House votes to reclaim $9.4B and cut NPR, PBS spending
June 12 (UPI) -- The House of Representatives narrowly approved axing $8.3 billion in funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development and another $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting on Thursday.
The House voted 2014-2012 to approve the rescissions package of bills and send them to the Senate, which could pass the measures with a simple majority.
The measures were passed after two House Republicans switched their votes after initially opposing their passage.
Reps. Don Bacon of Nebraska and Nick LaLota of New York opposed the rescission bills but voted for the measure with strong encouragement from House GOP leadership.
Four other GOP House members, Nicole Malliotakis of New York, Mark Amodei of Nevada, Mike Turner of Ohio and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania voted with 208 House Democrats to oppose the rescission package.
Four Democrats and two Republican House members did not vote on the rescission package.
The formerly Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency recommended the rescissions after reviewing USAID, PBS and NPR spending.
"I want to thank DOGE for their heroic and patriotic efforts," House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters afterward.
"What we're trying to do is ensure that every dollar spent by the federal government is used efficiently and effectively," Johnson said.
Johnson conferred with LaLota and Bacon on the House floor while the vote was still open, but passage looked doubtful until they changed their votes.
LaLota said the conversation between him and Johnson involved state and local tax cuts in New York that are part of the "one big beautiful bill" that Trump wants passed to fund the federal government for the 2026 fiscal year.
"I had some conversations with the speaker that raised my level of confidence that will put this and future issues in the right trajectory," LaLota told reporters afterward.
Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., also joined Johnson and LaLota for the floor conversation and then voted in favor of the measure.
Bacon had announced on Monday that he wouldn't support the rescission package "if it guts an AIDS relief program," namely the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, which was started by former President George W. Bush.
President Donald Trump posted to Truth Social in April that "Republicans must defund and totally disassociate themselves from NPR and PBS," further calling the stations "radical-left monsters."
Johnson has called the request an opportunity to cancel "wasteful spending" that would "ensure greater accountability in government going forward."
"There is no reason for any media organization to be singled out to receive federal funds, especially those who appear to have so little regard for the truth," Johnson previously said.
As for USAID, Johnson said DOGE "went after USAID first for their review, their audits," because it allegedly "opposed the loudest of this accountability measure," which "put the scrutiny targets on their own backs."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., accused House Republicans of "debating legislation that targets Elmo and Big Bird and Daniel Tiger and Sesame Street" instead of legislation that could help the nation and its economy during floor debate on Thursday.
Congress has the ability to cancel funds that the federal government had previously appropriated but hasn't spent under the rescissions process.
The president can temporarily defer or withhold such funds, but only with the approval of Congress.
Republicans currently hold a seven-seat majority in the House. In the case of the Senate, where there are 53 Republicans among its 100 seats, rescission bills only require a simple majority.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
32 minutes ago
Lawsuit centers on power struggle over elections in Arizona's most populous county
PHOENIX -- The top elections official in one of the nation's most pivotal swing counties is suing the Maricopa County governing board over allegations that it's attempting to gain more control over how elections are administered. County Recorder Justin Heap filed a lawsuit Thursday in state court with the backing of America First Legal, a conservative public interest group founded by Stephen Miller, who is now the White House deputy chief of staff. Heap, a former GOP state lawmaker who has questioned election administration in Arizona's most populous county, has been at odds with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors for months over an agreement that would divide election operations between the two offices. After taking office in January, Heap terminated a previous agreement that was reached between his predecessor and the board. He claimed in his lawsuit it would have restrained his power to run elections by reducing funding and IT resources for the recorder's office. Last year's agreement also gave the board authority over early ballot processing, which drew criticism from Heap in his lawsuit. Heap is asking the court to undo what the lawsuit calls 'unlawful' actions by the board and to issue an order requiring the board to fund expenses he deems necessary. 