
Fifty Years Of LA Louver in Venice, CA: A History
LA Louver on N. Venice Blvd in Venice, CA
LA Louver, the Venice, California art gallery known for its exhibition of such well-known artists as David Hockney, R. B. Kitaj, and Ed and Nancy Kienholz, as well as contemporary artists such as Alison Saar, Gajin Fujita, and Rebecca Campbell, is celebrating its 50th anniversary.
Gallery founding director Peter Goulds with artist David Hockney, 2015.
'It's been a fabulous incredible journey,' LA Louver's founder Peter Goulds told me recently.
Long devoted 'to showing Los Angeles based artists in an international context,' LA Louver is commemorating this landmark with an exhibition of artists they have shown and who have inspired them (on view until June 13), from Terry Allen to Tom Wudl, as well as Marcel Duchamp, Wallace Berman, George Herms. John Cage, Nick Cave, Leon Kossoff, and Ed Moses, among many others. It is a museum-worthy retrospective housed in a familiar gallery space with wondrous surprises at every turn. Don't miss it!
Recently, I sat down with LA Louver's triumvirate of Peter Goulds, Kimberly Davis, and Elizabeth East, to hear their personal stories as well as their roles in the gallery's history.
Born in London, in Islington, Goulds, who as a youngster always won his school's Art Prize as well as its Religion Prize, passed his A levels at the precocious age of 15, which would be impressive if you didn't learn that Liz, his wife, had achieved hers at 14. They met at the Walthamstow School of Art, which he attended before leaving London to attend the Coventry Art School, and then the Manchester School of Art, all along developing his interest in information design and audiovisual communication. Goulds's teenage years also included starting a car cleaning business, becoming a card-carrying member of Ronnie Scott's Jazz club, and working at theaters in the West End, building sets, painting scenery, moving scenery and props. All experiences that would prove invaluable in a gallery owner.
In 1971, Goulds, as the recipient of a Leverhulme Fellowship, met Mitsuru Kataoka of UCLA's Dickson Art Center design center at a conference in Vienna; then decided to spend four months traveling around the US, visiting universities teaching Video arts and communication.
From the moment he arrived in Los Angeles, Goulds began his love affair with the city. 'I remember going up Laurel Canyon and I saw those houses on stilts and right then I began my romance [with Los Angeles].' Goulds met many Americans, and 'encountered philanthropy at a level I couldn't have imagined [and] as a bedrock of this society.' While in LA he went to see UCLA 'to see what it was all about.'
Goulds returned to the UK to teach at the Leeds Art School, while continuing research on creating audiovisual content at Manchester. After only a few weeks, he received a call from Kataoka, asking Goulds to fill in for him at UCLA while he was away in Japan on sabbatical.
At UCLA, Goulds created a very popular course on structuralism in 20th Century Art for which he projected films, showed slides, and which he taught for three years. In 1975, as his time at UCLA was coming to an end, Goulds, who was now married to Liz, had a decision to make: 'We both wanted to stay on because we really got enthralled by this iconoclastic place and met so many artists'
Gallery directors Peter Goulds & Kimberly Davis, pictured at 55 North Venice Boulevard, 1991.
Goulds presented two ideas to Liz: The first was to start a textile manufacturing company. Liz was happy being a fabric designer working for Lanz, (famous for their nightwear) but she couldn't stand the manufacturers. The other idea was to start a gallery, something Goulds would have never have thought to do in the United Kingdom.
During their time in California, Goulds had managed to save $15,000 thanks to grant funds and a quirk of the British Tax Code that didn't tax their earnings abroad. So that was their investment in the gallery.
The history of contemporary art galleries in LA was checkered. The Ferus Gallery opened in 1957, with the involvement of Walter Hopps and Irwin Blum and a coterie of artists. Nick Wilder opened his gallery in 1965. However, in the 1970s both would close. At that time, most contemporary art was shown at universities rather than galleries or museums.
