US lawmakers approves Musk's $9 billion budget cut; NPR, PBS, USAID and more to be affected
US lawmakers on Thursday approved a White House request to claw back $9.4 billion from funding already allocated by Congress in a victory for President Donald Trump as he pushes to lock in spending cuts spearheaded by tech billionaire Elon Musk.
The vote in the Republican-led US House of Representatives was seen as the first test of how easily Congress could usher into law savings sought by Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) -- just days after his acrimonious exit from the government.
Also Read: Donald Trump accepts Elon Musk's apology: 'Very nice that he did that'
But the saved funds -- targeting public broadcasting and foreign aid -- were unpopular in some sections of both parties, and Republicans in the House of Representatives shoehorned the bill through a razor-thin 214-212 vote.
"Under President Trump's leadership, your taxpayer dollars are no longer being wasted," House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a statement.
"Instead, they are being directed toward priorities that truly benefit the American people."
Also Read: Elon Musk expresses 'regret' over last week's X posts on Donald Trump after feud: 'Went too far'
Legislation to grab back money already approved by Congress -- known as a "rescissions package" -- is extremely rare and no such measure had passed in decades.
The vote was the first in what Johnson has touted as a potential series of packages codifying the cuts made by DOGE.
Musk was tasked by Trump with leading the task force after spending $290 million helping the Republican get elected.
Also Read: '…dangerous place': Donald Trump as US to pull some personnel from Middle East amid tensions with Iran
The SpaceX boss boasted that he would be able to save $2 trillion in federal spending -- but left the White House under a cloud earlier this month as he feuded with Trump over deficits and spending.
DOGE acknowledges that it has saved taxpayers just $180 billion -- and fact checkers even see that claim as dubious, given previous inaccuracies in its accounting.
The recissions package slashes $8.3 billion in foreign aid, with much of that approved for humanitarian organization USAID, one of DOGE's first targets.
The text also eliminates $400 million in funding allocated to health programs including the lifesaving PEPFAR global AIDS program, created by then-president George W. Bush.
The package also targets $1.1 billion to be taken back from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which helps fund National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), as well as more than 1,500 local radio and television stations.
Conservatives often accuse PBS and NPR of bias, and Trump signed an executive order in May to cease federal funding for both networks.
"For decades, Republicans have promised to cut NPR, but have never done it, until now," Trump said on Truth Social as the vote got underway.
"NPR and PBS are a Radical Left Disaster, and 1000% against the Republican Party!"
Democrat Dan Goldman and Republican Mark Amodei, co-chairs of the congressional public broadcasting caucus, said cutting the funding will not meaningfully reduce the deficit, but instead dismantle "a trusted source of information for millions of Americans."
The package now moves to the Republican-led Senate, where it needs the support of only a simple majority -- 51 members -- rather than the 60 votes usually required.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump sparks outrage with rambling Russia remarks, critics say he's showing signs of cognitive decline
Donald Trump's mental health is questioned again after he gave a confusing defense of Russia. Trump appeared to wrongly say that Vladimir Putin fought for Russia in World War II, even though Putin was born 7 years after the war ended. People accuse Trump of " cognitive collapse " because of his strange remarks about Russia and Putin's role in WWII, as per reports. Trump said he talked with French President Emmanuel Macron about WWII commemorations before making his confusing speech about Putin. Trump said, "I happened to speak to President Putin at the time. Now in all fairness to him, he lost 51 million people and he did fight." Trump made a historical mistake because Putin was born in 1952, and World War II ended in 1945, so he couldn't have fought in it. Trump said, "It's kind of interesting, he fought with us in WWII and everyone hates him, but Germany and Japan are fine. One day someone will explain that. I like Germany and Japan too," as reported by the Irish Star. Trump and wrong facts Trump said Putin doesn't understand why people dislike Russia, even though they were allies in WWII and lost many lives. But reports say Trump didn't seem to know it was the Soviet Union, not just Russia, that fought in the war. The Soviet Union had 15 countries, like Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. The modern Russian Federation was created only in 1991 after the Soviet Union broke up. Trump also gave wrong numbers. Live Events According to the Irish Star, the National WWII Museum says the Soviet Union lost around 24 million people in WWII, not 51 million as Trump claimed. Many people online made fun of Trump's comments. One person wrote, "Someone should tell him that Russia now attacks democracies, while Germany and Japan are peaceful friends." Another said, "There was no Russia during WW2." A third questioned, "Putin fought WWII? How old is he then?" Someone else said Trump's brain 'didn't develop normally' and called him 'very ignorant,' as reported by the Irish Star. Another person even said Trump should be arrested for treason, writing, 'Putin was born in 1952... Being friendly with a war criminal isn't foreign policy, it's betrayal.' Critics said Trump's remarks showed signs of "cognitive collapse" and questioned his ability to lead, "Age limits for the presidency FFS. One user wrote, "This old clown mumbling about WW2 is not good." Another said, "Dementia Donnie is rambling again." Someone else called the comments "delusional" and said the room went completely silent, according to the report by Irish Star. FAQs Q1. What's the buzz about Trump and Putin in WWII? Because Trump wrongly said Putin fought in World War II, even though he was born after the war ended. Q2. What is the "cognitive collapse" people mention about Trump? It means people think Trump's thinking and memory may be getting worse due to his confusing comments.
