Latest news with #Nixon
CNN
7 hours ago
- Health
- CNN
States, cities face loss of vaccination programs and staff after ‘baffling' cuts to federal funding
Millions of dollars have been pulled from state and local vaccination programs with no explanation, after a review of the funding agreements by the US Department of Health and Human Services. Affected programs say they will probably have to cut staffers and services because of the shortfall, and they worry that vaccination rates will also drop as they lose the ability to assist people who are low-income or uninsured. Immunization programs across the country are already struggling to address an increase in vaccine-preventable diseases. These include pertussis – also known as whooping cough – which has sickened more than 10,000 Americans and killed five children this year, as well as a smoldering outbreak of measles that has killed three people in the US and threatens to end the country's elimination status. 'That's the baffling part,' said one policy expert who spoke to CNN on the condition that they not be named for fear of government retaliation. 'Why anyone would create this disruption in the midst of the worst measles outbreak in 30 years.' Most money spent by states on vaccination comes from the federal government. The grant money, which is appropriated by Congress under Section 317 of the Public Health Services Act, enables states, territories and some large cities to collect data on vaccination, as well as provide shots to underserved children and adults. The funds also help monitor the safety of vaccines and fight misinformation. The money is doled out in five-year grants overseen by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the most recent awards were due to states on July 1. This year, however, HHS conducted lengthy reviews of the awards, which delayed their arrival in some cases. HHS Director of Communications Andrew Nixon said the reviews were part of agency cost-cutting efforts. 'The Defend the Spend initiative is a department-wide effort to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used effectively, transparently, and in alignment with this administration,' Nixon said in a statement to CNN. 'As part of this oversight, grant recipients may be asked to provide additional information, which is essential to preventing waste, fraud, and abuse. HHS is committed to working all grantees to resolve outstanding issues as quickly as possible while maintaining the highest standards of accountability.' Public health advocates say the latest funding cuts appear to be part of a larger pattern of efforts by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to disrupt and dismantle the America's vaccination infrastructure. 'Millions of children missed their routine vaccinations during the pandemic,' and never caught back up said Dr. Caitlin Rivers, director of the Center for Response Outbreak Innovation at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Vaccine hesitancy has also increased, driven by a deluge of misinformation, some of it now coming from official channels. As a result, vaccination rates have dropped, and some communities are no longer protected by herd immunity, the threshold of vaccination required to prevent certain infectious diseases from easily spreading. If state vaccination programs are not adequately resourced, 'we're just going to continue to fall further and further behind, and that sets the stage for things like measles and pertussis outbreaks, which we're seeing,' Rivers said. Public health programs often become victims of their own success, she said. 'When there is a large public health emergency … there are huge investments made in public health, because we can see very clearly what the consequences are of having inadequate resourcing and inadequate infrastructure. But over time, those investments begin to work, and the threats recede, and we start to forget why it's so important to maintain those defenses,' Rivers said. 'And I think now, five years out of Covid, we're very clearly in the neglect cycle, and we're seeing a lot of the investments we made during the pandemic be pulled back,' she added. Of 66 jurisdictions awarded federal immunization funding this year, about 40 received awards lower than their funding targets. And more than a dozen states and cities received lower awards this year than they did in 2019, just before the Covid-19 pandemic began, the last time these awards were offered through the CDC, according to a CNN analysis of federal data. Massachusetts, New York, Indiana, California and Arizona were among those awarded less this year than in 2019, the year before the Covid-19 pandemic began. 'That's really, really unbelievable to us,' said one public health advocate who asked not to be named for fear of political retaliation for speaking out against the cuts. 'How could we come out of a pandemic with half of states being less prepared?' Other states found that their awards were far lower than they'd been told to expect. In January 2025, the CDC sent out a Notice of Funding Opportunity – essentially an invitation – to states, territories and certain large cities. It came with a funding target: the amount they could expect if their grant proposals were accepted. Washington, for example, was told it could expect about $9.5 million, so the Department of Health planned for that amount for the 2026 fiscal year. When the state got its Notice of Award on July 1, however, it was for $7.8 million, an 18% reduction. Massachusetts was told it could expect $7.7 million for the upcoming fiscal year, already a 20% reduction from its 2025 budget. When the award arrived, it was $1 million under the targeted amount, at $6.7 million, which means the department expects to operate with about 30% less funding next year than it has this year. Colorado received almost $500,000 less than it expected, a decrease of about 5% from the amount it budgeted for, according to federal data California, Illinois, Michigan and New York also received lower-than-expected funding awards, according to a CNN analysis of federal data. Sometimes, the delays and errors in funding caused chaos: At least one state, Idaho, furloughed its immunization program staff with no notice after the money didn't arrive when expected. When the award did come through a day later, they were put back to work, but medical providers who reached out in the interim to submit their regular data updates had no one to help them and didn't know when services would be restored. The cuts didn't just affect state health departments. The city of New Haven, Connecticut, had to lay off immunization positions that were supported by subawards it receives from the state grant. When the grant didn't arrive in time, the state directed the city not to incur any more expenses, and when the federal money did come through, it was 20% less than anticipated. Chicago is also preparing to lay off immunization workers, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the city's plans, who asked not to be named because they feared retaliation by the Trump administration. Not all awardees saw reductions, however. About two dozen jurisdictions, including Alabama, Idaho and Wyoming and Montana, got significant funding increases over their award targets for this year. State officials who spoke to CNN for this story say they were given no explanation for why the awards were reduced or increased this cycle. The cuts come on top of the loss of billions in unspent Covid relief funding that was being used by states, in part, to help staff immunization programs. In late March, HHS directed the CDC to roll back about $11.4 billion in Covid-era funding granted to state and local health departments. Another $1 billion was reclaimed from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. A survey conducted by the Association of Immunization Managers found that the Covid money clawback alone has led to the elimination 579 staff positions in state vaccination programs. After the new grant cuts, some jurisdictions said they would probably need to lay off even more workers but were trying to assess the changes that would be needed. Some programs said they hoped state funding could help fill the gaps. In the past, the funding amounts that jurisdictions were told they could expect have been determined by a relatively simple formula that primarily relied on an area's population. This year, however, federal officials deployed a more complicated formula that took into account population levels as well as how much of a state was rural and how many providers participate in the Vaccines for Children program compared with the overall population, according to a public health advocate familiar with the awards who asked not to be named for fear of political retaliation. Immunization programs were told they could expect about $418 million in funding. All told, what they were awarded totaled roughly $398 million. Changes to the funding formula don't appear to account for the reductions, however. The formula was applied to the target amounts that were distributed in January. Instead, changes to the awards came after the HHS review, which in some cases delayed the release of the money and left programs hanging. Hawaii, for example, received authorization to borrow up to $100,000 from the state government to pay salaries and cover operational expenses until its award came through, about two weeks late. Public health advocates blasted the funding decision. 'Stripping 317 waiver funds combined with other losses is starving state and local public health budgets and is not just short-sighted, it's reckless,' said Dr. Brian Castrucci, president and chief executive officer of the nonprofit deBeaumont Foundation, which advocates for the public health workforce. 'We're watching the deliberate dismantling of the public health safety net in real time,' Castrucci said.
CNN
8 hours ago
- Health
- CNN
States, cities face loss of vaccination programs and staff after ‘baffling' cuts to federal funding
Vaccines Federal agencies Children's healthFacebookTweetLink Follow Millions of dollars have been pulled from state and local vaccination programs with no explanation, after a review of the funding agreements by the US Department of Health and Human Services. Affected programs say they will probably have to cut staffers and services because of the shortfall, and they worry that vaccination rates will also drop as they lose the ability to assist people who are low-income or uninsured. Immunization programs across the country are already struggling to address an increase in vaccine-preventable diseases. These include pertussis – also known as whooping cough – which has sickened more than 10,000 Americans and killed five children this year, as well as a smoldering outbreak of measles that has killed three people in the US and threatens to end the country's elimination status. 'That's the baffling part,' said one policy expert who spoke to CNN on the condition that they not be named for fear of government retaliation. 'Why anyone would create this disruption in the midst of the worst measles outbreak in 30 years.' Most money spent by states on vaccination comes from the federal government. The grant money, which is appropriated by Congress under Section 317 of the Public Health Services Act, enables states, territories and some large cities to collect data on vaccination, as well as provide shots to underserved children and adults. The funds also help monitor the safety of vaccines and fight misinformation. The money is doled out in five-year grants overseen by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the most recent awards were due to states on July 1. This year, however, HHS conducted lengthy reviews of the awards, which delayed their arrival in some cases. HHS Director of Communications Andrew Nixon said the reviews were part of agency cost-cutting efforts. 'The Defend the Spend initiative is a department-wide effort to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used effectively, transparently, and in alignment with this administration,' Nixon said in a statement to CNN. 'As part of this oversight, grant recipients may be asked to provide additional information, which is essential to preventing waste, fraud, and abuse. HHS is committed to working all grantees to resolve outstanding issues as quickly as possible while maintaining the highest standards of accountability.' Public health advocates say the latest funding cuts appear to be part of a larger pattern of efforts by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to disrupt and dismantle the America's vaccination infrastructure. 'Millions of children missed their routine vaccinations during the pandemic,' and never caught back up said Dr. Caitlin Rivers, director of the Center for Response Outbreak Innovation at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Vaccine hesitancy has also increased, driven by a deluge of misinformation, some of it now coming from official channels. As a result, vaccination rates have dropped, and some communities are no longer protected by herd immunity, the threshold of vaccination required to prevent certain infectious diseases from easily spreading. If state vaccination programs are not adequately resourced, 'we're just going to continue to fall further and further behind, and that sets the stage for things like measles and pertussis outbreaks, which we're seeing,' Rivers said. Public health programs often become victims of their own success, she said. 'When there is a large public health emergency … there are huge investments made in public health, because we can see very clearly what the consequences are of having inadequate resourcing and inadequate infrastructure. But over time, those investments begin to work, and the threats recede, and we start to forget why it's so important to maintain those defenses,' Rivers said. 'And I think now, five years out of Covid, we're very clearly in the neglect cycle, and we're seeing a lot of the investments we made during the pandemic be pulled back,' she added. Of 66 jurisdictions awarded federal immunization funding this year, about 40 received awards lower than their funding targets. And more than a dozen states and cities received lower awards this year than they did in 2019, just before the Covid-19 pandemic began, the last time these awards were offered through the CDC, according to a CNN analysis of federal data. Massachusetts, New York, Indiana, California and Arizona were among those awarded less this year than in 2019, the year before the Covid-19 pandemic began. 'That's really, really unbelievable to us,' said one public health advocate who asked not to be named for fear of political retaliation for speaking out against the cuts. 'How could we come out of a pandemic with half of states being less prepared?' Other states found that their awards were far lower than they'd been told to expect. In January 2025, the CDC sent out a Notice of Funding Opportunity – essentially an invitation – to states, territories and certain large cities. It came with a funding target: the amount they could expect if their grant proposals were accepted. Washington, for example, was told it could expect about $9.5 million, so the Department of Health planned for that amount for the 2026 fiscal year. When the state got its Notice of Award on July 1, however, it was for $7.8 million, an 18% reduction. Massachusetts was told it could expect $7.7 million for the upcoming fiscal year, already a 20% reduction from its 2025 budget. When the award arrived, it was $1 million under the targeted amount, at $6.7 million, which means the department expects to operate with about 30% less funding next year than it has this year. Colorado received almost $500,000 less than it expected, a decrease of about 5% from the amount it budgeted for, according to federal data California, Illinois, Michigan and New York also received lower-than-expected funding awards, according to a CNN analysis of federal data. Sometimes, the delays and errors in funding caused chaos: At least one state, Idaho, furloughed its immunization program staff with no notice after the money didn't arrive when expected. When the award did come through a day later, they were put back to work, but medical providers who reached out in the interim to submit their regular data updates had no one to help them and didn't know when services would be restored. The cuts didn't just affect state health departments. The city of New Haven, Connecticut, had to lay off immunization positions that were supported by subawards it receives from the state grant. When the grant didn't arrive in time, the state directed the city not to incur any more expenses, and when the federal money did come through, it was 20% less than anticipated. Chicago is also preparing to lay off immunization workers, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the city's plans, who asked not to be named because they feared retaliation by the Trump administration. Not all awardees saw reductions, however. About two dozen jurisdictions, including Alabama, Idaho and Wyoming and Montana, got significant funding increases over their award targets for this year. State officials who spoke to CNN for this story say they were given no explanation for why the awards were reduced or increased this cycle. The cuts come on top of the loss of billions in unspent Covid relief funding that was being used by states, in part, to help staff immunization programs. In late March, HHS directed the CDC to roll back about $11.4 billion in Covid-era funding granted to state and local health departments. Another $1 billion was reclaimed from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. A survey conducted by the Association of Immunization Managers found that the Covid money clawback alone has led to the elimination 579 staff positions in state vaccination programs. After the new grant cuts, some jurisdictions said they would probably need to lay off even more workers but were trying to assess the changes that would be needed. Some programs said they hoped state funding could help fill the gaps. In the past, the funding amounts that jurisdictions were told they could expect have been determined by a relatively simple formula that primarily relied on an area's population. This year, however, federal officials deployed a more complicated formula that took into account population levels as well as how much of a state was rural and how many providers participate in the Vaccines for Children program compared with the overall population, according to a public health advocate familiar with the awards who asked not to be named for fear of political retaliation. Immunization programs were told they could expect about $418 million in funding. All told, what they were awarded totaled roughly $398 million. Changes to the funding formula don't appear to account for the reductions, however. The formula was applied to the target amounts that were distributed in January. Instead, changes to the awards came after the HHS review, which in some cases delayed the release of the money and left programs hanging. Hawaii, for example, received authorization to borrow up to $100,000 from the state government to pay salaries and cover operational expenses until its award came through, about two weeks late. Public health advocates blasted the funding decision. 'Stripping 317 waiver funds combined with other losses is starving state and local public health budgets and is not just short-sighted, it's reckless,' said Dr. Brian Castrucci, president and chief executive officer of the nonprofit deBeaumont Foundation, which advocates for the public health workforce. 'We're watching the deliberate dismantling of the public health safety net in real time,' Castrucci said.
CNN
8 hours ago
- Health
- CNN
States, cities face loss of vaccination programs and staff after ‘baffling' cuts to federal funding
Millions of dollars have been pulled from state and local vaccination programs with no explanation, after a review of the funding agreements by the US Department of Health and Human Services. Affected programs say they will probably have to cut staffers and services because of the shortfall, and they worry that vaccination rates will also drop as they lose the ability to assist people who are low-income or uninsured. Immunization programs across the country are already struggling to address an increase in vaccine-preventable diseases. These include pertussis – also known as whooping cough – which has sickened more than 10,000 Americans and killed five children this year, as well as a smoldering outbreak of measles that has killed three people in the US and threatens to end the country's elimination status. 'That's the baffling part,' said one policy expert who spoke to CNN on the condition that they not be named for fear of government retaliation. 'Why anyone would create this disruption in the midst of the worst measles outbreak in 30 years.' Most money spent by states on vaccination comes from the federal government. The grant money, which is appropriated by Congress under Section 317 of the Public Health Services Act, enables states, territories and some large cities to collect data on vaccination, as well as provide shots to underserved children and adults. The funds also help monitor the safety of vaccines and fight misinformation. The money is doled out in five-year grants overseen by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the most recent awards were due to states on July 1. This year, however, HHS conducted lengthy reviews of the awards, which delayed their arrival in some cases. HHS Director of Communications Andrew Nixon said the reviews were part of agency cost-cutting efforts. 'The Defend the Spend initiative is a department-wide effort to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used effectively, transparently, and in alignment with this administration,' Nixon said in a statement to CNN. 'As part of this oversight, grant recipients may be asked to provide additional information, which is essential to preventing waste, fraud, and abuse. HHS is committed to working all grantees to resolve outstanding issues as quickly as possible while maintaining the highest standards of accountability.' Public health advocates say the latest funding cuts appear to be part of a larger pattern of efforts by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to disrupt and dismantle the America's vaccination infrastructure. 'Millions of children missed their routine vaccinations during the pandemic,' and never caught back up said Dr. Caitlin Rivers, director of the Center for Response Outbreak Innovation at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Vaccine hesitancy has also increased, driven by a deluge of misinformation, some of it now coming from official channels. As a result, vaccination rates have dropped, and some communities are no longer protected by herd immunity, the threshold of vaccination required to prevent certain infectious diseases from easily spreading. If state vaccination programs are not adequately resourced, 'we're just going to continue to fall further and further behind, and that sets the stage for things like measles and pertussis outbreaks, which we're seeing,' Rivers said. Public health programs often become victims of their own success, she said. 'When there is a large public health emergency … there are huge investments made in public health, because we can see very clearly what the consequences are of having inadequate resourcing and inadequate infrastructure. But over time, those investments begin to work, and the threats recede, and we start to forget why it's so important to maintain those defenses,' Rivers said. 'And I think now, five years out of Covid, we're very clearly in the neglect cycle, and we're seeing a lot of the investments we made during the pandemic be pulled back,' she added. Of 66 jurisdictions awarded federal immunization funding this year, about 40 received awards lower than their funding targets. And more than a dozen states and cities received lower awards this year than they did in 2019, just before the Covid-19 pandemic began, the last time these awards were offered through the CDC, according to a CNN analysis of federal data. Massachusetts, New York, Indiana, California and Arizona were among those awarded less this year than in 2019, the year before the Covid-19 pandemic began. 'That's really, really unbelievable to us,' said one public health advocate who asked not to be named for fear of political retaliation for speaking out against the cuts. 'How could we come out of a pandemic with half of states being less prepared?' Other states found that their awards were far lower than they'd been told to expect. In January 2025, the CDC sent out a Notice of Funding Opportunity – essentially an invitation – to states, territories and certain large cities. It came with a funding target: the amount they could expect if their grant proposals were accepted. Washington, for example, was told it could expect about $9.5 million, so the Department of Health planned for that amount for the 2026 fiscal year. When the state got its Notice of Award on July 1, however, it was for $7.8 million, an 18% reduction. Massachusetts was told it could expect $7.7 million for the upcoming fiscal year, already a 20% reduction from its 2025 budget. When the award arrived, it was $1 million under the targeted amount, at $6.7 million, which means the department expects to operate with about 30% less funding next year than it has this year. Colorado received almost $500,000 less than it expected, a decrease of about 5% from the amount it budgeted for, according to federal data California, Illinois, Michigan and New York also received lower-than-expected funding awards, according to a CNN analysis of federal data. Sometimes, the delays and errors in funding caused chaos: At least one state, Idaho, furloughed its immunization program staff with no notice after the money didn't arrive when expected. When the award did come through a day later, they were put back to work, but medical providers who reached out in the interim to submit their regular data updates had no one to help them and didn't know when services would be restored. The cuts didn't just affect state health departments. The city of New Haven, Connecticut, had to lay off immunization positions that were supported by subawards it receives from the state grant. When the grant didn't arrive in time, the state directed the city not to incur any more expenses, and when the federal money did come through, it was 20% less than anticipated. Chicago is also preparing to lay off immunization workers, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the city's plans, who asked not to be named because they feared retaliation by the Trump administration. Not all awardees saw reductions, however. About two dozen jurisdictions, including Alabama, Idaho and Wyoming and Montana, got significant funding increases over their award targets for this year. State officials who spoke to CNN for this story say they were given no explanation for why the awards were reduced or increased this cycle. The cuts come on top of the loss of billions in unspent Covid relief funding that was being used by states, in part, to help staff immunization programs. In late March, HHS directed the CDC to roll back about $11.4 billion in Covid-era funding granted to state and local health departments. Another $1 billion was reclaimed from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. A survey conducted by the Association of Immunization Managers found that the Covid money clawback alone has led to the elimination 579 staff positions in state vaccination programs. After the new grant cuts, some jurisdictions said they would probably need to lay off even more workers but were trying to assess the changes that would be needed. Some programs said they hoped state funding could help fill the gaps. In the past, the funding amounts that jurisdictions were told they could expect have been determined by a relatively simple formula that primarily relied on an area's population. This year, however, federal officials deployed a more complicated formula that took into account population levels as well as how much of a state was rural and how many providers participate in the Vaccines for Children program compared with the overall population, according to a public health advocate familiar with the awards who asked not to be named for fear of political retaliation. Immunization programs were told they could expect about $418 million in funding. All told, what they were awarded totaled roughly $398 million. Changes to the funding formula don't appear to account for the reductions, however. The formula was applied to the target amounts that were distributed in January. Instead, changes to the awards came after the HHS review, which in some cases delayed the release of the money and left programs hanging. Hawaii, for example, received authorization to borrow up to $100,000 from the state government to pay salaries and cover operational expenses until its award came through, about two weeks late. Public health advocates blasted the funding decision. 'Stripping 317 waiver funds combined with other losses is starving state and local public health budgets and is not just short-sighted, it's reckless,' said Dr. Brian Castrucci, president and chief executive officer of the nonprofit deBeaumont Foundation, which advocates for the public health workforce. 'We're watching the deliberate dismantling of the public health safety net in real time,' Castrucci said.
Sky News AU
2 days ago
- Business
- Sky News AU
The ABC faces 'existential reckoning' after the US defunded NPR and PBS in a clarion call that shatters the myth of state-backed media's indispensability
The once-cherished ideal of publicly-funded media teeters on the brink of irrelevance – a relic of a bygone era when airwaves were scarce and governments saw themselves as arbiters of impartial truth. The rise of digital streaming and decentralised content creation, coupled with fiscally irresponsible governments and a polarised public sphere, has exposed state-backed broadcasters as lumbering dinosaurs in a world awash with private media alternatives. As trust in institutions wanes and fiscal scrutiny intensifies, the very concept of taxpayer-subsidised journalism faces an existential reckoning. The centre-right side of the political aisle from Washington DC to London to Canberra and beyond has long been debating the cost-benefit of such entities in serving the public interest – to little result. Finally, on July 18, 2025, the US Congress passed the historic Rescissions Act of 2025, marking a watershed moment in this protracted debate and providing a bold precedent to nations everywhere – including and especially Australia – to fundamentally challenge the merits of publicly-funded media. The Historic US Rescission Bill The Rescissions Act of 2025 passed in the United States Congress last week by a narrow House vote of 216-213 and a Senate vote of 51-48, clawing back $7.9 billion in previously approved federal spending for foreign aid programs, and eliminating $1.1 billion in federal funding for fiscal years 2026 and 2027 for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the parent entity over public broadcast network PBS and public radio network NPR. The bill, driven by the Trump administration and supported by Republican majorities, required only a simple majority to pass due to the rarely used rescission process, which allows Congress to cancel previously appropriated funds within 45 days of a presidential request. This rescission marked a historic first in defunding public media among Western democracies, succeeding where previous attempts in the US and elsewhere had failed. In the US, Republican-led pushes to defund CPB date back to the 1970s under President Nixon, with notable attempts under Reagan, George W. Bush, and during Mitt Romney's 2012 campaign. In Canada, the CBC has faced Conservative Party budget cut proposals to no avail. In Europe, the BBC, Germany's ARD/ZDF, and France Télévisions have endured calls to reform or abolish license fees but retained government support. And right here in Australia, the Coalition government has looked to trim around the edges, under Howard ($55 million reduction in 1996), Abbott ($254 million over five years), and Turnbull ($83.7 million over three years in 2018), though never fully defunded the broadcaster. The 2025 US success hinged on unified Republican control of Congress, the will to invoke the rarely used rescission process, and Trump's once-in-a-generation talent for framing and persuading contentious political issues allowed for a swift, party-line vote to finally challenge a centuries old, entrenched belief system. This alignment of political will, executive pressure, and procedural strategy marks a first among Western democracies. Defeating the Commonly Cited Objections to Defunding Public Media Two primary arguments are typically cited by opponents of defunding public media: (i) the impact it would have on media access by rural communities, and (ii) its role in producing cultural and local content that the global media industry would not naturally prioritise. Both arguments are increasingly outdated in today's media landscape. Rural communities now benefit from significant internet penetration ( Critically, defunding public media has no bearing on funding for emergency alert systems, which are managed separately and thus ensure rural areas retain access to vital public service announcements. The second objection—that publicly funded media is necessary for cultural and locally relevant content not prioritised by global media—ignores the extreme democratisation of content creation and distribution enabled by the internet over the past quarter century. Independent creators are now producing a full spectrum of content from mass to niche, including cultural/ localised content and citizen journalism at a fraction of the cost. As an example, private media companies (both corporate and independent) are two to five times as efficient as their publicly funded counterparts, demonstrating the expected differences in incentives and outcomes brought about by competition. Finally, private donations has always been and remains a viable source of funding for local/cultural content that may not be prioritised by global media conglomerates. Notably, one to two per cent of NPR's and only 15 per cent of PBS's budgets are funded by the American taxpayer whereas their counterparts in countries like the UK, Canada, Germany, France and Australia are close to or fully 100 per cent taxpayer funded. While this may be a reflection of the more socialist heritage of these nations relative to the US, it is getting harder to defend in an era of irrational government debts, and conversely, so many more avenues for private funding from crowdfunded donations to traditional corporate and large-scale philanthropy. The Case and Blueprint for Australia The bold precedent set by the US Congress last week, coupled with the structural shifts seen in the media landscape over the last twenty years, reveals how the case for eliminating publicly funded media in Australia is now more compelling than ever before. As mentioned above, it is 100 per cent taxpayer funded when compared to its US counterparts, disincentivising private donations that could foster accountability and diversity in funding, Australia's rural broadband penetration is higher than the US, with only 10–15 per cent of its 7 million rural residents lacking access (compared to 24 per cent in the U.S.), enabling streaming alternatives to serve regional audiences effectively. Australia's gross debt will exceed AUD $1 trillion by 2027 As an English-speaking market, Australia benefits from access to a vast array of top-tier global media, from major English-language broadcasters and platforms in news and entertainment, to independent media voices in podcasting, Substack, and beyond, offering diverse subjects and worldviews that reduce the need for a large and bloated taxpayer-funded broadcaster. Last week's historic precedent in the US offers a blueprint for any Australian politician willing to build on the case made by previous Coalition governments and take it to its logical endpoint. The Liberal-National Coalition must embed ABC defunding in its election platform, as the US. Republicans did with CPB cuts. This aligns with criticisms from Liberal figures and the Institute of Public Affairs, which regularly cite ideological biases in the ABC alongside its fiscal unsustainability. A skilled PR campaign, mirroring Trump's 'one-two-punch' approach of political pressure and narrative persuasion, should leverage public scepticism about the ABC. A 2022 Guardian Australia poll showed 56 per cent of Australians supported restoring ABC funding, but 44 per cent were opposed or neutral, indicating a sizable persuadable audience. The campaign should emphasise conceptual obsolescence, fiscal responsibility, and ideological bias. To win over sympathetic rural communities, where 24 per cent lack adequate broadband, the policy prescription must emphasise that it would preserve essential services like emergency broadcasts, while highlighting the expected ongoing increases in internet connectivity across rural Australia. Lastly, the parliamentary budget process in Australia is generally easier to execute than the recissions procedure in the US congress, due to its annual cycle and simple majority requirements – a greater indictment on the lack of success towards this goal by the Coalition government thus far. When next in a parliamentary majority, the Coalition can defund the ABC through an amendment to zero out its $1.1 billion allocation in the annual budget or a standalone bill amending the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983, requiring only a simple majority in both houses. To counter Labor and Greens opposition, citing the ABC's 14.5 million monthly reach, the Coalition could propose a transition plan (e.g., partial privatisation) and secure crossbench support. A taskforce would oversee asset sales and ~4,000 staff redundancies, with targeted subsidies ensuring rural service continuity to mitigate backlash from groups like ABC Friends. In Conclusion As the airwaves of yesteryear give way to the boundless digital frontier, the US Rescissions Act of 2025 stands as a clarion call, shattering the myth of state-backed media's indispensability and igniting a revolution in how nations fund their narratives. Australia, tethered to the ABC's $1.1 billion yoke, now faces a pivotal choice: cling to a fading paradigm or embrace a vibrant, market-driven media ecosystem. The numbers lay bare the ABC's inefficiencies against a range of comparable media entities. As the US forges ahead, finally breaking its decades old public media burden, Australia has a fleeting chance to sever the chains of subsidy, unleash private creativity, and redefine its voice in a world where the marketplace, not the state, shapes the stories we tell. Kosha Gada is a tech entrepreneur and broadcast commentator on US and international current affairs, appearing live three nights a week on Sky News Australia. She is a board member of sports betting platform PointsBet.
Time Magazine
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time Magazine
'Slow Burn' Is on The 100 Best Podcasts of All Time
History The original season of Slate's excellent Slow Burn , which began airing in 2017, somehow managed to render oft-retread stories from American history surprising, thanks to an unexpected cast of characters and added context that gets lost in the process of mythologizing. Kicking off with a series about Watergate, Slow Burn closely traced when, exactly, the public was pushed over the edge by Nixon's lies—it was later than you think. The unforgettable first episode of the first season, 'Martha,' tells the horrifying and revealing story of Martha Mitchell, wife of Nixon's attorney general, who was kidnapped and locked in a hotel room in an attempt to cover up the Watergate leak. Mitchell is rightfully the center of that narrative, and the podcast continues to find the very real people often forgotten in the sweeping history-book narratives. The second season covered the Clinton Impeachment—the podcast reminds you that the coverage of Monica Lewinsky is even more sexist than you remember. And more recent seasons have traced the road to the Iraq War, the 1992 L.A. Riots, and the Rise of Fox News, all of which offer lessons for our current political moment.
