GOP ready to cut off NPR?

posted at 8:48 am on January 14, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Republicans took a shot at defunding NPR in the 1990s after taking control of the House and Senate in the 1994 midterm elections, but the effort soon fizzled.  Even though the GOP had good arguments about the anachronistic quality of government-funded broadcasts in an era where cable TV delivered hundreds of choices to Americans, the obvious animus of Republicans to NPR and the lack of a compelling and acute issue doomed the idea, and NPR’s funding survived.  Byron York reports that the House Republicans believe they can succeed this time in eliminating NPR’s funding thanks to public disgust with federal spending, as well as the aftermath of NPR’s decision to fire Juan Williams:

There are two reasons House Republicans are more optimistic than before: concern over federal spending and the lingering fallout from NPR’s decision to fire commentator Juan Williams.

“We’re running annual deficits of over a trillion dollars,” says Rep. Doug Lamborn, the Colorado Republican who has written a new bill to defund NPR. “With 500 cable TV channels, Internet on people’s cell phones, satellite radio, we have so many sources of media that we don’t need a government-subsidized source of media.”

Lamborn introduced an NPR-defunding bill last year but couldn’t get much support. That changed in October when NPR fired Williams for confessing that he sometimes gets nervous when people in Muslim garb board airplanes. “Before the Juan Williams issue came up, it really wasn’t on a lot of people’s radar screens,” says Lamborn. “People said, ‘Oh, you can’t go against Big Bird.’ ”

The “Big Bird” argument — that defunding public broadcasting would kill beloved programming like “Sesame Street” — is the oldest plea in the book for defenders of government-funded media. But Lamborn’s narrowly focused bill is aimed specifically at NPR, and not at all of public broadcasting.

Still, cutting off federal money just to NPR is a complicated task. There isn’t any congressional appropriation that says “Funds for NPR.” Instead, federal money goes to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which received $420 million from the government in 2010. About $90 million of that went to public radio. The corporation gave part of that $90 million to NPR, and part of it to local public radio stations, which turned around and used the money to buy NPR programming. NPR has also gotten money from the National Endowment for the Arts, as well as the Departments of Education and Commerce.

How much money does NPR get from the federal government?  No one really knows, Lamborn explains.  He asked the Congressional Research Office to give an analysis, and they couldn’t figure it out.  Instead, Lamborn has to go to the Government Accountability Office and hope they can find the answer.  NPR claims that less than 2% of their operating funds come from the federal government, but they define that as direct funding; the subsidies paid to local channels to buy NPR programming doesn’t get acknowledged as federal funding by NPR, and neither do grants laundered through agencies other than CPB.

The 1994-5 argument about the anachronistic nature of federal subsidies for broadcasters is even stronger now.  In 1995, satellite radio had not yet arrived; now millions of people have the option to receive hundreds of channels in their cars and in their homes that have nothing to do with local broadcasters, removing the counterargument that people outside the major cities had a dearth of choice.  Furthermore, people can now download podcasts from myriad sources for a wide diversity of listening choices.  In this kind of environment, federal money hardly needs to be spent to compete with private enterprise.

Will the firing of Juan Williams for his occasionally heterodox views provide a catalyst for defunding?  That would be just fine, even though it shouldn’t be the main reason for ending subsidies to NPR.  The main reasons should be that we can’t afford for Congress to play program director any longer — and it really shouldn’t have been their role at all anyway.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

If they can’t defund NPR, then what can they defund?

MeatHeadinCA on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM

juan williams spent yesterday morning on the Laura Ingraham show using the same tactics against Palin and conservatives that were used against him. Not only did he not learn anything from his experience but he has snapped right back into line. juan williams is neither smart nor a nice guy. He is a committed leftist propagandist.

peacenprosperity on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Curious… how many other things are we paying for that the government can’t readily tell us how much we are paying?

myrenovations on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM

NPR claims that less than 2% of their operating funds come from the federal government

Then they should have no problem doing without it.

Good Lt on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM

NPR gets little government money, according to them, but they will go ballistic if the trickling tap is cut off? I’ll be interested to see the rhetorical gymnastics on this one.