NDTV
36 minutes ago
- NDTV
Trump May Try To Alter AUKUS Deal, But Here's Why He Won't Sink It
The Pentagon has announced it will review the massive AUKUS agreement between the United States, United Kingdom and Australia to ensure it's aligned with US President Donald Trump's 'America first' agenda. The US undersecretary of defence for policy, Elbridge Colby, is reportedly going to oversee the review. The announcement has raised concern in Australia, but every government is entitled to review policies that their predecessors have made to consider whether or not there's a particular purpose. The UK has launched a parliamentary inquiry into AUKUS too, so it's not actually unreasonable for the US to do the same. There's a degree of nervousness in Australia as to what the implications are because Australia understandably has the biggest stake in this. But we need to consider what Colby has articulated in the past. In his book, The Strategy of Denial: American Defence in the Nature of Great Power Conflict, he made the case the US could 'prepare to win a war with China it cannot afford to lose – in order to deter it from happening'. So, with a deterrent mindset, he sees the need for the US to muscle up militarily. He's spoken about the alliance with Australia in very positive terms on a couple of occasions. And he has called himself an ' AUKUS agnostic ', though he has expressed deep concern about the ability of the submarine industrial base in the US to manufacture the ships quickly enough. And that leads to the fear the US Navy would not have enough submarines for itself if Washington is also sending them to Australia. As part of the deal, Australia would eventually be able to contribute to accelerating the production line. That involves Australian companies contributing to the manufacture of certain widgets and components that are needed to build the subs. Australia has already made a nearly A$800 million (US$500 million) down payment on expanding the US industrial capacity as part of the deal to ensure we get some subs in a reasonable time frame. There's also been significant legislative and industrial reforms in the US, Australia and UK to help facilitate Australian defence-related industries unplug the bottleneck of submarine production. There's no question there's a need to speed up production. But we are already seeing significant signs of an uptick in the production rate, thanks in part to the Australian down payment. And it's anticipated the rate will significantly increase in the next 12–18 months. Even still, projects like this often slide in terms of timelines. Why The US Won't Spike The Deal I'm reasonably optimistic that, on balance, the Trump administration will come down on the side of proceeding with the deal. There are a few key reasons for this: 1) We're several years down the track already. 2) We have more than 100 Australian sailors already operating in the US system. 3) Industrially, we're on the cusp of making a significant additional contribution to the US submarine production line. And finally, most people don't fully appreciate that the submarine base just outside Perth is an incredibly consequential piece of real estate for US security calculations. Colby has made very clear the US needs to muscle up to push back and deter China's potential aggression in the region. In that equation, submarines are crucial, as is a substantial submarine base in the Indian Ocean. China is acutely mindful of what we call the ' Malacca dilemma '. Overwhelmingly, China's trade of goods and fossil fuels comes through the Malacca Strait between Malaysia and Indonesia's island of Sumatra. The Chinese know this supply line could be disrupted in a war. And the submarines operating out of Perth contribute to this fear. This is a crucial deterrent effect the US and its allies have been seeking to maintain. And it has largely endured. Given nobody can predict the future, we all want to prevent a war over Taiwan and we all want to maintain the status quo. As such, the considered view has been that Australia will continue to support the US to bolster its deterrent effect to prevent such a scenario. Could Trump Be Angling For A Deal? As part of the US review of the deal, we could see talk of a potential slowdown in the delivery rate of the submarines. The Trump administration could also put additional pressure on Australia to deliver more for the US. This includes the amount Australia spends on defence, a subject of considerable debate in Canberra. Taking Australia's overall interests into account, the Albanese government may well decide increasing defence spending is an appropriate thing to do. There's a delicate dance to be had here between the Trump administration, the Australian government, and in particular, their respective defence departments, about how to achieve