US federal Govt gets approval from Congress to cut funding for public media organisations NPR and PBS
US politicians voted 216 to 213 for the so-called rescissions package, which was sent to Congress at the request of US President Donald J Trump..
The move will leave the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the entity set up by Congress to distribute funds to public media outlets, with zeroed out federal funding for the first time since it was formed in 1967.
The rescinded money had already been allocated by Congress for the next two fiscal years, starting on April 1.
The president and CEO of NPR Katherine Maher has said that the funding cuts were "an unwarranted dismantling of beloved local civic institutions, and an act of Congress that disregards the public will."
"Despite promises from some members of Congress to fix anything the bill breaks, this will be an irreversible loss," she said. "If a station doesn't survive this sudden turn by Congress, a vital stitch in our American fabric will be gone for good."
She said that "with support from listeners and readers in communities around the nation," they "will work to rebuild."
Public media advocates have been lobbying politicians in congress in recent weeks to keep the funding, pointing to the unique mandate of the non-commercial outlets to provide educational, cultural and local programming, among other content.
But the US Presidenr has targeted PBS and NPR, and their news programming in particular, as biased toward the left.
That has long been a common complaint on the right, but the US President threatened to withhold support or endorsements from any politicians who did not support the package.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Journal
4 hours ago
- The Journal
Macron calls for the inclusion of Ukraine in planned talks between Putin and Trump next week
LAST UPDATE | 1 hr ago FRANCE'S PRESIDENT EMMANUEL Macron has called for the inclusion of Ukraine in talks between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The American and Russian presidents are to meet in Alaska on Friday to discuss Ukraine's future. It is seen as a potential breakthrough after weeks of expressing frustration that more was not being done to quell the fighting. Earlier today, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy dismissed the planned summit between the two, warning that any peace deal excluding Kyiv would lead to 'dead solutions'. In a statement posted to Telegram, Zelenskyy said Ukraine's territorial integrity, enshrined in the constitution, must be non-negotiable and emphasised that lasting peace must include Ukraine's voice at the table. Zelenskyy said Ukraine 'will not give Russia any awards for what it has done' and that 'Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier'. Touching on Ukrainian anxieties that a direct meeting between Putin and Trump could marginalise Kyiv and European interests, Zelenskyy said: 'Any solutions that are without Ukraine, are at the same time, solutions against peace. 'They will not bring anything. These are dead solutions, they will never work.' Zelenskyy then said that he had spoken with Macron among a list of European leaders. In a post to X, Macron confirmed that the two had spoken, and said, 'We remain determined to support Ukraine, working in a spirit of unity and building on the work undertaken within the framework of the Coalition of the Willing. Advertisement 'Ukraine's future cannot be decided without the Ukrainians, who have been fighting for their freedom and security for over three years now. Europeans will also necessarily be part of the solution, as their own security is at stake. 'I will continue to coordinate closely with President Zelensky and our European partners.' Ukrainian officials previously said Kyiv would be amenable to a peace deal that would de facto recognise Ukraine's inability to regain lost territories militarily. Trump said he will meet with Putin to discuss ending the war in Ukraine, suggesting that an eventual deal between Moscow and Kyiv to end the war in Ukraine could involve swapping territory. The Kremlin later confirmed the summit, calling the location 'quite logical.' Alamy Stock Photo Alamy Stock Photo Zelenskyy said Ukraine was 'ready for real decisions that can bring peace' but said it should be a 'dignified peace', without giving details. Tens of thousands of people have been killed since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, with millions forced to flee their homes. Putin held consultations Friday with the leaders of China and India ahead of the summit with Trump, who has spent his first months in office trying to broker peace in Ukraine without making a breakthrough. 