Nebraska House GOP members vote to cut $9.4B federal funding from foreign aid, NPR, PBS
The Trump Administration is on track to do what two previous GOP administrations sought to do: strip federal funding for NPR and PBS. (Photo by)
LINCOLN — Nebraska House Republicans joined a GOP majority Thursday in advancing a White House request to claw back $9.4 billion the federal government had already approved for international aid and funding for public media.
The legislation revokes more than $8 billion from several foreign aid programs run by the U.S. State Department or the U.S. Agency for International Development.
It also would rescind all funding Congress approved for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for fiscal years 2026 and 2027, totaling $1.1 billion.
It passed the House on a largely party-line vote of 214-212. The proposal now goes to the U.S. Senate, where it needs a simple majority to pass. The Senate would need to act before mid-July to approve the cuts, States Newsroom reported.
The Trump Administration is on track to do what two previous GOP administrations sought to do — strip federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service.
'For decades, Republicans have promised to cut NPR, but have never done it, until now,' Trump said during the vote on Truth Social. 'The Rescissions Bill is a NO BRAINER, and every single Republican in Congress should vote, 'YES.' MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!'
The push is just another step in the White House's political battle with the media. Trump and some House GOP members said they are fulfilling their pledge to cut the organizations' funding.
U.S. Reps. Adrian Smith, who represents Nebraska's rural 3rd Congressional District and Mike Flood, who represents eastern Nebraska's 1st District, had telegraphed support for the proposal for days. But Rep. Don Bacon, who represents the Omaha-based 2nd District, had told the New York Times earlier this week he was a no on the rescissions package, saying he wouldn't follow His 'party off the cliff.'
Bacon flipped his vote to yes after a brief floor conversation with House Speaker Mike Johnson as the vote was held open. States Newsroom also reported that New York Republican Rep. Nick LaLota also changed his vote after a similar talk.
Bacon told the Nebraska Examiner on Thursday that he got reassurances from House GOP leadership to find funding for international AIDS prevention and at least some funding for public media.
'I was reassured by House Republican leadership that PBS would receive funding for next year, and it would go to annual funding after that,' Bacon said. 'They also told me that PEPFAR funding for life-saving treatments will not be affected. Because of these reassurances, I voted yes on H.R. 4.'
PEPFAR, or the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, was launched by former President George W. Bush in 2003.
Bacon had previously said that if Nebraska Public Media loses funding, its 'absence' would 'leave a void.'
Bacon's critics, including the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said it continued a trend of Bacon saying one thing publicly to sound moderate and ultimately voting with the party — though he recently voted against party lines for a bill that would rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.
'How many times have we seen this same tired act from him?' DCCC Spokesperson Madison Andrus said.
While federal funding accounts for only a fraction of the budget for national independent public news organizations, it does help smaller, often rural, local affiliate stations afford to operate in places the free market might not serve.
The impact of the cuts on Nebraska Public Media could be significant, up to 16% of its annual budget, which could put essential services, including emergency alert systems, at risk, the organization has said. NPM is responsible for most public TV and radio stations in the state. It receives approximately $4 million in federal funding, representing roughly 16% of its annual budget.
Nebraska Public Media is tasked with live-streaming the legislative session and public hearings on bills. NPM also covers state government daily during legislative sessions. NPM also broadcasts and streams local high school and college sports. It also issues essential vital alerts for severe storms and other emergencies.
The state funds roughly 44% of the NPM budget, according to information published on the NPM website.
Nebraska Public Media officials said they were 'disappointed in the outcome of this vote' as 'clawing back funding already approved by Congress threatens the core mission of public media, especially in rural areas.'
'These aren't just numbers on a spreadsheet,' NPM General Manager and CEO Stacey Decker said. 'Federal investment underpins the journalism we produce, the educational resources we share with children and families, the remarkable stories we tell about our state.'
KIOS, a smaller Omaha public radio station that Omaha Public Schools operates, received approximately $154,000 this year in federal funding. Omaha Public Schools officials decline to comment on the vote but are monitoring the potential impact on the station.