the most effective outcome. It's highly likely whatever decision the US government makes will be portrayed as the Trump administration 'doing a deal'. In the grand scheme of things, that's not a bad thing. This is what countries do. We talk a lot about the Trump administration's transactional approach to international relations. But it's actually not that different to previous US administrations with which Canberra has had to deal. So I'm reasonably sanguine about the AUKUS review and any possible negotiations over it. I believe the Trump administration will come to the conclusion it does not want to spike the Australia relationship. Australia has been on the US side since federation. Given this, the US government will likely make sure this deal goes ahead. The Trump administration may try to squeeze more concessions out of Australia as part of 'the art of the deal', but it won't sink the pact. However, many people will undoubtedly say this is the moment Australia should break with AUKUS. But then what? What would Australia do instead to ensure its security in this world of heightened great power competition in which Australia's interests are increasingly challenged? Walking away now would leave Australia more vulnerable than ever. I think that would be a great mistake. (Author: , Professor, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University) (Disclosure Statement: From 2015 to 2017 John Blaxland received funding from the US Department of Defense Minerva Research Initiative (subsequently disbanded by the Trump administration). This was used to write a book (with Greg Raymond) entitled "The US Thai Alliance and Asian International Relations" (Routledge, 2021). John currently is a fulltime employee of the ANU.)
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Cong legislators' meeting on June 15 to discuss seats
Patna: Congress has called a meeting of its legislators on June 15 in Patna to discuss its future course of action after the opposition coordination committee meeting on Thursday in which all the INDI Alliance partners have been asked to submit their lists of seats they wanted to contest in the coming assembly elections to RJD leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav , who is the coordination committee chairman. All the Congress MLAs will be present in this meeting to be attended by AICC in charge of Bihar, Krishna Allavaru, state party president Rajesh Kumar and other senior leaders. Sources said the Congress legislators will be given responsibilities on the instructions of party leader Rahul Gandhi, who is making efforts to revive and strengthen the party at the grassroots level for the Bihar assembly elections due this year. The meeting assumes significance in the backdrop of the bickering among the alliance partners over the number of seats being demanded by them. The Communist Party of India (CPI) reportedly complained about its ally CPI(ML) in the meeting after their leader Dipankar Bhattacharya said his party wanted 45 seats to contest. RJD, Congress, CPI, CPM, CPI(ML) and VIP are so far the INDIA bloc partners in Bihar. CPI state general secretary Ram Naresh Pandey told this reporter on Friday that the alliance partners had agreed not to make any statements which could create confusion. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 임플란트 29만원 이벤트 임플란트 더 알아보기 Undo "Every party will submit its list of seats it wants to contest," he said on way to Bennipatti to attend a party programme in Madhubani. Vikassheel Insaan Party (VIP) patron Mukesh Sahani raised the seat-sharing issue in the Thursday meeting. VIP spokesperson Dev Jyoti on Friday said the party's state committee had proposed to contest 60 seats. "But Tejashwi will take a final call," he said. The Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM), an alliance partner of RJD in the neighbouring state, has already staked its claim on 12 seats in the bordering districts. Though JMM is not a part of the INDIA bloc in Bihar so far, its spokesman Manoj Pandey on Friday said the party has strong public support in 12 Bihar constituencies. RJD spokesman Shakti Singh Yadav, however, dismissed any rift and said since there is an internal democracy in the alliance, everyone is free to express his opinion. Congress, which contested 70 seats last time and won 19, wants to keep the number intact with a few changes in constituencies. Out of the total 243 seats, RJD contested the maximum 144, Congress 70, CPI(ML) 19, CPI 6 and CPM 4 seats. The CPI(ML) had the best strike rate of winning 12 out of the 19 seats it contested. RJD won 75, Congress 19, and CPI-CPM 2 each in 2020. Follow more information on Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad here . Get real-time live updates on rescue operations and check full list of passengers onboard AI 171 .