Bishop on January 14, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Let them try the market approach…Once on the government teat, a sucker for life…

Gohawgs on January 14, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Is anyone else a little concerned by the fact that we cant really figure out, at this point, how much money our government spends on NPR? Geesh!

Indy82 on January 14, 2011 at 8:53 AM

How much money does NPR get from the federal government? No one really knows, Lamborn explains. He asked the Congressional Research Office to give an analysis, and they couldn’t figure it out.

Seriously? We can’t figure out where our tax dollars are going? Anyone else bothered by that?

And yes, I am against tax dollars going to Big Bird. I have no problem going there. Big Bird wants to fly, he can go find his own worms.

rbj on January 14, 2011 at 8:53 AM

’bout time!

honsy on January 14, 2011 at 8:53 AM

The market should be free or it ceases to work. NPR, however, if it is going to accept public money or frequencies or stations or non-profit tax status has to be less biased. Either cough up your public funding in any form or quit being such a bunch of liberl shills NPR.

Haunches on January 14, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Waaaaaaay overdue…

OmahaConservative on January 14, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Time for npr to sink or swim on its own

cmsinaz on January 14, 2011 at 8:55 AM

Still, cutting off federal money just to NPR is a complicated task. There isn’t any congressional appropriation that says “Funds for NPR.” Instead, federal money goes to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which received $420 million from the government in 2010. About $90 million of that went to public radio.

Then cut off the entire CPB from federal funds. That’s $420 million we can save ourselves right there. Seriously, if the GOP can’t do something simple like this, then there is no hope.

Doughboy on January 14, 2011 at 8:56 AM

I’ve searched all morning and can’t find the line in the Constitution that allows for funding NPR, maybe one of the hack leftist on this sight can point to it.

wheelgun on January 14, 2011 at 8:57 AM

At this point, I don’t even see how it could be that hard to defund them… I mean, seriously, given the financial problems we’re having, you’d think this program would have been scrapped years ago…

MeatHeadinCA on January 14, 2011 at 8:58 AM

I agree with the others, if the GOP can’t even cut off the entire CPB from funding, it’s time to go back to the primaries.

Over50 on January 14, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Chaffee wants the “advertisers” to shut down Talk Radio.

http://newsblog.projo.com/2011/01/ri-gov-chafee-stop-paying-for.html

Who could not have seen the progression of this after the Congress passed McCain-Feingold Free Speech killer and Bush 43 signed it? Incumbent politicians are part of the *PROGRESSIVE AXIS OF EVIL in America (are we still allowed to use the word Evil in this country?).

*DC Beltway Ruling class / NYC Media and the Ivy league schools that feed them.

PappyD61 on January 14, 2011 at 8:59 AM

The “Big Bird” argument — that defunding public broadcasting would kill beloved programming like “Sesame Street”

Anyone been to Toy-r-us and seen the S.S. merchandise? Please if S.S. can’t survive on it’s own without public funding there is some serious theft going on some where.

Caper29 on January 14, 2011 at 8:59 AM

Ed said: and neither do grants laundered through agencies other than CPB.

That’s an interesting, and I believe correct way of putting it: laundered.

Why is it that so much of what our government does looks and smells just like what the mob did/does?

NavyspyII on January 14, 2011 at 8:59 AM

Then cut off the entire CPB from federal funds. That’s $420 million we can save ourselves right there.
Doughboy on January 14, 2011 at 8:56 AM

I was taking for granted that cutting funding for NPR as a slogan meant cutting all funding of the CPB.

myrenovations on January 14, 2011 at 9:00 AM

juan williams spent yesterday morning on the Laura Ingraham show using the same tactics against Palin and conservatives that were used against him. Not only did he not learn anything from his experience but he has snapped right back into line. juan williams is neither smart nor a nice guy. He is a committed leftist propagandist.

peacenprosperity on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Thread winner right thar.

Williams has always been a leftist tool. Can’t even listen to him anymore (you know what they’re going to say before they even say it).

PappyD61 on January 14, 2011 at 9:00 AM

How much money does NPR get from the federal government? No one really knows, Lamborn explains. He asked the Congressional Research Office to give an analysis, and they couldn’t figure it out.

The best and brightest. Modern day pirates in suits.

RepubChica on January 14, 2011 at 9:01 AM

Also, I strongly feel that one of the few places that truly need a “fairness doctrine” is government funded broadcasting.

