Who Would Miss It?

Should government fund the arts? To do so would seem to imply that someone in government is capable of deciding what constitutes art good enough to fund. And if someone in government can decide that, they can decide if art is bad too. Given the amount of money spent by Americans on art voluntariy, it's perhaps not necessary. Usually what it means when someone wants the government to support "the arts" is that they want government to support "their arts." And given the tiny amount the U.S. government spends on the arts, who would miss it?