Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

End NPR subsidy: Windfall can replace federal funding
The Union Leader, Manchester, NH ^ | November 7, 2003 | editorial

Posted on 11/07/2003 3:50:10 AM PST by RJCogburn

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: garyb
Well said...Money is fungible (what a cool word) and the important thing is where it ends up, not how they disperse it.

Also a significant amount of STATE tax money is used to fund many of the stations.

21 posted on 11/07/2003 5:47:46 AM PST by Drango (Democratic fund rasing... If PBS won't do it, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
National Public Radio has been telling us for years that just under 1 percent of its budget comes from the federal government. NPR’s last fiscal year budget was $103 million, which puts its federal subsidy at around $1 million.

That has to be wrong. NPR and CPB must receive more than $1 million per year from the government.

22 posted on 11/07/2003 5:54:38 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Things are more like they are now than they ever were before.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkT
Section 8. Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have the power

1. to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States:

This is "enumerated power" that both Democrats and Republicans have used for years to constitutionally justify their spending.

The question is: What was the original meaning and intent of the terms "...general welfare" and "United States?"

23 posted on 11/07/2003 5:55:41 AM PST by tahiti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
I was thinking exactly the same thing as I read this story in this morning's paper. With that much money in their endowment, they no longer need the taxpayer's teat.

24 posted on 11/07/2003 5:56:15 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Thanks C-I-C for the observation.

Thei first amendment does give people the right to speak but it doen't give them the right to an audience for their message.

The sooner the elft realizes and recognizes this reality the better we'll be able to get along.

But I don't see them recognizing or accepting this reality anytime soon.

25 posted on 11/07/2003 5:56:41 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Yes! Just think of all the bombers and tanks that money will buy.
26 posted on 11/07/2003 5:59:27 AM PST by HIDEK6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
REFUND! REFUND! I WAN'T A REFUND OF MY TAX MONEY!!!!!!

(Yes, I was shouting.)
27 posted on 11/07/2003 7:20:38 AM PST by Chewbacca (Nothing burps better than bacon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Getting rid of established programs seems to take something like a dictator. Since there isn't one around, let's just agree that NPR means Not a Prayer, RJ.
28 posted on 11/07/2003 5:20:34 PM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: garyb
Great post, garyb. Now, can you or anyone else tell me how many tax dollars in total go to NPR, PBS, CPB, and individual radio or TV stations each year? And another question (I sould know this, but I don't): are donations to any of the above tax deductable? If so, that's tantamount to an additional taxpayer subsidy.

I have no problem with a "listener supported" service, if it really is that. But we don't need a "state" broadcasting system, with all of the private alternatives (cable TV, satellite dishes, and now, satellite radio) available.

29 posted on 11/08/2003 8:13:10 AM PST by southernnorthcarolina (John Edwards is among the 99% of lawyers who give the rest a bad name.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: southernnorthcarolina
Now, can you or anyone else tell me how many tax dollars in total go to NPR, PBS, CPB, and individual radio or TV stations each year?

You can't break out the radio/TV split, but here is an excellent summary. Note that it shows the amount that comes from local and state tax dollars. http://www.current.org/pbpb/statistics/totalrevs.html


Dollar figures in thousands

FY82

FY86

FY90

FY93

FY94

FY97

FY99 FY01
TOTAL INCOME $845,214 $1,134,009 $1,581,447 $1,790,095 $1,794,631 $1,932,260 $2,146,798 $2,280,464

FEDERAL INCOME
SUBTOTAL

197,625
(23.4%)
185,694
(16.4%)
267,369
(16.9%)
369,527
(20.6%)
329,975
(18.4%)
322,271
(16.7%)
300,960
(14%)
385,185
(16.9%)
CPB 172,000
(20.3%)
159,500
(14.1%)
229,391
(14.5%)
253,309
(14.2%)
275,000
(15.3%)
260,000
(13.5%)
250,000
(11.6%)
340,000
(14.9%)
Satellite system
replacement
0 0 0 65,327*
(3.6%)
0 0 0 0
Other federal funds 25,625
(3%)
26,194
(2.3%)
37,978
(2.4%)
50,891
(6.5%)
54,975
(3.1%)
62,271
(3.2%)
50,960
(2.4%)
45,185
(2%)

NONFEDERAL
INCOME
SUBTOTAL

647,589
(76.6%)
948,315
(83.6%)
1,314,078
(83.1%)
1,420,568
(79.4%)
1,464,656
(81.6%)
1,609,989
(83.3%)
1,845,838
(86%)
1,895,278
(83.1%)

State & local
tax-based
sources subtotal

301,038
(35.6%)
378,828
(33.4%)
473,837
(30%)
475,176
(26.5%)
509,528
(28.4%)
542,872
(28.1%)
544,279
(25.4%)
593,449
(26%)
Local governments 42,353
(5%)
50,879
(4.5%)
59,810
(3.8%)
56,230
(3.1%)
55,927
(3.1%)
66,087
(3.4%)
57,159
(2.7%)
60,933
(2.7%)
State governments 166,515
(19.7%)
213,069
(18.8%)
262,219
(16.6%)
254,715
(14.2%)
272,018
(15.2%)
298,834
(15.5%)
297,816
(13.9%)
331,203
(14.5%)
Public colleges
& universities
92,170
(10.9%)
114,881
(10.1%)
151,808
(9.6%)
164,232
(9.2%)
181,584
(10.2%)
177,951
(9.3%)
189,304
(8.8%)
201,313
(8.8%)