'Despite their repeated misinformation and gaslighting of the public on these issues, defending the civil right to free, fair and honest elections for every Maricopa County voter isn't simply my job as county recorder, it's the right thing to do and a mission I'm fully committed to achieving,' Heap said in a statement Thursday. The board's chair and vice chair have called the legal challenge frivolous, saying Heap is wasting taxpayer money by going to court. Negotiations between the offices have been ongoing since the beginning of the year, and the board said in a statement that it appeared things were going well after a meeting in April. It was only weeks later, the board said, that Heap came back with what he called a final offer that included dozens of changes. Heap claims in the lawsuit that the board rejected his proposed agreement in late May. In a statement, America First Legal says the board separately voted on a tentative budget that shifts Heap's key duties and underfunds the recorder's office. 'From day one, Recorder Heap has been making promises that the law doesn't allow him to keep," Board Chairman Thomas Galvin said. "Arizona election statutes delineate election administration between county boards of supervisors and recorders to ensure there are checks and balances, and Recorder Heap clearly doesn't understand the responsibilities of his position.' Following President Donald Trump's 2020 loss, Maricopa County became an epicenter for election conspiracy theories. Heap has stopped short of saying the 2020 and 2022 elections were stolen, but he has said the state's practices for handling early ballots are insecure and has questioned how ballots are transported, handled and stored after they are submitted. Last year, Heap proposed an unsuccessful bill to remove Arizona from a multistate effort to maintain voter lists. Heap's predecessor, Stephen Richer, was rebuked in some GOP circles for defending the legitimacy of the 2020 and 2022 elections, in which Democrats including former President Joe Biden and Gov. Katie Hobbs won by razor-thin margins. Trump won Arizona in 2024, along with the other battleground states.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Takeaways from AP's investigation of US death benefits program for public safety officers
A federal program that provides benefits to families of police officers and firefighters who die and become disabled on duty is rapidly growing while facing criticism for increasing delays in deciding claims. Congress created the Public Safety Officers' Benefits program in 1976 to guarantee that the spouses and children of officers who put their lives on the line would receive financial support. But repeated expansions in eligibility approved by Congress, including three passed in the last five years, have made the program more popular and complex to administer. Critics say the program fails some families by taking too long to grant or deny benefits and making inconsistent rulings. An Associated Press analysis found that hundreds of families are waiting years to learn whether they qualify for payments, and more are ultimately being denied. For one widow, payment came just as she'd given up hope New Jersey widow Sharline Volcy learned this month that she'd been awarded the benefits, more than 3 1/2 years after her husband, Ronald Donat, died while training at the Gwinnett County Police Academy in Georgia. Volcy said she was grateful for the aid, which will provide some financial security and help pay for her two daughters to go to college. But she said the long wait was stressful, when she was told time and again the claim remained under review and ultimately saw her inquiries ignored. 'They told me they didn't know how long it would take because they don't have a deadline. That's the hardest thing to hear,' she said. 'I felt defeated.' She said lawyers didn't want to take the case, and a plea for help to her congressperson went nowhere. She said she'd given up hope and was lucky she had a job as an airport gate agent in the meantime. The benefits program isn't meeting its timeframe goal Volcy's experience isn't unique, and some cases take longer. As of late April, more than 120 claims by surviving relatives or disabled first responders have been awaiting initial determinations or rulings on their appeals for more than five years, according AP's findings. About a dozen have waited over a decade for an answer. The program has a goal of making determinations within one year but has not taken steps to track its progress, according to a recent Government Accountability Office report. But roughly three in 10 cases have not met that timeframe in recent years. As of late late April, 900 claims had been pending longer than one year. That includes claims from nearly every state. Republican lawmakers have introduced a bill to require the program to make determinations within 270 days. The denial rate for benefits is up, too Over the last year, the denial rate has increased, with roughly one in three death and disability claims getting rejected. Applicants can appeal to a hearing officer and then the director if they choose, but that isn't common. Many say they can't afford attorneys or want to get on with their lives. Justice Department officials, who oversee the program, say they're making complicated decisions about whether cases meet legal criteria. 