Trump asked Congress to claw back funding for PBS and NPR. What now?
America's two big public broadcasters, PBS and NPR, have 45 days to salvage their federal funding — starting now.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration sent Congress a long-awaited request for lawmakers to cancel more than $1 billion in federal funds earmarked for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the entity that disburses taxpayer funds to local NPR and PBS stations across the country.
The request, known as a 'rescission package,' starts a 45-day clock for Congress to either approve or ignore the proposal. Rescinding the funds only requires a simple majority, which means in this case that no Democratic votes are needed.
However, Republicans only have slim majorities in both the House and Senate, and public media executives are cautiously hopeful that they can convince some Republican moderates to ignore the White House's proposal, thereby killing it.
White House budget director Russ Vought said on Fox News Tuesday afternoon that the House will be 'putting this on the floor next week.'
Vought also warned, 'If it doesn't pass, we have to then release the funds and it has to be spent.'
The 45-day period will end on July 18. Until then, PBS and NPR officials will be lobbying lawmakers and counting votes. NPR said its lobbying efforts will start on the House side, 'where we expect the memo to be first taken up,' CEO Katherine Maher said in a statement.
'During this fight we will demonstrate our value to Congress, as we have over the last 50 years, in providing educational, enriching programs and critical services to all Americans every day for free,' PBS CEO Paula Kerger said in a separate statement.
The funds being targeted now were allocated by the Republican-controlled Congress in a bill that Trump signed into law earlier this spring but haven't been spent yet because the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is budgeted two years in advance.
Trump, tapping into long-held conservative beliefs that NPR and PBS are biased in favor of liberals, is now trying to strip away the future funding and score a political win.
Kerger said it would be a loss for the public at large. 'The proposed rescissions would have a devastating impact on PBS member stations and the essential role they play in communities,' she said, 'particularly smaller and rural stations that rely on federal funding for a larger portion of their budgets. Without PBS member stations, Americans will lose unique local programming and emergency services in times of crisis.'
The Trump White House has targeted public media on multiple fronts in recent weeks.
The president signed an executive order in early May directing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to stop funding PBS and NPR. He also tried to fire three of the corporation's board members.
The corporation has essentially ignored him, however, because it is a private nonprofit entity set up by Congress and historically insulated from presidential interference. The entity has filed suit with the hopes that a federal court will affirm its independence.
Both NPR and PBS have also filed separate lawsuits accusing the administration of violating the First Amendment.
All three cases have been assigned to Judge Randolph D. Moss.
Furthermore, the Federal Communications Commission is conducting a probe into NPR and PBS member stations, citing concerns that public media underwriting messages may be violating federal law.
But of all the attempts to target public media this year, Tuesday's proposal stands out.
'This rescission proposal is the most serious threat ever faced by public broadcasting,' Maher wrote in her statement. 'We urge Congress to act in the interest of their constituents and save public broadcasting.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
6 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Republican Gets Good Sign in New Jersey Governor's Race Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Republican New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Jack Ciattarelli received a potentially good sign about his favorability in a new poll of Garden State voters days ahead of the primary election. Newsweek has contacted Ciattarelli's and Representative Mikie Sherrill's campaigns for comment via email. Why It Matters New Jersey voters are set to head to the polls next Tuesday to pick party nominees for the gubernatorial race scheduled for November. The competitiveness of the election could hinge on which candidates prevail in the primaries, and the race has major implications for both parties. The election may indicate whether Democrats are winning back key voter groups that shifted right in the 2024 presidential race—such as young adults and Latinos—or whether Republicans can continue winning those groups even though President Donald Trump's approval has dropped since January. What To Know A new poll conducted by SurveyUSA found that Ciattarelli, who is viewed as a strong favorite to win the GOP nomination next week, is viewed favorably by a similar percentage of New Jersey voters as Sherrill, the Democrat who has held a narrow but consistent lead in primary election polls. However, Sherrill is viewed unfavorably by a smaller percent of voters. The poll found that 40 percent of voters viewed Ciattarelli favorably, while 41 percent viewed Sherrill favorably. Meanwhile, 36 percent viewed Ciattarelli unfavorably, while 29 percent viewed Sherrill unfavorably. Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Ciattarelli at an election watch party in Bridgewater, New Jersey, on November 2, 2021. Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Ciattarelli at an election watch party in Bridgewater, New Jersey, on November 2, percent of respondents were unfamiliar with Ciattarelli, while 30 percent were unfamiliar with Sherrill. The poll surveyed 576 likely voters from May 28 to 30 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 6.1 percentage points. Ciattarelli was the GOP's nominee in the 2021 gubernatorial race, when he came close to unseating Democratic Governor Phil Murphy, losing by about 3 percentage points. Independent polling on the general election hasn't been released, but Republicans are hoping to build on the increased support Trump saw in the state in November. While Joe Biden won the state easily in 2020, securing victory by 16 percentage points, Democratic support collapsed in the state last year. Then-Vice President Kamala Harris carried the state by only 6 points—the closet margin since 2004. Shifts in heavily Latino areas in the north of the state, as well as eroding Democratic support in South Jersey, contributed to the shift. The latest head-to-head poll of the Democratic primary showed Sherrill leading the Democratic side with 28 percent of the vote, followed by Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop and Representative Josh Gottheimer each at 11 percent. Emerson College conducted the poll between May 11 and 13 among 386 likely voters. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points. What People Are Saying Democratic Representative Mikie Sherrill's campaign manager, Alex Ball, told Newsweek in May: "New Jersey saw in the debate why Mikie Sherrill continues to lead in every poll: her lifelong commitment to service, strong record getting big things done and her ability to beat Trump Republicans at every turn. Republicans are afraid to go up against Mikie in November because she knows how to win and then deliver for New Jerseyans." Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Ciattarelli said on Fox & Friends First on Tuesday: "We're in a very commanding position in the primary. We're not taking anything for granted. We'll finish strong over the last week; early voting does start today. We'll be up and down the state once again delivering our message that there's only one Republican who can win in November, and that's why I'm honored to have President Trump's complete and total endorsement. I really am. Having his faith, trust and confidence. He knows New Jersey is in play." What Happens Next After the June 10 primary, voters are set to head to the polls for the general election on November 4. The Cook Political Report classifies the race as leaning Democrat—meaning it is "considered competitive," but the Democrats have "an advantage."
8 minutes ago
Migrants and ICE officers contend with heat, smog and illness after detoured South Sudan flight
WASHINGTON -- Migrants placed on a deportation flight originally bound for South Sudan are now being held in a converted shipping container on a U.S. naval base in Djibouti, where the men and their guards are contending with baking hot temperatures, smoke from nearby burn pits and the looming threat of rocket attacks, the Trump administration said. Officials outlined grim conditions in court documents filed Thursday before a federal judge overseeing a lawsuit challenging Immigration and Customs Enforcement efforts to swiftly remove migrants to countries they didn't come from. Authorities landed the flight at the base in Djibouti, about 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) from South Sudan, more than two weeks ago after U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy in Boston found the Trump administration had violated his order by swiftly sending eight migrants from countries including Cuba and Vietnam to the east African nation. The judge said that men from other countries must have a real chance to raise fears about dangers they could face in South Sudan. The men's lawyers, though, have still not been able to talk to them, said Robyn Barnard, senior director of refugee advocacy at Human Rights First, whose stated mission is to ensure the United States is a global leader on human rights. Barnard spoke Friday at a hearing of Democratic members of Congress and said some family members of the men had been able to talk to them Thursday. The migrants have been previously convicted of serious crimes in the U.S., and President Donald Trump's administration has said that it was unable to return them quickly to their home countries. The Justice Department has also appealed to the Supreme Court to immediately intervene and allow swift deportations to third countries to resume. The case comes amid a sweeping immigration crackdown by the Republican administration, which has pledged to deport millions of people who are living in the United States illegally. The legal fight became another flashpoint as the administration rails against judges whose rulings have slowed the president's policies. The Trump administration said the converted conference room in the shipping container is the only viable place to house the men on the base in Djibouti, where outdoor daily temperatures rise above 100 degrees Fahrenheit (38 degrees Celsius), according to the declaration from an ICE official. Nearby burn pits are used to dispose of trash and human waste, and the smog cloud makes it hard to breathe, sickening both ICE officers guarding the men and the detainees, the documents state. They don't have access to all the medication they need to protect against infection, and the ICE officers were unable to complete anti-malarial treatment before landing, an ICE official said. 'It is unknown how long the medical supply will last,' Mellissa B. Harper, acting executive deputy associate director of enforcement and removal operations, said in the declaration. The group also lacks protective gear in case of a rocket attack from terrorist groups in Yemen, a risk outlined by the Department of Defense, the documents state. ___
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘A lesson in worst practices': Shocking audit reveals Chicago parking meters have made $2B for private company
