Cut the Cord: Defund NPR and PBS Now
The freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment protect speech from government interference. They do not compel taxpayers to fund partisan propaganda. Yet every year, hard-earned tax dollars are funneled into outlets like NPR and PBS, which have increasingly used their platforms to promote radical left-wing agendas.
Just last week, even PBS's Sesame Street introduced Pride Week to impressionable children–a clear example of ideological messaging disguised as children's programming. When Congress moves to end this funding, these outlets cry foul, claiming violations of free speech and free press. But the real offense is forcing Americans to subsidize content they fundamentally disagree with.
That's why the White House's rescissions package rightly targets wasteful and politically charged programs like NPR and PBS for permanent defunding. These media organizations no longer resemble neutral public broadcasters. Instead, these outlets siphon public funds to push divisive, far-left agendas.
Let's be clear: NPR and PBS are well-established media giants with robust donor networks, corporate sponsorships, and expansive digital platforms. NPR alone has reported hundreds of millions in revenue in recent years, while PBS benefits from expansive support networks that include major companies like Google and Amazon. With lucrative advertising deals and brand visibility that rivals commercial networks, these outlets are more than capable of standing on their own. In fact, only 1% of NPR's budget comes directly from the CPB funding the House will vote to rescind this week.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which distributes federal dollars to NPR and PBS member stations, receives around $500 million in taxpayer funding annually. That may seem like a small figure in the context of Washington's massive budget, but it represents a larger issue—one of misplaced priorities.
In an era where we are borrowing trillions and paying a staggering interest on our national debt, every dollar matters. Right now, our grandchildren are on track to become indentured servants to a debt that will dwarf our current $37 trillion liability. It's our responsibility now to do government differently by having the courage to make sweeping reforms, and cutting unnecessary spending is how we begin to preserve the fiscal health of our nation for future generations. We certainly should not be borrowing a billion dollars every two years to fund wildly pro-transgender stories and other left-wing content.
Moreover, the question isn't whether NPR or PBS should exist. It's whether they should continue to do so on the public dime.
When PBS and NPR were founded, there were real concerns about access to content on the public airwaves. But the media landscape has changed. Today, Americans have access to limitless content—educational, cultural, and otherwise—on demand, for free, or through voluntary subscription. Public broadcasting is one of many choices, not the only one.
If viewers value the content, they can and do support it voluntarily, as millions already do through local fundraising drives and memberships. There is nothing stopping NPR or PBS from thriving in a competitive media environment. But there is something fundamentally wrong with forcing all taxpayers, regardless of political views or media preferences, to fund it. If we are serious about reducing waste, protecting taxpayers, and restoring trust in government, we must be willing to make choices that reflect both fiscal discipline and fairness.
Republicans have campaigned on making these choices for decades with little to show for it, but circumstances have changed. With President Trump committed to draining the swamp and refocusing our government's priorities, Congress has a concrete opportunity to back up its words with action.
This first rescissions package should be a softball pitch for Republicans. We can't miss it.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
30 minutes ago
Support for solar energy, offshore wind falls among Democrats and independents: poll
Americans' support for green energy tax credits and renewable energies like wind and solar power has decreased in recent years, according to a new poll, driven by a softening in support from Democrats and independents. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that U.S. adults' support for tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels has weakened, as well as their enthusiasm for offshore wind farm expansion. While Democrats remain the strongest supporters of these initiatives, the poll reveals signs of growing cynicism within their ranks. The poll results coincide with sweeping changes President Donald Trump's Republican administration is making to regulations related to energy and climate change, including slashing the federal workforce in these departments. And although Democrats and independents have weakened their support for some green energy initiatives, there has not been an increase in support for Trump's energy policies. The poll found only about 4 in 10 U.S. adults — including only 1 in 10 Democrats and about 2 in 10 independents, along with three-quarters of Republicans — approve of the way Trump is handling climate change, which largely tracks with his overall approval rating. About 6 in 10 Democrats, 58%, favor tax credits for purchasing an electric vehicle, down from about 7 in 10 in 2022. Among independents, support declined from 49% in 2022 to 28%. Only one-quarter of Republicans supported this policy in 2022, and that hasn't changed measurably. 'As far as the pollution goes ... the vehicles nowadays put out very little emissions to the air,' said JD Johnson, a 62-year-old Democrat from Meadowview, Virginia, who somewhat opposes tax credits to purchase an electric vehicle. That's partly because he sees the electric vehicle manufacturing process as energy intensive and believes gasoline-powered vehicles have made improvements with the pollutants they emit. The decline in favoring solar panel tax credits was across the board rather than being concentrated among Democrats. 'For solar panels, in all honesty, I don't think they're that efficient yet,' said Glenn Savage, 78, a left-leaning independent from Rock Hill, South Carolina. 