'Death and disability claims involving complex medical and causation issues, voluminous evidence and conflicting medical opinions, take longer to determine, as do claims in various stages of appeal,' they said in a statement. Claims have doubled in recent years The program started as a simple $50,000 payout for the families of officers who were fatally shot on duty or died as a result of other violence or dangers. But Congress expanded the program in 1990 to cover some first responders who were disabled on duty, which made some determinations harder to reach. A 1998 law added educational benefits for the spouses and children of those deceased and disabled officers. Since 2020, Congress has passed three laws making many other types of deaths and disabilities eligible, including deaths related to COVID-19, deaths and injuries of those working rescue and cleanup operations after the September 2001 attacks, and responders who committed suicide under certain circumstances. Annual claims have more than doubled in the last five years, from 500 in 2019 to roughly 1,200 today. Critics say a key partnership creates a conflict of interest While many applicants have criticized the increasing delays, the leading group that represents the relatives of officers who die on duty has been silent. Critics say that's because the group, Concerns of Police Survivors, has a financial incentive not to criticize the program, which has awarded it tens of millions of dollars in grant funding in recent decades. The Missouri-based nonprofit recently received a new $6 million grant from the program to for its work with deceased officers' relatives, including counseling, hosting memorial events, educating agencies about the program and assisting with claims. The group's founder and retired executive director, Suzie Sawyer, said she was warned many years ago that fighting too hard for claimants could jeopardize its grant funding. But current spokesperson Sara Slone said advocacy isn't the group's mission and that it works 'hand in hand' with PSOB to assist applicants and provide education about benefits. One widow's fight has been remarkable, supporters say Lisa Afolayan's husband died after a training exercise at the Border Patrol academy more than 16 years ago, but she's still fighting the program for benefits. An autopsy found that Nate Afolayan died from heat illness after completing a 1.5-mile test run in 88 degree heat, at a high altitude in the New Mexico desert. The program had awarded benefits to families after similar training deaths, dating back to an officer who died at an academy in 1988. But its independent investigation blamed Nate's death on sickle cell trait, a genetic condition that's usually benign but has been linked to rare exertion-related deaths in police, military and sports training. The program denied Lisa's claim and her subsequent appeals, arguing the death wasn't the result of heat along and didn't qualify. The program stood by its denial in 2024, even after a federal appeals court said it may have failed to adequately consider the weather's role and violated a law barring discrimination on the basis of genetic information.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Doug Ford returning to U.S. to fight Donald Trump's tariffs
Premier Doug Ford and his counterparts from the Atlantic provinces are headed stateside to promote trade with New England governors. Ford, who quietly met with Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp last week at Queen's Park, has been stepping up the lobbying of U.S. leaders against President Donald Trump's tariffs on Canadian goods. 'You can keep tariffing everything, but it's hurting the American people,' the premier told a Toronto business conference last Monday. That's a reference to the fact that U.S. companies importing products from Canada are already passing along their higher costs to consumers. Ford also noted Ontario alone does $500 billion in annual two-way trade with the U.S., and the province is the largest trading partner with 17 of America's 50 states. 'I've had an opportunity to speak to many governors and senators and congresspeople — Republicans or Democrats … (and) every single person I speak to says we can't pick a fight with everyone in the world — and especially you can't pick a fight with your number-one customer,' he said. 'We need to move on.' Along with another wave of appearances on American cable news shows to underscore the importance of trade with Canada, the premier is moving to further strengthen ties with state governors. To that end, Ford, Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston, New Brunswick Premier Susan Holt, Newfoundland and Labrador Premier John Hogan and Prince Edward Island Premier Rob Lantz will be in Boston on Monday. The premiers will be meeting with Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey, Maine Gov. Janet Mills, Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee, Vermont Gov. Phil Scott and Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont. During last winter's provincial election campaign, which the governing Progressive Conservatives successfully framed as a referendum on which party could best deal with Trump, Ford twice visited Washington, D.C., to lobby U.S. lawmakers.