However, Los Angeles Institute of Contemporary Art (LAICA), LA's first nonprofit exhibition space founded by Robert L. Smith and his wife Toby Smith, had a wonderful archive where artists could leave slides of their work on file, with details about the artists. Goulds was able to study these to really become familiar with many LA artists. He also contributed a visual essay to their publication, Journal, that was a manifesto of sorts, declaring 'freedom from all heroes, past, present, and to come.'
Goulds was living in Venice and decided to open his gallery there, in part because he couldn't compete with the galleries on decorator's row on La Cienega; and because many artists were living nearby between Ocean Park and Washington Blvd, and between the Ocean and Lincoln Blvd.
Gallery founding director Peter Goulds with his artwork L.A. Louver, Eros it is the mirror, 1976, 2025.
Marcel Duchamp had created a work called 'Fresh Widow' which was a window whose panels of glass were covered with black leather. Goulds had created his own take on it for a film he wanted to make, that was a louvered window whose slats were mirrors. In tribute to Duchamp's French heritage, Goulds called it 'La Louver.' At Liz's suggestion, this became the name of the gallery (you can see the actual item at the current LA Louver show).
'I thought if you open a halfway decent place, you have something to say, open it where artists live and work, then artists visit other artists, curators visit, collectors visit, critics visit, writers visit. There was a built-in audience. So you just had to gamble that your program was going to encourage others to come by. And it worked.'
From the first day, important curators such as Betty Turnbull and Betty Asher came by, and they brought their fellow curators including a young Stephanie Barron, and the LACMA legend Maurice Tuchman. Local artists often walked in, some hoping to exhibit, some hoping to get work doing construction or installation work.
Lili Lakich, Mona, 1981, Photostat on Masonite, plexiglass, glass tubing with argon and neon gasses, crackle tube, transformer, 54 ½ x 39 ¼ x 7 in.
At first, Goulds had trouble getting artists to show at LA Louver. He approached Lili Lakich who was doing works with neon (She eventually opened the Museum of Neon). Among the first shows was George Herms, who brought along Wallace Berman. Berman didn't want gallery representation but allowed Goulds to keep a few works in his back office to deal. Tom Wudl, and a Kate Steinitz retrospective followed. Ed Moses would rebuild the gallery and install his work. LA Louver did a couple of shows with Ed Ruscha and published some prints. 'He had no means whatsoever in those days,' Goulds recalled.
Goulds figured that he would give it two years, after which if there were no sales, he wasn't sure how they'd survive. 'But I had a hunch,' Goulds said, 'And luckily, we made sales in the first year, actually $29,000. Next year we made $80,000; and the third year over $200,000. And it sort of went on like that.'
At Art Basel in 1977, he met Paul Cornwall Jones whose Petersburg Press was creating fine art prints with artists such as a young David Hockney. A few years later, Jones needed $250,000 to undertake a large new project, and Goulds borrowed the money to participate, having slowly built up his own credit rating by taking and repaying small loans. Goulds was involved in the exhibition of Jasper Johns illustrations for Samuel Beckett's Foirades / Fizzles. And that led to an edition where he got to meet David Hockney.
Installation of David Hockney: Looking at Landscape / Being in Landscape at L.A. Louver, 1998. Pictured at right: David Hockney, A Bigger Grand Canyon, 1998, Oil on sixty canvases, 81 ½ x 293 in., National Gallery of Australia, Purchased with the assistance of Kerry Stokes, Carol and Tony Berg and the O'Reilly family 1999.
In London, R. B. Kitaj had mounted The Human Clay, his exhibition making the case for a 'School of London' figurative painting. Inspired by this, Goulds decided to assemble an exhibition, This Knot of Life, that would feature ten British painters. He went to Hockney who agreed to participate who introduced him to Kitaj , and eventually the exhibition included work from Lucian Freud, Frank Auerbach, Leon Kossoff, Francis Bacon, Michael Andrews, and Howard Hodgkin. This cemented the direction of the gallery having an international viewpoint. And, over the years, LA Louver has mounted many beautiful shows of Hockney's ongoing experimentation and exploration of various landscapes, perspectives, media, and his studio.
Gallery director Kimberly Davis with a sculpture by Deborah Butterfield, 2020.