If we are paying for it through public funds it should showcase all viewpoints on the issues.

Cut off funding, or radically restructure so that all sides are represented. I’d lean towards the former, but would not be adverse to the latter. If you want to be 100% liberal shills, let NYT/CNN/MSNBC…et al. fund it.

NavyspyII on January 14, 2011 at 9:04 AM

Also, I strongly feel that one of the few places that truly need a “fairness doctrine” is government funded broadcasting.

NavyspyII on January 14, 2011 at 9:04 AM

I agree with your sentiment; however, the thing is that gov’t can’t even fairly implement a “fairness doctrine”

Can you imagine all the gov’t leaches just waiting to “fairly” oversee how gov’t funds were spent?

MeatHeadinCA on January 14, 2011 at 9:07 AM

If we don’t know how much money we are giving to NPR, that is the best reason yet to take it all away.

The same for any other government agency. If it’s under the radar, and therefore unaccountable, get it gone!

WesternActor on January 14, 2011 at 9:07 AM

Yes, CPB should go.

Too bad they didn’t do it before Juan “the Victim” Williams was let go, though. The post-firing embrace of the dedicated liberal slurper-at-the-public-trough by some “conservatives” was only eclipsed by those same squishes rushing to praise Osama Obama for his pep-rally speech.

MrScribbler on January 14, 2011 at 9:10 AM

How much money does NPR get from the federal government? No one really knows,

Truth to tell, no one really knows how much the Feds spend on anything.

Bugler on January 14, 2011 at 9:10 AM

He asked the Congressional Research Office to give an analysis, and they couldn’t figure it out didn’t want to state a specific amount. Instead, Lamborn has to go to the Government Accountability Office and hope they can find the answer.

Closer to the truth?

cs89 on January 14, 2011 at 9:12 AM

Yeah, I don’t get why they should be selectively targeting NPR but not the entire CPB. Makes no sense. And of course it’s hard to find out how much federal money goes to NPR — that was always the point of the whole rube Goldberg scheme to begin with.

Purple Fury on January 14, 2011 at 9:12 AM

The same for any other government agency. If it’s under the radar, and therefore unaccountable, get it gone!
WesternActor on January 14, 2011 at 9:07 AM

Including black ops? “You don’t think we really pay $700 for a hammer, do you?”

Bishop on January 14, 2011 at 9:13 AM

Don’t go getting my hopes up!

Done That on January 14, 2011 at 9:15 AM

Defunding public broadcasting is the canary in the coal mine as to whether the Republicans are serious about making real cuts in Federal spending.

The amounts involved are relatively trivial with regard to overall deficit reduction. But they are not trivial in two regards: 1) The PRINCIPLE that there is no justification whatsoever for government funding this activity; and 2) The FACT that the spending overwhelmingly represents a direct subsidy to the far left.

If Republicans can’t cut subsidization of a lucrative industry that helps the far left compete with investor owned businesses, they aren’t serious about cutting anyhing. And it seems they are already tippy toeing around by trying to build a claim that they are “only” cutting NPR. Eliminate the whole damn subsidy to public broadcasting, period. It is worse than waste, it is a Department of Left Wing Propaganda.

Sesame Street would be a massive, profitable success if not tied to ‘public’ broadcasting. In essence, it is part of the subsidy because the profit it would produce for investors is currently directed to bringing you Angela Davis broadcasts about the evils of America.

DaMav on January 14, 2011 at 9:15 AM

If I told the IRS I was not sure how much money I spent, with a particular vendor, I’m sure they would be understanding.

faol on January 14, 2011 at 9:19 AM

I think NEA, and CPB should be defunded. These are continuing money pits for political lackeys. Let them compete in the arena of ideas. They will fare as well as well as Air America did.

Rode Werk on January 14, 2011 at 9:19 AM

fire sale on tote bags!

negentropy on January 14, 2011 at 9:22 AM

’bout time!

mozalf on January 14, 2011 at 9:23 AM

Personally, I think they’ve ruined Sesame Street anyways. Way too PC anymore. Cookie Monster can’t have cookies??? Oscar not in the trash can??? Like everything else they lay their mitts on, liberals have wrecked SS so I don’t care if it goes away.

search4truth on January 14, 2011 at 9:25 AM

Cut the budgets to all those depts and agencies that dole it out to npr and see how long it takes them to cut Big Bird off. This is how the left has been funding anything it wants for decades. Create an agency, fund it and then dole out the funds, which would not work in a real business world.