'I'd rather see them pour money into research and try to get the solar panels more efficient before they start giving tax breaks to the public. I may be wrong on that, but that's just my thought.' Scientists say transitioning to renewable energies and ditching fossil fuels that release planet-warming emissions are essential to protect the planet. Billions of dollars in project grants for clean technologies awarded during President Joe Biden's Democratic administration have been canceled by the Trump administration, and the offshore wind sector has been stunted by Trump's executive order that paused approvals, permits and loans for wind energy projects. Fewer than half of U.S. adults, 44%, now say that offshore wind farms should be expanded in the U.S., down from 59% in 2022. About half favor expanding solar panel farms, while about two-thirds were in support in 2022. When people are concerned about the economy and their personal finances, environmental issues are sometimes prioritized less, said Talbot Andrews, an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University who was not involved in the poll. 'I think it makes people anxious to think about increased taxes or increased spending on environmental issues when the cost of eggs are going through the roof,' Andrews said. Trump has championed the expansion of offshore oil drilling, as well as domestic coal production. Despite a decline in support for expanded renewable energies, the new poll shows that only about one-third of U.S. adults think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas should be expanded in the U.S., and only about one-quarter say this about coal mining. In both cases, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to support expanding these energy sources. Trump has sought to open up national monuments for oil drilling, but more U.S. adults oppose than support auctioning off more public space for oil drilling. Only about one-quarter of U.S. adults favor this, while 4 in 10 are opposed. Republicans are much more likely than independents or Democrats to be in support. The Energy Star program that certifies appliances, such as dishwashers and refrigerators, as energy efficient recently appeared in headlines when the EPA made plans to scrap the program. The blue and white logo is well recognized, and experts say the program has long had bipartisan support until recently. The poll found three-quarters of Democrats support providing consumer rebates for efficient home appliances, compared with 6 in 10 Republicans. Patrick Buck, 54, from Chicago, describes himself as a liberal Republican and is a fan of the consumer rebates for energy-efficient appliances. 'It seems to work in terms of transforming what people have in their houses, because a lot of people have a lot of old appliances and just can't afford new ones,' he said. The poll found only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults are 'extremely' or 'very' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of their drinking water, the air they breathe and the meat, poultry, fruits and vegetables they buy in grocery stores. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are 'somewhat' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of each of these, and about 4 in 10 are 'not very' or 'not at all' confident. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back rules and policies related to limiting pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, such as rules that limit pollution from power plants and blocking California's efforts to phase out cars that run on gas. The federal government has also cut staff at the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency tasked with protecting public health and ensuring food supply safety. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
30 minutes ago
What to know about debate over protesters and ICE agents wearing masks amid immigration crackdowns
CHICAGO -- President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly called for mask-wearing at protests to be banned and for protesters whose faces are covered to be arrested, with the most recent push following demonstrations in Los Angeles over immigration raids. Legal experts told The Associated Press there are a variety of reasons people may want to cover their faces while protesting, including to protect their health, for religious reasons, to avoid government retaliation, to prevent surveillance and doxing, or to protect themselves from tear gas. With legislative action happening across the U.S., they say it's only a matter of time before the issue returns to the courts. Protesters, meanwhile, have voiced anger over footage of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents covering their faces at immigration raids and masked officers at the Los Angeles protests, calling it a double standard. Here are some things to know about the debate over face masks: At least 18 states and Washington, D.C., have laws that restrict masks and other face coverings in some way, said Elly Page, senior legal adviser with the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law. Since October 2023, at least 16 bills have been introduced in eight states and Congress to restrict masks at protests, according to the center. Many of these laws date back to the 1940s and '50s when many states passed anti-mask laws as a response to the Ku Klux Klan, whose members hid their identities while terrorizing victims. Amid protests against the war in Gaza and the Republican president's immigration policies, Page said there have been attempts to revive these rarely used laws to target protesters, sometimes inconsistently. Trump's calls to arrest protesters for wearing masks came as federal agents were seen donning masks while conducting raids in Los Angeles and other U.S. cities. Democratic lawmakers in California have introduced legislation aiming to stop federal agents and local police officers from wearing face masks amid concerns that ICE agents were attempting to hide their identities and avoid accountability for potential misconduct during high-profile immigration raids. The issue also came up at a congressional hearing on June 12, when Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, criticized ICE agents wearing masks during raids, saying: 'Don't wear masks. Identify who you are.' Republican federal officials have maintained that masks protect agents from doxing. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the California bill 'despicable." Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor, said the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the right to free speech includes the right to speak out anonymously. But he said how it should apply to protesters wearing masks remains 'an unresolved First Amendment question.' For Stone, that raises a key question: Why should protesters and ICE agents be subject to different rules? 'The government doesn't want them to be targeted because they engaged in their responsibilities as ICE agents,' Stone said. 'But that's the same thing as the argument as to why you want demonstrators to wear masks. They want to wear masks so they can do their 'jobs' of engaging in free speech properly. The same rationale for the officers wearing masks should apply to the protesters.'