The story now turns over to Kimberly Davis, who was born in California, grew up in Detroit, and attended a year at Wayne State before transferring to Pratt in Brooklyn. 'I always wanted to be in New York,' she told me recently. Initially attracted to the fashion world, after working in all aspects of the industry, including making hand-painted silk fabrics, she decided, 'This is no world for me. I just hated it.'
She had a lot of friends who were artists, so she decided to go to Hunter College to get a Master's in Art History. However, she was stymied by the German language requirement. 'So I started working in the art world.' Her first job was with Alanna Heiss at the Clocktower, whom she helped with the opening of PS One in 1976, after which Davis got an internship at the Guggenheim Museum. However, none of those jobs paid enough to live on. Davis babysat in exchange for an apartment and worked as a bartender and a waitress two nights a week.
Finally Davis got a paying job with Judith Selkowitz who did corporate art consulting for clients such as IBM, Xerox, and Prudential.
'It taught me a lot about how to hang art, because we would go into a building on the weekend in Westchester and we would have 300 works we would have to hang,' Davis said, adding, 'That was very useful, but it was boring.'
A friend told her about a job in California working for British art dealer Bernard Jacobson. She moved to LA with $5000 and a lot of inventory, of works by Howard Hodgkins and David Hockney, and prints from Brooke Alexander and Bob Feldman from Parasol Press. 'Start selling the inventory,' Davis was told, 'Then you can pay yourself. It was really hard.'
Davis had met Graham in New York, and he followed her out to LA, where they married. To expand her circle of friends, acquaintances, and buyers, she started to host dinner parties at her apartment. Often, she called a person she didn't know but invited them saying someone else would be there and then called that person saying the first couple was coming. That first year, Davis made dinner for 300 people, and she adds, laughing, 'no one ever invited me back to their homes.' But it was at one such dinner that she met Peter and Liz.
Davis opened a Bernard Jacobson Gallery in a space in the parking lot of Ma Maison that had been Patrick Terrail's mother's boutique. She put together shows from Jacobson's inventory as well as some of the British artists he represented. However, she discovered that it was less expensive to have the artists come to LA for three months and create new work than to ship it from England.
The gallery was barely surviving and Davis, who was paying all the gallery's bills, was owed a lot of money. She decided that what she needed was a job. 'I left with some inventory that I could own myself and ultimately did okay with it.'
Davis had been to LA Louver to see This Knot of Life, which exhibited artists she knew from working with Jacobson, such as Hockney, Kossoff, and Hodgkin. Peter and Liz had come to her house for dinner, and she had worked with Peter on a Howard Hodgkin exhibit, so Davis joining LA Louver made sense, and allowed Goulds to travel to art fairs while Davis managed the gallery and its sales.
The next piece in the puzzle was Chris Pate, a young artist who. while continuing to work in his own studio, helped prepare the exhibitions. Today, he manages and is in charge of the collections.
Over the years, beyond the story of artists and exhibitions, Goulds threaded his way through labyrinthian real estate arrangements up and down his block of N. Venice Blvd, moving to a space next to his original location that resulted in the gallery building LA Louver has occupied since 1987; as well as the parking structure across the street which makes visiting the gallery simple. At one point, there was a New York branch of the gallery that created its own problems and which Goulds eventually decided to close, Doing so was costly which, luckily, they could weather. At the same time, there were vexing situations of employees who went off to start their own gallery trying to take artists and collectors with them, and one trusted employee's financial skullduggery.
Fred Fisher was the architect for the new gallery building on N. Venice Blvd. Goulds had a rather precise vision for the height of the rooms and how art might be moved in and around the building. For example, Goulds went to visit Riko Mizuno in her gallery. The whole time they talked, Mizuno was crocheting; after which, she stood up and put on the pants she'd just made. But what was more striking was that Ed Moses had taken the roof off her studio to build a sky room. The story Goulds was told was that Ed's friend had helped him make the perfect hard edge to frame the space. That friend: James Turrell. So, when Goulds built his new space for LA Louver, inspired by Mizuno and Turrell, he built his own sky room, which he says is 'The most popular, really successful room there.'
