would cripple the state library. The way I read it, the bill would delete all eight subparagraphs of RSA 21-K:8, whjch deals with the commissioner of cultural resources' rulemaking authority. Only subparagraph 21-K:8V deals with the state art fund. |
Here is the bill, as introduced and passed by the Executive Departments & Administration committee:
See Also:
SusanThe's January 26, 2012 BlueHampshire.com diary "Randomly Bad"
HB 1183: "relative to access to the galleries in the general court."
December 27, 2011: my Letter to the Editor about Redistricting & County Government
November 25, 2011: the Birthers Implicate Me in Obama's Conspiracy!
My November 2011 testimony against an educational-funding constitutional amendment
My October 12, 2011 tribute to my father, Hon. James O. Horrigan (1930-2011)
October 19, 2011 Foster's Daily Democrat op-ed; "Part Time Citizen Legislature"
|
|