Trump Budget Bloodbath Devastates PBS, NPR


Holding true to his word to cut federal spending, President Donald Trump’s proposed budget includes ending federal support for public broadcasting.

Specifically, the budget includes a proposal to end federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds liberal favorites like National Public Radio.

“The Budget proposes to eliminate Federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) over a two year period,” according to the proposal, reported The Hill.

This is fantastic news, unless you’re a Democrat.

Liberals will claim the end of public funding for these programs will destroy children’s education and cultural diversity programing. They will poke fun at Republicans for wanting to get rid of Big Bird and Elmo, but the truth goes beyond puppets on “Sesame Street.” (And the supposedly nonpartisan “Sesame Street” made its feelings known about Trump a long time ago.)

Watch: Tucker Carlson Says Election '100% Stolen' from Trump, Breaks Down How it Happened

The problems Republicans have with funding NPR is that it uses taxpayer money to fund a boatload of liberal content, much of which attacks conservatives and conservative ideas under the guise of “entertainment.” (Try listening to “Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me” some weekend and see how long it takes to figure out which side NPR is on.)

As it is, taxpayers do not have choice on what programs their money funds, and that needs to change.

According to CPB records, the organization received $445 million in federal funding in 2016. There are far better ways to spend tax dollars.

Before liberals get too much in a twist, they should remember that if a program is popular, it will survive without the government funding it with tax dollars.

Do you think NPR is liberal propaganda?

The Trump budget pointed out that the money is not necessary. Fox News reported that the budget report noted that federal funding comprises about 15 percent of the total amount spent on public broadcasting, which means much more comes from non-federal funding.

“This private fundraising has proven durable, negating the need for continued Federal subsidies,” the proposal continues, adding that NPR and PBS could make up the shortfall by “increasing revenues from corporate sponsors, foundations, and members.”

Good point.

“Sesame Street” and “A Prairie Home Companion” are examples of popular programs that have large audiences. If these shows are as important and valuable as liberals believe they are, they should have no trouble finding sponsors for them.

But here’s the thing. The pretentious executives and on-air personalities that make up the public persona of public radio and television bank on their federal funding for more than just money to pay the bills. Their “government-funded” nature is the basis for what they consider their whole moral authority.

NY Republicans Mock State's Democrats After Attempt to Get Rid of Them Fails Miserably

If they had to grub for money the way commercial networks do, the whole patina of NPR purity would be destroyed. That’s why, even though the amount of money from the government itself might be able be made up, the proposed Trump budget devastates PBS and NPR in a way that goes far beyond simple dollars and cents.

But what it comes down to is as simple as this: If Democrats want left-leaning content that attacks Republicans and conservative ideals, then they can pay for it — or find someone other than the taxpayer to pick up the tab.

Additionally, expecting conservatives to be happy about their tax dollars supporting liberal elites that mock the president of the United States is ridiculous.

Cutting federal funds from the CPB won’t solve the national debt, but doing so would demonstrate that there are still Americans in Washington who believe that government power should be limited.

And it’s time to end taxpayer-funded liberal propaganda.

Share this story on Facebook and Twitter if you agree.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, , , , ,