The Hill
37 minutes ago
- The Hill
Midway through year one, America is souring on Trump's agenda
Last week, President Trump signaled that he would soon make the most consequential foreign policy decision of his presidency, whether or not to order the U.S. military to strike Iran. In no uncertain terms, this decision may ultimately have greater impact than former President Biden's unilateral withdrawal from Afghanistan in summer 2021. Biden's polling numbers never recovered from the chaos that unfolded at that time. Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here With that in mind, it is important and instructive to look at what the polls say about how Americans feel about Trump's presidency thus far, both generally and on key issues such as foreign policy. Roughly six months into his second term, new polling shows that support for Trump has declined across the board and on key issues. Indeed, despite Trump's assertions that his approval ratings hit 'all-time highs,' the numbers tell a different story. Trump began his second term with 51 percent approval versus 44 percent disapproval, but now, those numbers have reversed. Just over half (52 percent) of Americans now disapprove of his job performance, compared to only 40 percent who approve — a net 19-point drop-off, according to the RealClearPolitics polling aggregator. To be sure, as chaos spreads in the Middle East and the question of American involvement hangs in the air, Trump's support on foreign policy is also critical. At the start of Trump's term, Ipsos polling showed Trump with a net plus-2 rating (39 percent to 37 percent), likely due to his promises to end wars and deliver peace through strength. Early on, he seemed to be delivering. He was instrumental in securing a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas and oversaw the return of multiple Israeli hostages. According to polling from Data for Progress (Jan. 17-18), a plurality of Americans — 49 percent — credited Trump rather than Biden with the Israel-Hamas cease-fire. For context, Biden ended his presidency with a minus-18 point approval rating for his handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict, and Trump started his with a plus 12 percent approval rating on the same issue. Half a year later, Trump is practically on par with Biden on the conflict, at minus-17 — a 29-point net swing against him, according to Quinnipiac. Looking specifically at Trump's handling of Iran, 41 percent disapprove, versus 37 percent who approve, according to polling from YouGov. It is not that Americans disagree with Trump's perception of Iran as a threat. In fact, nearly three-quarters (73 percent) say they are worried about the threat Iran poses to U.S. national security, up 13 points from last year, according to polling from Fox News. But Americans' fear of the prospect of another forever war in the Middle East seems to be weighing on the mood. That same Fox poll, conducted last weekend, shows that Trump has lost the public's trust in another key issue area: the economy. Likely due to the chaos and uncertainty unleashed by Trump's tariff policy, a majority (58 percent) of voters disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy, while just 40 percent approve, a significant decline for one of Trump's former strengths. In fact, the 18-point margin of discontent is the worst spread Trump has seen in either of his terms. And it does not appear that Trump's cornerstone legislation, the 'big, beautiful bill,' will help. Six in 10 Americans (59 percent) oppose it, and 49 percent think that the bill will 'hurt' their families economically. Just as the economy went from a strength to a vulnerability, Trump's polling has also seen a reversal on immigration, a crucial issue that largely propelled Trump to victory last November. Americans are increasingly concerned about the administration's heavy-handed approach to immigration. This is not to say that Americans dislike Trump's policies generally; a majority (51 percent) approve of Trump's handling of the border, per NBC polling. And exceptionally strong support (87 percent) remains for deporting migrants who commit crimes, according to Economist-YouGov polling. Yet Americans are turned off by the administration's response to protests in Los Angeles specifically, and the belief that the administration is being too cavalier about whom it is deporting. The same poll shows that 57 percent believe the administration is making mistakes in whom it is deporting, and 74 percent say the government needs to make sure there are no mistakes in deportations. Taken together, polling six months into Trump 2.0 shows that many of his former points of pride and political strengths have lost considerable support among all but his most ardent supporters. But it would be a mistake to say the rest of Trump's presidency is doomed. Tariff uncertainty is likely to fade, either because people stop paying attention or due to signed trade deals. In that same vein, it's entirely possible that views on the economy rebound if the 'big, beautiful bill' delivers on Trump's pro-growth agenda. Moreover, tensions in the Middle East will eventually come to a head, with or without American involvement. Fears of a forever war in Iran are misguided, and it's still not at all certain that Trump will commit American forces. Finally, Trump is greatly assisted by the fact that Democrats are still unable to develop a compelling and politically viable alternative. Still reeling from their loss in November, the party continues to struggle to find its way and challenge Trump's excesses. Six months may just be too short a time period to predict the course of the next three and a half years. But it remains useful and informative to gauge the mood of the electorate at this delicate time. Whether or not Trump can reverse this downward trend remains to be seen. It will be extremely compelling to watch. Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book, 'America: Unite or Die.'