Kissmygrits on January 14, 2011 at 9:28 AM

NPR claims that less than 2% of their operating funds come from the federal government, but they define that as direct funding; the subsidies paid to local channels to buy NPR programming doesn’t get acknowledged as federal funding by NPR, and neither do grants laundered through agencies other than CPB.

Only liberals would bother to offer and try to support this argument.

All the same, Dems have set the trap. Thanks to all the conservative commentators who line up to praise Obama, the GOP will make its move only to have Obama and the Dems oppose them with two arguments. First, now, more than ever, an “independent” NPR is needed to serve as a voice of moderation between the right and the left. Second, and you know it’s coming–defunding NPR would not be something that would make Christina and the country’s grandchildren and more remote descendants proud of us.

Nobody pushed back on Obama’s speech, so we’ll be choking on it until he gets reelected in 2012.

BuckeyeSam on January 14, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Curious… how many other things are we paying for that the government can’t readily tell us how much we are paying?

myrenovations on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Virtually everything…

PatriotRider on January 14, 2011 at 9:29 AM

That is just one of a 100,000 cuts that need to be made immediately.

Alsom I am in favor of continuing food stamps but the per person allotment would be 30 dollars per month.
$30.00 buys a lot of beans and rice.

We need to look to the intrepid Joe Arpaio for how we can run HUD, TENTS.
If a MF wants heat and A/C they’ll need to get a damned job.

esnap on January 14, 2011 at 9:30 AM

I bet Gov. Daniels would think this is just a distraction.

Cindy Munford on January 14, 2011 at 9:30 AM

Rode Werk on January 14, 2011 at 9:19 AM

Exactly, I am not sure how much money I have received, so I won’t pay taxes on that amount…that would work.
The scary part is, no one knows how much money they are receiving, and they wonder why we can’t “cut the budget”.

right2bright on January 14, 2011 at 9:31 AM

juan williams spent yesterday morning on the Laura Ingraham show using the same tactics against Palin and conservatives that were used against him. Not only did he not learn anything from his experience but he has snapped right back into line. juan williams is neither smart nor a nice guy. He is a committed leftist propagandist.

peacenprosperity on January 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Yep, he sure did… I can’t stand this guy for this reason.

Keemo on January 14, 2011 at 9:31 AM

Need I mention that NPR was the original source of the “Giffords is dead” news last Saturday?

steveegg on January 14, 2011 at 9:32 AM

NPR has also gotten money from the National Endowment for the Arts, as well as the Departments of Education and Commerce.

Cut ALL of these wasteful departments OFF!!! And that’s only a START!!!

parteagirl on January 14, 2011 at 9:34 AM

If nobody can account for the $420 million that is spent on CPR, the entire appropriation should be terminated (oops, can’t say that, eliminated (oops again), taken out (dang it, what can I say)…….. deleted from the budget.

David in ATL on January 14, 2011 at 9:35 AM

BIG BIRD,,,,,BIG BIRD??!??

Forget Big Bird and the rest of S.S.

As the father of two girls, I am certain that S.S. teaches NO alphabet or numbers. It DOES teach children to watch television! TV with a left wing twist to boot.

It’s propaganda, GET RID OF IT!

FOWG1 on January 14, 2011 at 9:38 AM

How much money does NPR get from the federal government? No one really knows, Lamborn explains. He asked the Congressional Research Office to give an analysis, and they couldn’t figure it out.

This is the very definition of the “Criminal Enterprise” that was intended to be the subject of the RICO statutes. Following the money through the Byzantine labyrinth of the Federal bureaucracy could be a career for an entire branch of the FBI, if anyone ever really wanted to find the truth of how government in America actually works.
I doubt that anybody really wants to know, though. If they did, someone would be chasing down the hundreds of sources of Federal and State dollars that fund ACORN under the table.

Lew on January 14, 2011 at 9:39 AM

NPR in the crosshairs. First casualty in the gop war on waste.