Have you ever been strapped for cash? Perhaps you took a payday loan, sold a long-term asset or even made an early withdrawal from your 401(k). And chances are, you've later regretted it. This is the situation the City of Chicago finds itself in — and the cost may have been billions. Privatizing public infrastructure is a growing trend among cash-strapped cities that need fast revenue. Back during the 2008 financial crisis, Chicago was broke and needed to raise money. Rather than make the unpopular move of raising property taxes, then-mayor Richard M. Daley chose to privatize public assets. Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 5 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10) 'If we didn't have money for a long-term debt, you're talking about a serious economic crisis then for Chicago,' Daley said at the time, according to NBC 5 Chicago. So, Chicago City Council struck a deal to lease the city's 36,000 parking meters to investment consortium Chicago Parking Meters LLC, a group of global investors led by Morgan Stanley. The investors paid nearly $1.157 billion to receive the revenue from the meters for 75 years — and the city must reimburse them whenever the parking meters are taken offline, such as for festivals or construction. The deal was essentially rubber-stamped 40-5 in favor by the council, which had only a few days to review it before voting — turning out to be what the Better Government Association later called 'a lesson in 'worst practices.'' Soon after, a report issued by the then-inspector general found the city was paid at least $974 million less than it could have made from operating the parking meters itself over the term of the deal. While an analysis done by 32nd Ward Alderperson Scott Waguespack — who voted against the deal — found the deal could have been worth $5 to $10 billion, reported NBC 5. Now, a 2024 audit by accounting firm KPMG has found that, with another 58 years still left in the agreement, the private investors have already recouped their initial investment. In 2023, the meters generated a record $160.9 billion in income, bringing the total income from the start of the deal to $1.97 billion. 'It's just one of those deals that I would beg people never to replicate anywhere in the United States,' Waguespack told NBC 5. Still, many Americans can relate to the situation that faced Mayor Daley. When we're desperate for funds, we can make rash decisions that negatively affect our long-term financial health. Almost 4 in 10 (37%) U.S. adults would not be able to cover a $400 emergency expense with cash savings, according to the Economic Well-Being of US Households in 2024 report from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. And while many of these people say they could cover the expense some other way, such as using a credit card, borrowing from family or friends or selling something, 13% would not be able to pay the expense by any means. About 58% of Americans are 'living paycheck to paycheck and experienced a cash emergency in the past 12 months,' according to The 2025 Cash Poor Report from peer-to-peer lending platform SoLo Funds. Read more: Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says — and that 'anyone' can do it These 'cash-poor' Americans may not be who you think they are. Forty percent have a full-time job and one in seven cash-poor households earn more than $75,000 per year. The top unexpected expenses, according to the report, are auto repairs, medical bills and utility bills — common expenses that can happen to any of us. To cover these expenses, some may turn to short-term financing options that could end up costing them more money in the long term. For instance, buy now pay later (BNPL) services come with an average borrowing cost of 23%, according to The 2025 Cash Poor Report, which can increase substantially if the borrower incurs repeat late fees. Another option is a payday loan, which is one of the most expensive ways to borrow. The industry average cost of borrowing for payday loans is 35%, according to the report, but origination fees, late fees and processing fees can push this as high as 49% of the principal borrowed. Increased borrowing and missed payments can also affect your credit score, which in turn can limit your future ability to borrow. People might also look to sell long-term assets such as stocks, bonds or mutual funds, but this too can have long-term financial costs. If you're 30 years from retirement and sell $10,000 of an asset today that's earning 7% per year, then you'll have about $76,000 less when you retire due to the loss in compounding interest. Plus, research has shown that time out of the stock market can be costly — and missing the best days in the market can be devastating to your long-term returns. And, if you make an early withdrawal from a tax-deferred account such as a 401(k), you'll also pay a 10% tax penalty. To avoid high-cost borrowing in an emergency or cashing out long-term investments during a downturn, start by building an emergency fund that could cover unexpected expenses. A rule of thumb is to have three to six months' income in an accessible account, such as a high-yield savings account. While desperate times may call for desperate measures, it's worth consulting with a financial advisor (or a free counseling service) to discuss your options before getting saddled with debt or selling long-term assets. Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead How much cash do you plan to keep on hand after you retire? Here are 3 of the biggest reasons you'll need a substantial stash of savings in retirement Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Like what you read? Join 200,000+ readers and get the best of Moneywise straight to your inbox every week. This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