Gallery director Elizabeth East with artist Matt Wedel with his sculpture Fruit Landscape (2017) at the Korean International Ceramics Biennale, Gwangju, South Korea, 2024.
In 1998, Elizabeth East joined LA Louver. East, who is also British, received her first degree in business. 'I thought I would spend my life in advertising,' she said. After being an account executive at an ad agency in London, she joined an art consultancy that was looking for a marketing executive. She worked there until her personal life took her to Washington D.C., where she worked at the Hollis Taggart Gallery for eight years. However, the gallery was focused on historic American painting, such as the Hudson Valley School. East decided that her passion was for contemporary art, and to get a job in that marketplace, she needed a Masters. As far as East was concerned, at that time, 'the place where artists get educated was Goldsmiths in London.'
After her year's course, East came to Los Angeles, and seeing shows of Joe Goode and Leslie Wayne, she understood that LA was a developing home for contemporary art and artists. She wrote to several galleries inquiring about employment opportunities. She received a call to visit LA Louver. Davis gave her a tour of the gallery, 'I couldn't believe it, because when I came up the stairs, I saw a Hockney, which I'd seen six months before in an exhibition in Manchester, England. ' As she proceeded through the gallery she saw work by British artist John Virtue, and then a Leon Kossoff, which is when she knew LA Louver was the place for her. East had timed doing her degree at Goldsmiths to being able to see the Kossoff exhibition at the Tate.
East, who had no direct connection to LA artists, collectors, and institutions, spent a year as Goulds's assistant, learning the practical aspects of the gallery. 'The business background of Elizabeth comes out quietly, in various ways,' Goulds told me. 'And it's a decisive part of what we do.'
Gallery managing director Lisa Jann, 2025. Courtesy of L.A. Louver, Venice, CA.
When Elizabeth decided to find her replacement as Goulds' assistant, she produced two candidates, the first a wonderful person who would take care of Peter, and the other, who was a dynamo that if Peter could keep up with, would be an incredible addition to the gallery. Goulds chose the latter, Lisa Jann, who has been with the gallery for 20 years and is now its managing director.
Over the course of its 50 year history, LA Louver has presented many memorable exhibitions and each of the trio has their favorites. For each, the gallery is a stage set, its proportions rationalized by Goulds. to offer up a variety of exhibition spaces that optimize seeing what's on display.
Among the early shows that Davis recalls as 'one of the most powerful we've done,' was a 1996 installation by Doris Salcedo, Atrabiliarios, her first on the West Coast, described in the LA Louver press release as 'shoes have been collected in a line along the wall and have been covered with a translucent layer of cow's bladder which has been sewn onto the wall.' At first, they endeavored to sell the pairs of shoes individually. Then they realized, that 'If they could find one buyer for the whole thing, that's the way to do it.' Davis found a home for the work at a museum. Which Goulds cited as 'a great piece of art dealing.'
Alison Saar, Little Big Sister, 2023-24, Cast stainless steel with patina, Collection of the Joselyn.
Davis also treasures her relationship with artists over the years such as with Deborah Butterfield and Allison Saar. Davis has worked with Saar for close to 20 years, which, she says, 'has allowed me to not only expand what she's doing, but curate a show that traveled to 12 museums and played a role in finding all those venues… I've worked with Jordan Schnitzer extensively and putting together a book that he published.' Davis adds that 'it's been a very rewarding relationship with her and her family, and all of that has been really great.'
East, whose own curatorial debut, the 2023 summer 'Flower Show' exhibition is among my personal favorites, listed a few of hers that included: 'Rebecca Campbell 'Poltergeist' in 2009; Alice Neel in 2010; Frederick Hammersley in 2017; David Hockney always…And the energy of our Rogue Wave exhibitions.' In 2001, Goulds and Pate began a program, Rogue Wave, to have solo and group exhibitions of Southern California's diverse, emerging and mid-career artists.
LA Louver has always marched to the beat of its own drummer. 'If you chase fashion,' Goulds said, 'You're finished.' He added that, 'For a long time through the nineties, we were probably better known in Europe than we were known here.'
