Bill to End Government Subsidy to NPR Passes House
The House approved a bill that would eliminate taxpayer money for NPR. HR-1076 was approved 228-192 on Thursday, with the majority of votes from Republicans. During the debate on the House floor, many supporters pointed to the availability of multiple platforms of content and some alleged that NPR’s content is one-sided. Opponents of the bill said the measure won’t save federal money and is based on an ideological agenda.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The bill introduced by Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., also prohibits public radio stations from using federal funds to purchase NPR programming and pay dues to the organization. Digital radio, commercial news and radio talk shows provide news and sources of opinion without federal dollars, he said during the debate: “NPR should do the same.” He wants “to see NPR rework its business model and begin to compete for all of its income,” he said. Lamborn also said he enjoys much of NPR’s programming and that programming at Colorado Public Radio will not be killed.
Supporters like Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said ending NPR funding addresses the need to save government money. In these challenging economic times, committing taxpayers to fund certain content, “including content he or she may never listen to, highlights this absurd anachronism of the past,” Blackburn said. The bill helps Washington do what citizens have to do, Cantor said. It ensures that “Washington begins to do more with less,” he said. NPR programming has veered “far from what most Americans would like to see as far as the expenditure of their taxpayer dollars,” he said: “Why should we allow taxpayer dollars to be used to advocate one ideology?”
Some opponents said the bill was rushed and won’t affect the budget. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., called it “a phony emergency measure” and said that “attacking and crippling NPR is hardly an emergency.” The bill “doesn’t serve any fiscal purpose,” said House Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman, D-Calif. No hearings were held on the bill, he added. The opposition to funding stems from “an ancient animosity” from the Republican Party, said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass. “They have from the creation of this network wanted to destroy it.” Funding supporters also expressed concern for quality local programming and jobs in public radio.
The Obama administration also opposed the measure, it said in a written statement. “Undercutting funding for these radio stations, notably ones in rural areas where such outlets are already scarce, would result in communities losing valuable programming, and some stations could be forced to shut down altogether.” It’s shameful “that so many members voted to deny their own communities a vital source of news, information and entertainment,” Free Press said.
Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, is hopeful that “the Senate will seriously consider all spending cuts passed in the House,” his aide told us. “Our nation is too deep in debt not to.” Brady included a provision to cut funding for public broadcasting in his bill, HR-235, introduced in January.
"We are confident that the Senate and the President will fight to restore funding for public broadcasting,” an aide for Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., said in a written statement to us. “Senate leadership and President [Barack] Obama have made clear that funding for public broadcasting is a priority.” Blumenauer still plans to reconstitute the Public Broadcasting Caucus and bring back Republican support, the aide said.