'The highly anticipated meeting between myself, as President of the United States of America, and President Vladimir Putin, of Russia, will take place next Friday, August 15, 2025, in the Great State of Alaska,' Trump said on his Truth Social site. He said earlier at the White House that 'there'll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both' Ukraine and Russia, without providing further details. Related Reads Trump threatens Putin with 'severe' secondary tariffs if no Ukraine ceasefire within 50 days Trump invited to Russia Three rounds of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine have failed to bear fruit, and it remains unclear whether a summit would bring peace any closer. Russian bombardments have forced millions of people to flee their homes and have destroyed swathes of eastern and southern Ukraine. Putin has resisted multiple calls from the United States, Europe and Kyiv for a ceasefire. He has also ruled out holding talks with Volodymyr Zelensky at this stage, a meeting the Ukrainian president says is necessary to make headway on a deal. At talks in Istanbul last month, Russian negotiators outlined hardline territorial demands for halting its advance – calling for Kyiv to withdraw from some territory it controls and to renounce Western military support. The Alaska summit would be the first between sitting US and Russian presidents since Joe Biden met Putin in Geneva in June 2021. Trump and Putin last sat together in 2019 at a G20 summit meeting in Japan during Trump's first term. They have spoken by telephone several times since January. The Kremlin's Ushakov said that Trump had been invited to visit Russia. 'Looking ahead, it is natural to hope that the next meeting between the presidents will be held on Russian territory. A corresponding invitation has already been sent to the US president,' Ushakov said. Additional reporting by Emma Hickey
RTÉ News
10 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Over 200 protest US military use of Irish airspace at Shannon Airport
Over 200 people have staged a protest at Shannon Airport to protest against the US military use of Irish airspace and to stop what they say is the transportation of weapons destined for Israel. The rally was organised by the Limerick branch of Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign (IPSC) and Shannonwatch. "Failing the stopping of American military going through, at the very minimum, the Government should be inspecting the planes to see what's on them and to ensure they're not carrying weapons," said Zoë Lawlor, Chairperson of the IPSC. "We also are demanding sanctions from the government on Israel. I mean, the situation now is catastrophic. They're going to occupy Gaza City, intensifying the genocide. It's going to be even more bloody. "They're deliberately starving people to death, and it is because of the impunity that all states, including Ireland, have granted to Israel that we've gotten to this stage. "We want the full implementation of the Occupied Territories Bill with services included, and we want the Central Bank to stop regulating Israel's war bond." 'Waiting for your own death' Tamara Nijim is a Palestinian woman living in Ireland for the past two years. She has been joined by her sister Marah, whom she managed to here on a scholarship three months ago. Marah addressed the rally on the situation she fled from. "All I can say is it's a nightmare that is not stopping. It's a nightmare we're not walking from it. It's waiting for your own death by seconds, waiting to see yourself as an orphan, waiting to see your home bombed, waiting to lose your friends, waiting to be killed. "That's what I can say. It's worse than a movie. It's the worst thing ever. It's a war. It's genocide." Tamara says it's very difficult for them to leave family behind in Gaza. She moved here one month before the war to finish her studies "We're here at Shannon today because our families are really, really struggling. They're starving and now they can die any minute, and it's very, very difficult. "We're here to object in what is going on. And because this is genocide going in there and we try to stop as much as we can the things that are happening there. Because any rocket, any bomb that could pass, could be the reason for a family death in a couple of seconds, a couple of minutes" Tamara says there is a price for speaking out but she and her sister cannot stand by and say nothing "We're here to talk about what's going on but it's still very difficult, because there's a price for speaking up about the situation, because once you speak up, your name goes all over the internet. "You might also lose your family, but we all have something to lose, and we have to speak for the people of Palestine. We should not be also only thinking about our only family, because everybody in Palestine is our family."
Irish Times
20 hours ago
- Irish Times
Could AI help America out of its debt hole?