Inanemergencydial on January 14, 2011 at 9:44 AM

Air America NPR should do just fine in a competitive market!!

BigWyo on January 14, 2011 at 9:51 AM

The president will simply find a way to regulate them money somehow.

29Victor on January 14, 2011 at 9:51 AM

There is an old story in the South about a revival preacher who used to have Clyde,from a good family, on stage with him. Clyde was a dissipate,fornicator,drunk that he good Reverend used as a living example. When passing the plate he urged folk not to be like Clyde. When the show was over he and Clyde would have a drink,count the money and head back to Meridian. Fox keeps Juan around so that they are… ready for it
FAIR and BALANCED.

Col.John Wm. Reed on January 14, 2011 at 9:54 AM

Take funding away from NPR or the military. Gee whiz, that’s a tough one.

Hening on January 14, 2011 at 10:14 AM

I’m not going to ride with the herd today because I think that going after NPR is of little value due to the growing competition from conservative media and the tiny amount of money spent in overall terms. I understand and agree with why they should be defunded but time is short to enact effective legislation before the next election and attention should be focused on the big things. I voted in November in hopes of seeing work begin on dialing back Obamacare, stopping regulatory end-runs to shove in irresponsible energy and environmental policy and stopping the crazy overspending in a significant way. I want the madness to stop and I see defunding NPR as a teeny, tiny target (sorry for the eliminationist rhetoric).

inmypajamas on January 14, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Reduce the funding and let the leftards at CPB decide whether NPR or Big Bird gets what’s left.

CurtZHP on January 14, 2011 at 10:17 AM

fire sale on tote bags!

negentropy on January 14, 2011 at 9:22 AM

Careful, these are rhetorically sensitive times.

Barnestormer on January 14, 2011 at 10:25 AM

Looks like NPR is in a new controversy – which I think is WORSE than Juan Williams …

CHECK IT OUT HERE.

HondaV65 on January 14, 2011 at 10:29 AM

Please let it be so!

Daemonocracy on January 14, 2011 at 10:29 AM

I’d pay more in taxes just to be rid of Elmo–that furry little commie!

/Joking, kind of.

drflykilla on January 14, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Judging by the way they are squealing like a stuck pig, I’ll bet NPR knows EXACTLY how much they ultimately get in tax dollars.

GarandFan on January 14, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Few things more entertaining that the screeching of a lefty plucked from the public teet.

bloviator on January 14, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Haunches on January 14, 2011 at 8:55 AM

We don’t want fairness. There is no place for NPR. No reason for NPR to exist at all. They can go private. Tax payer money has better places to go. Actually there is no tax payer money. It is borrowed money.

antisocial on January 14, 2011 at 10:42 AM

With Rhetoric like this below coming out of discussions on NPR if for no other reason than that they are racists and support racial division they should be defunded.

From a recent on the air discussion on NPR:

Ms. DAISY HERNANDEZ (Writer): I wasn’t the only person on Saturday who rushed to her Android when news came of the Tucson shooting. I wasn’t looking, however, to read about what had happened. My auntie had already filled me in -someone tried to murder una representante. People have been killed, she reported. What I wanted to know was the killer’s surname.
My eyes scanned the mobile papers. I held my breath. Finally, I saw it: Jared Loughner. Not a Ramirez, Gonzalez or Garcia.
It’s safe to say there was a collective sigh of brown relief when the Tucson killer turned out to be a gringo. Had the shooter been Latino,

In my opinion the NPR person should have stopped this interview right at that point and informed NPR listers that NPR does not support or tolorate such verbiage.

Rockman44 on January 14, 2011 at 10:45 AM

Then cut off the entire CPB from federal funds. That’s $420 million we can save ourselves right there. Seriously, if the GOP can’t do something simple like this, then there is no hope.

Doughboy on January 14, 2011 at 8:56 AM

Doesn’t some of that money go to the Public Broadcasting System (PBS), which puts on Sesame Street? While Sesame Street tells kids that it’s “brought to you by the letter D (for Democrat) and the number 1″, PBS tells adult spectators that their hi-falutin’ aristocratic cultural programming is “brought to you without commercial interruption”, except for those obnoxious half-hour infomercials whereby people can get a personalized PBS tote-bag for a $100 donation, or some slightly better gizwiz for a $250 donation, etc., ad nauseam. (I hear this stuff every time my Dad watches a classical music concert on PBS, and he dutifully writes them a check).