Gajin Fujita, Angel's Eye View, 2024, Spray paint, 23.75K gold leaf, 12K white gold leaf and paint markers on five wood panels, 72 x 110 in., Private collection.
There is a magic to LA Louver that is the reason artists such as David Hockney, Alison Saar, Gajin Fujita, and the estates of Ed and Nancy Kienholz and R. B. Kitaj, continue to call the gallery home. To an outsider, such as myself, each of the three has their persona: Peter radiates bonhomie, Kimberly seems formidable, and Elizabeth appears serious and studious. In truth, they are all that as well as its opposite: Peter knows exactly what he is doing, Kimberly is warm and nurturing to artists and friends, and Elizabeth has a great sense of humor and, from her perch on the main floor knows every person who comes to the gallery.
'We do not operate on a commission structure,' East told me. 'So we don't have a kind of classic sales competitive environment, which some galleries do have. And also, we have engagement directly with artists as well as clients… And I personally love that.'
'One of the things that ties us all together is that we share an aesthetic of liking the same artists,' Davis said, 'which is amazing, actually.'
'I've never allowed myself the luxury, honestly, of self-praise or congratulatory moments,' Goulds told me, '[But] I have to say now, as I look back, first of all, that the decision to stay in Los Angeles was the very best thing I ever decided… We have been a part of this community through the largest period of its cultural growth... To watch all that, and to somehow, [in] some small measure to have contributed to that, gives me great joy.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Android Authority
36 minutes ago
- Android Authority
Great tablet deals from Apple and Amazon!
Are you thinking of getting a tablet that is good but won't break the bank? My two favorite picks in the budget tier category are the Apple iPad A16 and the Amazon Fire Max 11. Both are on sale today, making them even more affordable! Get the Apple iPad A16 for $299 ($50 off) Get the Amazon Fire Max 11 for $174.99 ($55 off) These offers both come from Amazon. The Apple iPad A16 is available in four colors: Blue, Pink, Silver, and Yellow. All color versions are discounted equally. Apple iPad A16 If you want something more capable and much more mainstream, the Apple iPad A16 strikes the perfect balance. It's more than good enough for most users, but the price stays very reasonable. I can confidently say it offers the best value in the world of tablets. While this is technically Apple's 'lower-end tablet,' you wouldn't assume this if you didn't know its price. It looks, feels, and performs pretty much like a higher-end pad, offering an outstanding experience. I would recommend this one at full price, so the $50 discount is a really tasty cherry on top. As the name implies, this iPad has an upgraded Apple A16 chipset. It also features 4GB of RAM. While that may not sound too exciting, I can tell you it will be more than good enough for most apps and games. I use the 10th-generation iPad and have yet to see it slow down, so this one should do even better! The only downside here is that this iPad won't get Apple Intelligence. That requires an Apple A17 Pro chipset. The design is nearly identical to that of the previous generation iPad. It even has the same 9.79 x 7.07 x 0.28in dimensions, as well as an identical 1.05lbs weight! Honestly, you'll have a hard time telling them apart side to side. Another nice benefit is that the Apple iPad A16 gets twice the base storage at 128GB, as opposed to 64GB on the previous version. That means you'll be able to store twice as many apps, files, photos, and more. This is great news because we know many of you believe 64GB is too little for today's standards. The display is nearly the same, but there is technically an ever-so-slight upgrade here. This iPad display measures in at 11 inches, instead of the 10.9-inch screen in the Apple iPad 10th Generation. That said, the 0.1-inch difference is really negligible. Regardless, the definition is 2,360 x 1,640, so it's pretty sharp. If you're into hand-written notes or drawing, the Apple iPad A16 also supports both the Apple Pencil USB-C and the Apple Pencil First Generation. Battery life is pretty nice, too, at about 10 hours per charge. Amazon Fire Max 11 Amazon Fire Max 11 Amazon Fire Max 11 Competing with the big dogs in the tablet market Amazon has been in the tablet game for years, but the Fire Max 11 might be their first tablet to truly compete in the 11-inch tablet segment. A high-resolution display is backed by big battery life and enough storage for all of your apps and games. See price at Amazon Save $55.00 Limited Time Deal! The Apple iPad A16 is excellent, but it isn't for everyone. Maybe you want to spend even less, if the tablet is for a kid, or a very casual user. If I were to recommend a cheaper tablet, I would say go for the Amazon Fire Max 11. It's the best tablet Amazon has to offer, and you can currently get it for just $174.99. The Amazon Fire Max 11 is great if you want