When US President Donald Trump unveiled his 'big, beautiful bill' (BBB) last month, critics used data from Washington's congressional budget office to attack it. The reason? The office is tasked with projecting the long-term US fiscal outlook. And even before that BBB initiative, with its trillions of dollars of tax cuts, the watchdog's baseline scenario – using unchanged policies and fundamentals – was that debt will jump from its current 100 per cent of GDP to 156 per cent by 2055. However, there is a crucial, and little-noticed, caveat that matters enormously right now: while the congressional budget office's (CBO) baseline projections grab all the attention, it recently produced eight other forecasts showing the possible impact of shifting fundamentals. Some are more alarming: for instance, if interest rates rise five basis points a year more than the office's baseline projection then debt will exceed 200 per cent. One, however, is not: if annual productivity grows by 0.5 percentage points more than CBO projections because of artificial intelligence , debt will flatline at 'just' 113 per cent of GDP, even without austerity. READ MORE That is bad, but not a disaster. And while the CBO report does not attribute this just to AI, it has previously lauded the technology's impact on productivity. 'AI could solve the US fiscal problem,' suggests Apollo, the private capital group. Is this too good to be true? Perhaps: there are at least three reasons to question the optimism. First, history shows that innovation affects productivity in an unpredictable manner. The Brookings Institution, for example, notes that annual productivity rose around 3 per cent between 1995 and 2005, possibly because of digitisation. It was just 1.5 per cent between 2005 and 2022 – and equally low between 1973 and 1995. Indeed the Nobel laureate Robert Solow lamented in 1987 that computers 'were everywhere' except in the productivity statistics. Second, this uneven impact has arisen in the past because there is wide variety in how companies embrace innovation. That could intensify with AI, as Oxford Economics suggests. Third, insofar as productivity does rise, this could unleash social turmoil, given that groups such as JPMorgan and the IMF reckon that AI could displace half of US jobs by 2034. Dislocation on this scale has happened before. Just look at the industrial or agricultural revolutions. However, those shocks unfolded slowly (JPMorgan reckons it took 15, 32 and 61 years respectively for the internet, electricity and steam engines to have a discernible impact on productivity). Moreover, governments unveiled major policy reforms, such as the introduction of universal education and welfare state. This time, however, JPMorgan thinks AI could change productivity in just seven years. And thus far the White House shows no sign of preparing a proactive set of sensible industrial and social policies to offset the human costs. T he risk, then, is that AI unleashes political and social strife, which will sap growth and undermine fiscal reform. Optimists also have a riposte to those three points. The dismal recent productivity data means that even modest shifts in this series could change the statistics markedly. JPMorgan, for example, projects that AI will 'only' boost growth by around 10 per cent by 2034, while Goldman Sachs and PwC expect uplifts of 15 and 20 per cent respectively. And the fact that companies are responding to innovation unevenly might not be such a disaster. A fascinating recent report from McKinsey suggests that what really determines whether countries grow is whether a few big influential companies embrace innovation (or not), rather than what happens to the mean. Third, while the current Trump administration has hitherto failed to produce a coherent policy response to the growth of AI – of the sort that Singapore, for instance, is unveiling – future administrations might do. After all, techies are now more involved with Washington, and the Trump regime has shown how quickly the so-called Overton window – the range of publicly-debated policy ideas – can shift. Nothing can be ruled out on the future policy front if social conflict explodes. Don't get me wrong: by noting those counterfactuals, I am not endorsing this optimistic AI-as-saviour thesis – or at least not yet. The AI shock is still so new that I assume that if anything changes the path of US debt, it will be inflation, financial repression or implicit default. However, the CBO's upbeat AI scenario matters for two reasons. First, it is a humbling reminder of the vagaries of economic predictions. Second, this helps to explain the actions and thinking of Trump's policy team. For while Trump's critics (and most mainstream economists) fear that America is heading towards ever-rising debt and stagflation in the wake of the BBB, the White House economic team does not see it that way. They believe in the CBO's optimistic vision and think that deregulation and an AI productivity miracle will cause lower inflation, higher growth and falling debt. Crucially, they also want America to reap the most global benefits of that, at the expense of Europe, among others. Critics might view this as a mirage – or, to use AI jargon, a 'hallucination'. But it should not be ignored. All eyes, then, should be on that (lesser known) CBO projection – and not just investors in tech stocks, but holders of treasuries too. – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025