Why do American taxpayers have to fund these programs? Let them beg a little harder for money (or sell expensive tote bags), since that’s what they do anyway? If I change the channel, I might have to watch the green gecko and the Shamwow guy a few minutes an hour, but at least the government doesn’t FORCE me to buy Shamwows. Why should it force me to pay for something I don’t normally watch?

Steve Z on January 14, 2011 at 10:48 AM

420 million, almost a half a billion. OK< we have a 1.4 TRILLION dollar deficit, so we have to find 3,000 more cuts like this.

This is an excellest start.

karenhasfreedom on January 14, 2011 at 10:55 AM

How much money does NPR get from the federal government? No one really knows.

Stalin knew. When he died, the secret died with him.

Emperor Norton on January 14, 2011 at 10:57 AM

I’ve been cheering for this for decades…

kirkill on January 14, 2011 at 11:01 AM

GOP ready to cut off NPR?

Full speed ahead.

tommer74 on January 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM

DO it! If it provided any entertainment or value, I’d say fund it. For example, the BBC radio may be horribly bias, but it provides cultural programming, radio plays, classic literature, comedy, and so on. NPR gives us what? The horribly unfunny Wait Wait…, a car talk program that only a cult following follows, and the hot mess that is Prairie Home Companion. No variation of views. No educational programs. My local NPR plays MUSIC 90% of the time. Why are we funding this?

herrevery on January 14, 2011 at 11:03 AM

I’ve searched all morning and can’t find the line in the Constitution that allows for funding NPR, maybe one of the hack leftist on this sight can point to it.

wheelgun on January 14, 2011 at 8:57 AM

Somehow or someway it’s probably covered in the commerce clause.

tommer74 on January 14, 2011 at 11:05 AM

Change the regs so they can be commercial (some of the donorships may sound close enough to ads as it is). Car Talk will be right back after this message from Advance Auto Parts….

raccoonradio on January 14, 2011 at 11:14 AM

Why is it when a TASS story is quoted, American media are sure to explain it’s a state run news agency, but when quoting NPR, no such distinction is made?

ButterflyDragon on January 14, 2011 at 11:17 AM

Still, cutting off federal money just to NPR is a complicated task.

Lets see how complicated it is:

“No funds appropriated under this Act shall be used for the entity known as National Public Radio (NPR)…blah blah blah”

I agree. Too complicated for Congress.

BobMbx on January 14, 2011 at 11:21 AM

fire sale on tote bags!

negentropy on January 14, 2011 at 9:22 AM

Hehehe!

BobMbx on January 14, 2011 at 11:23 AM

In 2011 with the myriad of choices we have as consumers for media, it is ludricrous that any show, station, network etc. receives any sort of funding from the government.

As much as I cringe about the left leaning sensibilities of NPR, that is not the reason I believe they should be defunded. The philosophies of the reporters and managers could match my own; I still would believe they should not receive funding.

If people want to watch what they produce, then they will and they will support private funding for it, one way or another. If they don’t, then their shows will die. Yes; it’s that simple.

As someone else said – if Congress can’t get this accomplished, what can they do??

pbundy on January 14, 2011 at 11:25 AM

I agree with the others, if the GOP can’t even cut off the entire CPB from funding, it’s time to go back to the primaries.

Over50 on January 14, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Agree. If they cannot cut off CPB entirely, then they cannot–and arguably should not–even start on SS and Medicare. they will never sell entitlement reform unless they wring out ALL of the corporate welfare and naked propaganda operations first. CPB is a great place to start, followed by NEA.

james23 on January 14, 2011 at 11:27 AM

While people could argue about the utility of NPR and the CPB and bring up Big Bird and Mr. Rogers, there is no question that funding this belongs in that fearsomely large category of “maybe if we had a surplus”.

While running deficits over $1T, there shouldn’t be a millisecond of debate.

cthulhu on January 14, 2011 at 11:31 AM

GOP ready to cut off NPR?

Oh, pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease!

least1 on January 14, 2011 at 11:34 AM

Free nations don’t need state media.