Flood, in a joint statement with the House Main Street caucus, said the rescission package 'codifies important spending cuts identified by the Trump administration.'
'This package ends funding for foreign programs that are antithetical to American values, stops woke gender and climate programs and reins in wasteful spending,' the statement reads.
Flood in May echoed criticisms of NPR's national bias but defended the value Nebraska Public Media provides locally in previous Examiner reporting.
Smith called the package another 'step toward fiscal responsibility.'
'I will continue working with the administration and my colleagues to follow through on spending priorities overwhelmingly supported by the American people at the ballot box last November,' Smith said.
This story contains some information from a States Newsroom D.C. Bureau report.
Editor's Note: Nebraska Examiner Reporter Juan Salinas II interned at KERA, an NPR station serving North Texas.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
34 minutes ago
Mahmoud Khalil released from Louisiana jail after 3+ months in ICE custody
A federal judge granted his release on bail, ruling the Trump administration was punishing him over his pro-Palestinian speech.
The Hill
44 minutes ago
- The Hill
Where US troops in Mideast are most at risk of Iran strike
The Big Story Tens of thousands of U.S. troops are within Iran's striking distance should President Trump decide to wade into Israel's conflict with Tehran and directly attack the country. © Alex Brandon, Associated Press More than 40,000 American service members and civilians — as well as billions of dollars in military equipment — are in the Middle East, spread out across bases in Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Those working in countries closest to Iran, including Iraq and Kuwait, would conceivably have only minutes to prepare for an incoming Iranian strike, a likely outcome should Trump order the U.S. military to join Israel's bombing campaign, experts say. 'If [Iran] had the ballistic missiles ready to go, those strikes could happen in under 15 minutes. Launched to target,' retired Col. Seth Krummrich, vice president at security consultancy firm Global Guardian, told The Hill. 'They move very quickly.' Israel last week unleashed a barrage of airstrikes on Iran that set off the largest conflict ever between the two regional adversaries, with Tehran responding with its own attacks. The war has threatened to pull in the U.S., which says it supports Israel's right to defend itself but has not directly involved itself in the bombing. Trump has not yet decided on possible American military action against Iran, telling reporters through his top spokesperson that he would make his decision within two weeks. But Iran has already threatened to directly attack U.S. forces should they enter Israel's war campaign, with the country's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warning Wednesday that 'Americans should know that any U.S. military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage.' Tehran's threats aren't idle, as the country has retaliated against Washington in the past, most notably in January 2020, when Trump in his first term ordered an airstrike that killed Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran's elite Quds Force. The strike, which happened as Soleimani traveled to Baghdad, prompted a swift response from Iran, which days later hammered Al-Asad Air Base in Iraq and another U.S. base in Erbil with 13 ballistic missiles. While no Americans were killed in the largest ballistic missile attack ever against U.S. forces abroad, more than 100 were later diagnosed and treated for traumatic brain injuries. Now, with Trump reportedly considering using the GBU-57 — known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator or so-called bunker buster bomb — to damage Iran's Fordow nuclear enrichment facility, a similar attack from Tehran could soon be at hand. Read the full report at Welcome to The Hill's Defense & National Security newsletter, I'm Ellen Mitchell — your guide to the latest developments at the Pentagon, on Capitol Hill and beyond. Did someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe here. Essential Reads How policy will affect defense and national security now and inthe future: Trump: 'Hard' for Israel to stop strikes now President Trump said Friday it would be difficult for Israel to stop strikes on Iran at this point, a week into the intense conflict between the two nations and two weeks out from the president's decision on U.S. involvement. 'I think it's very hard to make that request right now,' he said when pressed about the Iranian foreign minister saying that the U.S. would call on Israel to stop airstrikes if Trump is serious about … Democrat: Trump 2-week Iran deadline 'not a bad thing' Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) tepidly praised President Trump on his handling of the ongoing military conflict between Israel and Iran, after the president said he would wait two weeks to decide whether to take direct action against Iran. 'The fact that we're not reading about a U.S. attack on Iran right now actually gives me a little bit of comfort,' the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee told independent … Israel, Iran trade strikes as Trump weighs US military involvement Israel and Iran traded strikes on Friday as President Trump weighs the possibility of U.S. involvement and European officials seek to revive nuclear negotiations with Tehran. Israel said it hit 60 Iranian aircrafts early Friday morning along with the headquarters of the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research, which carries out nuclear weapons research, according to the Associated Press. Iranian media said Israel's … On Our Radar Upcoming things we're watching on our beat: In Other News Branch out with a different read from The Hill: DHS places new limits on lawmakers visiting ICE facilities The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is placing new limitations on lawmakers seeking to visit detention facilities, releasing guidelines in the wake of visits from Democrats that have turned confrontational. Members of Congress have the legal right to make unannounced visits to U.S. Immigration … On Tap Monday Events in and around the defense world: What We're Reading News we've flagged from other outlets: Trending Today Two key stories on The Hill right now: Senate parliamentarian knocks pieces out of Trump's megabill Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough has ruled that several key pieces of the massive bill to implement President Trump's agenda run afoul of … Read more Supreme Court rules against FDA, EPA 12:30 Report is The Hill's midday newsletter. Subscribe here or using the box below: Close Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters … Read more Opinions in The Hill Op-eds related to defense & national security submitted to The Hill: You're all caught up. See you next week! Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
250 Million Acre Public Land Sale Would Ruin The Off-Road Industry
Ford Performance at the 2025 King of the Hammers in Southern California's Johnson Valley. Since President Trump took office in January, the amount of threats to anything considered public—from a large slice of our nation's workforce to the media—have been unrelenting. Earlier this month, these threats took on a new form: potentially robbing the American people of millions of acres of public land. Unveiled on June 11th and revised on the 14th, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's budget reconciliation bill outlines over 250 million acres, to be slightly more exact, that could be offered up for sale to private business. As reported on by Jonathon Klein of Ride Apart, this could have a tremendous negative impact on not just our natural resources, but every corner of the outdoor industry as well. For those amongst us who enjoy off-road driving (or hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, cycling, climbing, etc.), the possibility of being cut-off from lands where we savor such activity is very real. Klein points out one particular swath of land in Southern California, Johnson Valley—home to one of the world's top off-road racing events, King of the Hammers—is on the chopping block, which would not only be detrimental to this event, but every single industry that's involved in it. Automakers, the aftermarket performance and racing industries, tourism, general outdoor equipment industries; the list goes on. Take that same scenario and multiply it by every other parcel of land that outdoor enthusiasts could lose access to, and the damage would be extensive. For a good overall picture of what's on the chopping block, The Wilderness Society has created a handy map. Competitors at the 2020 King of the Hammers in Johnson Valley, California. But why is all of this land potentially for sale? As stated in the bill itself, as much as $15 billion in revenue could come from expanded oil, gas, coal, and geothermal leasing. Other aims include increased housing production, domestic energy security and timber production, as well as, in the bill's summarized words, 'ensuring states and counties benefit from energy projects on federal lands.' The Wilderness Society has also outlined a handful of counter arguments. In its words, 'research suggests that very little of the land managed by the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) and USFS (US Forest Service) is actually suitable for housing.' It also explains that the federal government can revoke national monument status and that certain changes would negatively impact sovereign Tribal Nations. We can't forget the fact that increased energy production carries its own environmental hazards, too. It's all bad and very unnecessary. One thing that truly makes America great is its beautiful natural land that's here for all of us to savor, and this bill could cut off a very significant portion of it. And again, there's the immense adverse effect on every single outdoor industry, especially off-road driving and racing, and the massive amount of American companies that feed it. Contact your US senator and let them know how you feel. Especially if you live in Utah, which is Senator Mike Lee's turf. He's Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the creator of this bill—ironically, as many as 18 million acres of his state's land could potentially be up for sale. That's a lot of territory for off-road driving, hunting, shooting, fishing, climbing, camping, hiking, mountain biking, and so on.
