House Republicans announced their plans to reduce the deficit last Friday — and the cuts they proposed cut precisely down party lines.
One of the cuts would eliminate the funding for public television and radio completely. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is just one of the many places House Republicans are targeting under their guise of trimming the budget responsibly.
Eliminating the CPB completely would reduce government spending by $531 million, according to the Associated Press. Of the $60 billion that House Republicans are trying to cut, the CPB represents less than 1 percent of the total goal.
The funding that the CPB receives was originally created by Congress in 1967. Since its creation the CPB has been vital to public communication and education throughout the country.
The CPB “helps support the operations of more than 1,100 locally-owned and -operated public television and radio stations nationwide, and is the largest single source of funding for research, technology, and program development for public radio, television and related online services,” according to the CPB website.
The CPB represents the government’s investment in making sure that all Americans have access to public radio and television, even in the most rural of areas. The proposal to eliminate the CPB is so unreasonable that it is hard to see why cutting it would be proposed if not for partisan motivations.
Eliminating CPB funding would affect programs like the Public Broadcasting Station, National Public Radio, KUHF and other local radio and television programs that many people rely on for information on a daily basis. The cuts would have a disproportionate affect on rural stations and programs that have fewer methods of funding.
The House Republicans are making it clear that they’re not interested in meaningful solutions — and are risking the channels of communcation for many Americans.
I think this awful .The reason I think this is we Give alot money foreign aid.They keep saying discussing cut dosmestic program.social program. our AMERICAN CITIZEN .That everytime they mention cutting foregin Aid ..OH not that much ..okay ,,cut as 100% percent foregin aid if you going cut 100% public funding for american .If WERE so broke why are giving money other country ..main street people my husband go to work not going by food feed my neighbor kids live my kids hungry..
Wow. Illiterate and confusing comment
I had a similar thought about your comment… Public broadcasting was created to 'give voice to voiceless' and to 'educate, inspire, and enlighten'. The whole point is that the marketplace doesn't do these things on its own. The priorities when chasing money create ever junkier entertainment that caters to our most base natures- sex and fear- Lady Gaga in her underwear, the Crisis News Network, TV and movies built wholesale on the drama of who is about to kill who… yeah, the whole point is that with public broadcasting we all chip in a few bucks to make a media space that is more enlightened, to give creators a chance to work outside the pressure of 'mo' money' for once. And yeah, it's a much better value than buying Indonesia and Egypt a bunch of helicopters.
The real budget killer is and will always be entitlement programs. However I agree that we should cut our forgein aid as well as funding to the joke we call a UN.
I like PBS programming. Sesame Street for kids is fantastic. Some of their other shows are great! NPR is annoying to me but I am sure some people like it.
Having said that, a goverment funded (and therefore controlled) media outlet is horrifying. I cannot in my wildest imagination think of any reason to force people to support any media outlet. If they can't survive on their own (and there are PLENTY of well off folks who listen and watch these shows), there is no reason to give them tax money.
Nobody is saying Bert, Ernie and the gang will be forbidden to be shown. But, if Bert, Ernie and the rest can't pay for their programs through either advertising or donations, it says they just are not important enough for people to pay them.
As to the "only" less than 1% argument…only in government is 531 MILLION a small amount of money.
Markey and the others are just pandering for votes, as usual, figuring the "make others pay for my entertainment" crowd will flock to thier campaigns. They are probably right.