something to watch movies, do some general browsing, or even play some games! IT has a large 11-inch screen, and the resolution is actually quite nice at 2,000 x 1,200. The stereo speakers are also pretty decent. Amazon That said, most of the tablet is more modest. It has a MediaTek MT8188J octa-core processor and 4GB of RAM. Nothing impressive, but it can handle casual tasks just fine. Despite its much lower price, it still has some cool features, like a fingerprint reader and a 14-hour battery life. If you want to improve the experience, you can even get an optional keyboard case and a stylus. This turns it into a bit of a powerhouse for anyone who wants to work on documents, browse the web, draft emails, take notes, or even draw. Are you getting one of these? Make sure to act quickly! We don't know how long these offers will stick around. And if you need some alternatives, here is our list of the best Android tablets.


Fast Company
39 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Business leaders must prioritize employee well-being
As I've been watching deep cuts unfold across the federal government and nonprofit sectors, I can't help but feel deeply sad for the work that is at risk or has been cancelled, the knowledge that will be lost, and for the people who did the work. I know firsthand what it means to be on both sides of the equation. I've been the leader tasked with executing layoffs, and I've also been the one laid off. Both experiences gutted me. They made me reflect on what leadership really means and what we should be measuring when we define success. The problem is that we often gauge success by revenue, efficiency, and productivity while completely overlooking a key factor:the well-being of the people doing the work. A 2024 Gallup report revealed that only 21% of employees strongly agree that their organization cares about their overall well-being. While I agree that there are inefficiencies in every bureaucracy and organization, leaders have a responsibility to balance financial performance with other measures of success. At Catapult Design, a social impact design firm, we've made well-being a non-negotiable metric—on equal footing with financial performance and creative excellence. Because if an organization's work is meant to improve lives—whether in social innovation, government services, or private enterprise—how can we ignore what's happening inside our own walls? Well-being is the missing metric I worked at one consultancy that had indicators for measuring the quality of work and the financial health of the company. I thought that was amazing. It really kept the company on track because both were reported quarterly. The work was consistently good by many measures, and the company was very healthy from a financial perspective. When I left there to take a CEO position, I suggested to my new board that we measure the quality of our work and financial health but also add another indicator around team well-being. At first, this was around ensuring that we had the best benefits that a small business could offer. We were thoughtful around vacation time, sick leave, training days, and professional and personal stipends. But over time, we realized that well-being isn't just about benefits or hours worked—it's about how people experience their work. We started paying closer attention to overwork—not as the cause of burnout, but as an early signal. Research shows that burnout is less about working too many hours and more about things like lack of clarity, autonomy, or alignment with values. Still, sustained overwork often points to deeper systemic issues. We use it as a 'check engine' light of the well-being of the team. That's why we've built a practice that if anyone is consistently working more than 45 hours a week, they message me directly. Then we talk about why. Is it a broken process? Poorly scoped projects? Is someone quietly drowning? We bring those issues to the board and leadership meetings, treating them as seriously as financial projections. As we've deepened our approach to well-being, we've also learned it's shaped just as much by leadership behavior as by organizational policy. A few months ago, my team asked to formally review me. Their feedback was honest, thoughtful, and generous. One thing they shared was that when something seems obvious to me, I tend to move forward without discussion. But what's clear to me isn't always clear to others—and they wanted more transparency and space for shared decision making. That feedback was a gift. One small but meaningful change I made was to begin sharing my weekly board emails with the entire team. It's helped remove ambiguity and reduce stress about what's happening behind the scenes. We all know at Catapult Design that we are not immune to what is happening in the U.S. government right now. While I'm happy to see efforts for efficiency in financial performance, I worry about what's being lost in the process. As budgets shrink and priorities shift, how will the quality of government services be measured? And what happens to the well-being of those providing—and relying on—those services if we fail to track what really matters? 