Private sources
subtotal

346,551
(41%)
569,487
(50.2%)
840,241
(53.1%)
945,392
(52.8%)
955,128
(53.2%)
1,067,117
(55.2%)
1,301,559
(60.6%)
1,301,829
(57.1%)
Private colleges
& universities
12,870
(1.5%)
26,335
(2.3%)
31.204
(2%)
23,244
(1.3%)
26,049
(1.5%)
35,206
(1.8%)
31,359
(1.5%)
36,460
(1.6%)
Foundations 22,108
(2.6%)
38,343
(3.4%)
71,070
(4.5%)
99,585
(5.6%)
96,927
(5.4%)
111,570
(5.8%)
123,150
(5.7%)
141,184
(6.2%)
Business 100,486
(11.9%)
170,828
(15.1%)
262,448
(16.6%)
285,380
(15.9%)
301,322
(16.8%)
277,576
(14.4%)
314,890
(14.7%)
361,078
(15.8%)
Subscribers 142,076
(16.8%)
245,614
(21.7%)
340.944
(21.6%)
390,570
(21.8%)
399,225
(22.2%)
472,040
(24.4%)
550,427
(25.6%)
575,556
(25.2%)
Auctions 20,392
(2.4%)
22,915
(2%)
22,760
(1.4%)
21,207
(1.2%)
20,590
(1.1%)
21,180
(1.1%)
17,217
(0.8%)
13,052
(0.6%)
Other sources 48,619
(5.8%)
65,451
(5.8%)
111,815
(7.1%)
125,407
(7%)
111,014
(6.2%)
149,545
(7.7%)
264,516
(12.3%)
174,499
(7.7%)
*Over three years, fiscal years 1991-93, Congress appropriated a total of $198 million for CPB to rehab the public TV and radio

30 posted on 11/09/2003 6:30:54 AM PST by Drango (Democratic fund rasing... If PBS won't do it, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
$200 million donation? What the heck is the Kroc family going to do with 4 million "Morning Edition" Coffee mugs?
31 posted on 11/09/2003 6:33:55 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim (SSDD - Same S#it Different Democrat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tahiti
"The question is: What was the original meaning and intent of the terms "...general welfare" and "United States?"

This should help.

James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson: With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. If the words obtained so readily a place in the "Articles of Confederation," and received so little notice in their admission into the present Constitution, and retained for so long a time a silent place in both, the fairest explanation is, that the words, in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted.

32 posted on 11/09/2003 6:40:01 AM PST by gorush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: tahiti
...and here is another:

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated." --Thomas Jefferson

33 posted on 11/09/2003 6:44:06 AM PST by gorush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: gorush
...and another

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute of Religious Freedom, 1779

34 posted on 11/09/2003 6:57:13 AM PST by Drango (Democratic fund rasing... If PBS won't do it, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Drango
As long as we're on a roll here...

In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison, 4 Annals of congress 179 (1794)

35 posted on 11/09/2003 7:01:24 AM PST by gorush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Drango
Thank you for the data, Drango. The "fine print" at the bottom was interesting, and I'd bet a little digging would turn up additional similar taxpayer grants.

I also assume FCC licensing fees and such are "on the house." Fees paid by private stations of similar power would add up to a considerable sum. Broadcasting "slots" are a scarce commodity; once frequency 90.7 FM in Charlotte was assigned to the NPR station, that was one fewer position available for a station which would pay fees to the FCC, and more importantly, generate taxable income.

Given all that, it's all but impossible to gauge the total cost of these gummint-subsidized radio and TV stations. But it ain't chicken feed.

36 posted on 11/09/2003 7:47:04 AM PST by southernnorthcarolina (John Edwards is among the 99% of lawyers who give the rest a bad name.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: southernnorthcarolina
Broadcasting "slots" are a scarce commodity; ... generate taxable income.

Indeed the government donation of the broadband spectrum is a hidden subsidy. On the TV side, the channel 9 allocation to PBS is worth millions. A community college PBS station in Orange County, California just sold for $32 million.

37 posted on 11/09/2003 8:29:16 AM PST by Drango (Democratic fund rasing... If PBS won't do it, who will?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Comment #38 Removed by Moderator

To: StabbinPont
"...but all the airwaves in this country are public property. So using these airwaves means using public property."

By formatting the bands and standardizing the bandwiths the government actually created broadcasting as we know it. The FCC regulates broadcasting--licensing a handful of priveledged people to broadcast at different frequency bands in particular locations. That is something not contemplated in the First Amendment, and which should never pass constitutional muster if applied to the literal press. Not only so, but the FCC requires application for renewal on the basis that a licensee broadcaster is “operating in the public interest as a public trustee.” That is a breathtaking departure from the First Amendment.

No one questions the political power of broadcasting; the broadcasters themselves obviously sell that viewpoint when they are taking money for political advertising. What does it mean, therefore, when the government (FCC) creates a political venue which transcends the literal press? And what does it mean when the government excludes you and me--and almost everyone else--from that venue in favor of a few priviledged licensees? And what does it mean when the government maintains the right to pull the license of anyone it does allow to participate in that venue? It means a government far outside its First Amendment limits.

And even if I assume that you are correct in your assertion that "...all of the airwaves in this country are public property," then it is even more imperative that the Constitution has jurisdiction over that property and thus Amendment I's absolute and unambigous statement, "Congress shall make NO law...abridging the freedom of speech" is the final word on the subject of CFR and the power of the FCC.

39 posted on 12/11/2003 8:57:46 AM PST by tahiti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson