The House Rules Committee on Tuesday will take up a so-called “rescissions” package that includes clawing back nearly $1.1 billion in funding for NPR, PBS and local public broadcasting stations, a move that has raised alarm bells among public media leaders.
There’s ample reason for worry, especially that sentiment has shifted even among those who once were staunch advocates.
A case in point is Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. Once a solid defender of continued federal funding, Cole last week was far less committal.
Asked whether his past support for public media had changed, Cole told Deadline, “No, but I have an up-and-down vote. So, I mean, there’s always going to be things in here that you prefer not be, but they are. And so, again, we are going to look at the package and vote accordingly.” The package also calls for revoking funding for foreign aid programs.
Watch on Deadline
Seven years ago, Cole was vocal in his desire to preserve funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which distributes federal funds to public media entities, as the Trump administration sought to zero it out in their budget request. At the time, Cole led the House subcommittee that oversees funding for the CPB.
Noting that he was from “probably the reddest state in the union,” Cole told Variety back then, “If you look at the range of services it provides, the quality of programming and the points of view it expresses, I just think for the amount of money we are talking about here, and the multiplier effect, it is able to sustain itself. I don’t see Congress having the desire [to cut funding] because they reflect the desire of the American people.”
At the time, Cole also noted that targeting public broadcasting funding is “nickel and dime-ing things” in deficit reduction, when the real issue is in reforming entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
Public media has survived past efforts to zero out funding. In 2011, House Republicans passed a bill to cut federal funds to NPR, but it died in the Senate. In each of the four years of Trump’s first term, his administration sent budgets to the hill that cut all funding to the CPB, but the recommendation went nowhere.
But times are different now, as fewer GOP lawmakers are willing to face the potential wrath of going against the president’s wishes, in this case a rescissions package initiated by the White House.
Trump’s proposal to Congress calls for rescinding CPB’s entire $535 million allocation in fiscal 2026 and the same amount in fiscal 2027. Congress already approved those amounts with bipartisan support in previous budget cycles.
Leaders of the CPB, PBS and NPR warn of “devastating impact” on member stations in particular, including those in rural areas that rely on a larger share of federal funding for their budgets. While private contributions and corporate support have helped support programming, particularly high-profile series, the worry is that services like emergency communications, early learning programs and local content will be particularly hard hit, with some communities left with news deserts.
Friends of OETA, which raises funds and support for the Oklahoma Education Television Authority, is urging Cole and other members of the state’s congressional delegation to oppose the rescissions package, calling it “absolutely the wrong policy tool at the wrong time.” They warned that it would “throw the PBS system into chaos by reneging on commitments already made and undermining plans already executed,” including workforce development and civics education programming.
“Without CPB funding to local PBS stations, OETA would not be able to operate,” the group said.
Advocates also point to public sentiment.
A Pew Research Center poll earlier this year showed that 43% of Americans said NPR and PBS should continue to receive federal funding, compared with 24% said that it should be ended, while 33% were not sure. Still, there was a partisan split on the question, with 44% of Republicans saying that funding should be ended, just 19% say it should be continued, and 37% are not sure.. By contrast, 69% of Democrats say it should retained, 5% say it should end and 26% are not sure.
A recent YouGov survey gave PBS and NPR high trust scores, above the average for outlets, and that the trust has grown in the past year.
That said, the Trump administration’s stated reason for rolling back public media funding is that it is “politically biased and an unnecessary expense to the taxpayer.”
Trump earlier signed an executive order directing federal agencies to slash funding to PBS and NPR, something that both outlets are challenging in court. The White House has attacked the two networks as ones that “spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news.’”
More recently, some Republicans calling to defund public media have pointed to a Sesame Street X post celebrating Pride month. Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) responded, “PBS is shamelessly grooming our children while collecting taxpayer dollars. This is evil and should infuriate every parent in America. DEFUND!!” Sesame Street, produced by a separate entity from PBS, recently signed a deal with Netflix to debut new episodes at the same time that they air on PBS.
Public media advocates also have invoked Sesame Street characters in the push to retain federal funding. That includes a viral Elmo “open to work” campaign from a group not affiliated with PBS or Sesame Street. A mock LinkedIn post has Elmo looking for a job, and the message, “If you hear of any opportunities, or want a hug, let’s connect. And if you want to help Elmo and his friends, please urge your local congress person to save Public Media.” There’s also a link to ProtectMyPublicMedia.org, the campaign led by advocacy group America’s Public Television Stations.
With Republicans holding a slim 220-212 majority in the House, a handful of holdouts can sink the legislation if all Democrats stay united, as expected.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-OK) told the New York Times that he is against the package, given its cuts to foreign aid programs to provide medicine and AIDS prevention. Politico reported Monday that at least 10 moderate Republicans have privately said that they oppose the legislation.
Later on Monday, Rep. Mark Amodei (R-NV) joined with Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NV), his fellow co-chair in the Public Media Caucus, in releasing a statement opposing the public broadcasting rescission. “While we reaffirm that public media must be objective and legitimate concerns about content should be addressed, funding decisions should be objective as well,” they said.
In the Senate, where Republicans have a 53-47 majority, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) expressed her support for federal funding in an op-ed last month.
But with so much scrutiny over the cost of Trump’s separate tax and spend bill, and former No. 1 ally Elon Musk warning it will bankrupt the government, will GOPers look to the rescissions package as a way to prove their fiscal hawkishness? Last week, in an interview with The Hill, Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) praised his state’s public television entity and recognized its value to rural America, but said that he still intended to support the rescissions package.
As one public media advocate said last week, the worry is that no GOP “hero” has emerged to take on the fight for funding, at a time when so much else is vying for attention.
If federal funding is clawed back, there will be plenty of people taking a cue from Elmo to find work via LinkedIn, and this time it will be for real.