4 ways to prioritize employee well-being Prioritizing well-being isn't just a leadership philosophy; it's a strategic decision. We're always refining what this looks like, but here's how organizations can make it real: Make well-being a key performance indicator. Measure engagement, workload balance, and psychological safety as rigorously as revenue. Normalize feedback loops. If leaders aren't being reviewed by their teams, they're missing critical data about what's working (and what's not). Recalibrate workloads. If overwork is the norm, the problem isn't employees—it's leadership. Project scoping must align with reality, not just ambition. Champion transparency. When teams understand the organization's financial health and strategic direction, they feel more invested—and less anxious. Well-being matters more than ever We're in a moment of reckoning. Layoffs are making headlines across industries—from tech to media to government—and many organizations are under pressure to do more with less. It's not surprising that burnout and questions about leadership are surfacing more often in the process. In a world where talent is mobile and exhaustion is widespread, the best organizations won't just be those that survive financially—they'll be the ones that create workplaces where people want to stay, grow, and thrive. I've learned the hard way that leadership isn't about having all the answers. But I do wonder, if we don't prioritize the people who make the work possible, will anything else matter.


CNN
43 minutes ago
- CNN
Analysis: How Trump's DOGE cuts package could put GOP in a bind
DOGE isn't dead, both President Donald Trump and Elon Musk assured last week as Musk said goodbye to the Trump administration. But the already dicey effort Musk led could soon become even more so. That's because the White House is now asking Congress to sign off on some of the cuts that the Department of Government Efficiency sought to make unilaterally. And the first set of cuts the White House has sent over to Capitol Hill epitomizes the dilemmas that lay ahead for Republicans. The dollar amount – $9.4 billion – is a tiny fraction of the federal budget, and the administration appears to be targeting low-hanging political fruit. But polling suggests the votes could still be tough ones. The idea is to make the cuts more permanent by having Congress pass what's known as a 'rescissions' package. This would codify the DOGE cuts into law, so that they can't be reversed by the next administration or overturned by the courts. Musk and fiscal conservatives have pushed for this, aiming to put a more lasting stamp of approval on cuts that have failed to live up to Musk's billing and could ultimately prove to be even less than meets the eye. The effort is also important as many of the same Trump allies have balked at the price tag of the president's 'Big Beautiful Bill' and want evidence that the administration is serious about spending cuts. Speaker Mike Johnson said Tuesday afternoon that the House had received the White House's request and vowed to put it on the floor for a vote 'as quickly as possible.' A lot will depend on how it's received and whether it passes. Such legislation needs only a majority of both chambers, meaning Republicans have the votes if they keep their side in line. 'We are intending to be strategic, work with Congress, see what they're willing to do, and if they pass this, we'll send up many more,' Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought told Fox News on Tuesday. But doing that is no small task. Spending cuts are often popular in theory but much less so in practice, when you get into specific things that will be taken away. Musk's and DOGE's efforts quickly fell out of favor with the American public, with polls showing both have become rather unpopular and Musk's efforts to impact a high-profile state Supreme Court election in Wisconsin falling flat. It's not difficult to see this legislative effort struggling and Trump – who has always talked much more about cutting spending than actually doing it – getting cold feet. Let's take a look at what's in the first rescissions package, and how it could test Republicans politically. The White House is aiming to make good on a long-standing conservative push to end federal funding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds NPR and PBS. This accounts for $1.1 billion of the rescissions package, according to Johnson's office Tuesday. But just because conservatives have been pushing this for a long time doesn't mean it's popular. A March Pew Research Center poll showed Americans supported continuing the funding rather than ending it, 43% to 24%. (About one-third of Americans offered no opinion.) Republicans and Republican-leaning voters were more in favor of the cuts, but even there it didn't seem to be a huge priority. While 44% wanted to end the funding, 19% – 1 in 5 – wanted to continue it. And past polling suggests this could be even more unpopular than those numbers suggest, depending on how the cut is sold. A 2017 Quinnipiac University poll, for instance, asked about the prospect of eliminating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Americans back then said it was a 'bad idea,' 70% to 25%. Getting 7 in 10 Americans to align on any given issue is difficult, but this one did the trick. This could also be a hurdle for some key Republican votes in the Senate and the closely divided House. Some Republicans from rural areas could worry this would decimate key news and educational programming in their areas. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, for instance, wrote an op-ed last month hailing public broadcasting and warning the administration against cuts. She called it an 'invaluable resource that saves lives in Alaska.' She noted some local stations in Alaska rely on the funding to operate – for as much as 30% to 70% of their budgets – at relatively low cost to taxpayers. Indeed, as CNN's Brian Stelter noted in April, the annual budget of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is about $535 million, or $1.60 per taxpayer. That makes it a tiny drop in the bucket when it comes to budget-cutting – but one the people who rely on the programming could quickly notice, particularly if it suddenly disappears. The Pew survey found about 1 in 5 American adults say they regularly get news from both NPR and PBS. It's a group that skews toward Democratic-leaning Americans, but still includes about 1 in 10 Republican-leaning ones. The lion's share of the money in the first rescissions package ($8.3 billion, according to Johnson's office) deals with what it calls 'wasteful foreign aid spending.' That gets to a key target of Musk and DOGE: the US Agency for International Development (USAID). And Republicans – including former USAID cheerleaders like Secretary of State Marco Rubio – have largely been in lockstep against this funding. This one is a little more complicated, politically. One the one hand, Americans generally think we send too much money overseas. A February KFF poll showed 58% of Americans said the United States spends 'too much' on foreign aid. But people also vastly over-estimate the amount of money involved. The same poll showed the average person estimated foreign aid was 26% of the budget; the actual number is about 1%. When the pollster told respondents about the actual figure, the percentage who said the government spends 'too much' dropped from 58% all the way down to 34%. Among Republicans – the group most critical of foreign aid – it dropped from 81% to 50%. We've also seen that Americans generally don't like the idea of ending most or all foreign aid. A March Pew poll showed Americans opposed ending 'most' USAID programs, 45% to 35%. The gap was similar in a March Reuters/Ipsos poll that asked about shuttering USAID. And a February CNN poll conducted by SSRS showed Americans said Trump shutting down entire government agencies like USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was a 'bad thing,' 53% to 28%. The rescissions package doesn't seem to go that far. Based on what OMB teased on social media Tuesday, it instead focuses on programs that might sound ridiculous to some. The administration has often misstated what these programs actually do, but many of them are obscure-sounding. They involve things like cultural programs in foreign countries and often things like DEI, gender equity and LGBTQ issues. And there, the administration could be on more solid ground. A Pew survey, for instance, showed that just 34% of Americans support foreign aid for 'art and cultural activities.' But some of the measures could test public support. For instance, the administration said it's requesting a rescission for $135 million in funding to the World Health Organization, which polls suggest is relatively popular. According to OMB, that includes money for circumcision, vasectomies and condoms in the African country of Zambia – part of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) program. PEPFAR is popular. And the Pew survey showed 83% of Americans support using foreign aid for 'providing medicine and medical supplies to developing countries.' Ultimately, the GOP's ability to sell these cuts – and feel confident voting for them – will depend in large part on whether Americans just see them broadly as cuts to obscure foreign aid programs, or if they view them as relatively modest investments in important programs. The real drama could come if the White House asks for more significant USAID cuts on programs beyond the ones they've cited in their talking points – programs that account for a much larger chunk of that 1%. The administration has struggled, for instance, to account for its changes to PEPFAR, which reports indicate have jeopardized the war against AIDS in Africa. The administration seems to view these initial rescissions cuts as the most politically palatable. But even they could test lawmakers' tolerance for signing off on DOGE's work – and could determine whether Republicans in Washington will press forward in actually voting on cuts.