Akzed on January 14, 2011 at 11:47 AM

Just because they can’t figure out where all NPR’s money comes from doesn’t mean they can’t start defunding it anyway.
Kill the CPB, and anything that directly goes to NPR, and then see where the rest of their money is coming from, and target that next.
It doesn’t have to be all at once, but it has to start, and NPR has to be finished.

Iblis on January 14, 2011 at 12:04 PM

They can’t do it fast enough!

CynicalOptimist on January 14, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Defund NPR! Let Nina dine on hamburger like the rest of us.

capejasmine on January 14, 2011 at 12:18 PM

We are wrong to make NPR a specific target. We need to go through the federal budget and remove any money dedicated to partisan organizations, including NPR. I guarantee you there is still ACORN money in there, and money for Nazi stooge George Soros’s Open Society organizations. Money for Planned Parenthood too. Get all of it out.

Conservatives may take a hit here and there as well, that’s the discipline. We need to do this first because we can’t afford it, and second because the money is going to partisan causes.

slickwillie2001 on January 14, 2011 at 12:21 PM

NPR is neither “National” nor “Public”:

It is an East Coast Left-wing propaganda organization.

DEFUND IT NOW!!!

We can’t afford to subsidize the lies of the left.

landlines on January 14, 2011 at 12:44 PM

If we are paying for it through public funds it should showcase all viewpoints on the issues.

Strongly agree. I believe I read from a comment here in the past -who are the Conservative commentators on NPR?
David Brooks – maybe. Name another.
Who are the liberal commentators on Fox, that unabashadely Conservative network? Well, there is Williams, Bob Beckel,Susan Estrich, Geraldine Ferraro,Mara Liasson, then a host of talk-radio personalities ( whose names I can’t recall, but I can picture their faces). They bring in the Left to “argue” with the Right, usually at least once an hour. My point being – why can’t NPR do somethinng similar? Why are my tax dollars funding a very one-sided point of view?
Enough! De-fund Now!

humdinger on January 14, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Shut them down. Shut them down NOW!!! Or so help me there will be a third party in 2012 and Republicans will be targets just like Democrats.

moochy on January 14, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Get rid of the CPB, NEA, and the Dept. of Education. We don’t need any of them, and cut the Dept. of Commerce by 25%.

woodNfish on January 14, 2011 at 3:41 PM

I enjoy NPR.

It’s nice to listen to radio that doesn’t have 10 minutes of SCREAMING COMMERCIALS every 5 minutes.

I avoid the left wing crazy shows. Plenty of other shows to enjoy on NPR.

Moesart on January 14, 2011 at 4:29 PM

I enjoy NPR.

It’s nice to listen to radio that doesn’t have 10 minutes of SCREAMING COMMERCIALS every 5 minutes.

I avoid the left wing crazy shows. Plenty of other shows to enjoy on NPR.

Moesart on January 14, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Great, please feel free to continue listening to it. I, however, do not listen to NPR and I don’t want to continue paying so you can. It’s that simple. If NPR can compete or coerce you and others who enjoy their programming to send them money more power to them.

Oldnuke on January 14, 2011 at 5:08 PM

If NPR wasn’t an abysmal failure at their mission:

2. NPR is committed to providing diverse and balanced viewpoints through the entirety of its programming.

and

3. Even a rigorously managed programming organization may inadvertently depart from its own standards and practices, and abuse its freedom and power to inform and entertain. NPR is dedicated to identifying such transgressions if they occur, correcting them, and acting to prevent repetition.

I’d have no problem with taxpayer support of the operation. But their bias is so evident:

A 2005 study conducted by researchers at UCLA and the University of Missouri found that Morning Edition leans left. At the time Morning Edition had a bias comparable to the The Washington Post and the CBS Morning Show, and was slightly more liberal than Time, Newsweek and U.S. News & World Report.[25] It found Morning Edition to be more liberal than the average U.S. Republican of the time of the study and more conservative than the average U.S. Democrat of the time.


that continued funding would be rewarding failure. I have a real problem with that.

rocksandbroncs on January 14, 2011 at 7:14 PM

Do it. Conservatives who support “support” of NPR and the like, are buying the enemies ammunition.

hawkdriver on January 15, 2011 at 2:26 PM