Luetkemeyer votes to cut U.S. tax funding for NPR

FULTON SUN File Photo: Congressman Blaine Luetkemeyer, 9th District

FULTON SUN File Photo: Congressman Blaine Luetkemeyer, 9th District

Ninth District Congressman Blaine Luetkemeyer Thursday voted to support a proposal to terminate taxpayer funding of National Public Radio (NPR).

The proposal was offered as a result of Americans speaking out to Congress through the YouCut Web site on federal spending they would like to reduce or eliminate.

“The American people sent Washington a loud message earlier this month and that message was Washington has to get serious about controlling spending,” Luetkemeyer said. “I heard that message loud and clear, and the American people are using the YouCut Web site to voice their support for spending cuts.”

On the You Cut Web site each week, Americans have the opportunity to vote on a spending cut, and shortly after all the ideas are processed, Luetkemeyer and his colleagues seek a vote on the most popular spending cut proposed by the public.

Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., who will be the Republican majority leader next January, has started the You Cut Web site, www.republicanwhip.house.gov/YouCut. The project is designed to allow the public to vote on spending cuts that they want the House to enact.

Until newly elected Republicans take office in January, Democrats still control the floor of the House and decide which bills to consider. Cantor and other Republicans try to make a procedural vote on an unrelated piece of legislation the vote on the YouCut item as a symbolic statement.

This week’s YouCut proposal to eliminate federal tax funding for NPR was sponsored by Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo.

Democrats turned aside the Republican proposal by voting 239-171 to close debate on the underlying measure.

Canton spoke out in behalf of Juan Williams, who was fired by National Public Radio for comments he made on Fox News about being uneasy when he sees people dressed in traditional Muslim clothing in airports.

National Public radio receives about $9 million each year in taxpayer funding through direct government grants from various federal agencies, including the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Education and the National Endowment for the Arts.

Cantor says NPR also receives tax funds indirectly. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting makes grants to public radio stations around the nation. Some of these grants can be used to acquire and produce programming. Most often this programming is purchased from NPR. Program fees and dues paid by local public radio stations to NPR account for 40 percent of NPR’s budget or about $65 million last year.

NPR also receives funding from private individuals and organizations. Cantor said NPR officials have contended taxpayer funding is only a small portion of NPR’s overall budget. “Therefore, eliminating taxpayer support should not materially affect NPR’s ability to operate while at the same time saving taxpayers millions of dollars annually,” Cantor said.

Comments

Leon 2 years, 6 months ago

Pity the poor Republicans. They want to stop broadcasting the truth because they think they can cut the deficit without increasing cash flow (increasing taxes) - it's simply not possible. The majority of the deficit was incurred under good ol' boy Dubya - after the three prior years of steadily increasing surpluses under the Democrats. Before you whine - look up the information like I did. then you too will stop voting the GOP ticket. Yeah - bring it on Republicans. Stupid is as stupid does.

0

ConcernedCitizen 2 years, 6 months ago

Actually, you should probably get YOUR facts straight. Government spending has actually DECREASED by 2.3% under Obama, George Bush INCREASED spending by about 4% every year he was in office. The deficit is still growing under Obama since it's still way over-budget, but it's growing less rapidly than at any point under Bush. The deficit went from $5.7 trillion when Bush took office to $10.4 trillion when he left. It currently stands at $10.9 trillion. You can find all of the details on Wikipedia under "National debt by U.S. presidential terms".

0

malmark 2 years, 6 months ago

I'm sorry but I would have to agree with ConcernedCitizen, the wikipedia article is impartial and looks back at the history of each president in office and correlates it with the facts, the washington post article is based around CBO estimates in an economic climate who's future is completely uncertain at the moment and I don't think the predictions they are spinning are accurate in this climate. Oh... and newspapers are in the business of reporting the news but sensationalism over predictions of what it would be like in 2020 under Barack's policies sells newspapers too :D

0

malmark 2 years, 6 months ago

Oh yeah.. isn't it also funny how a president can be in office for 8 years (Bush) and hands off this huge mess to Obama and all of a sudden everyone forgets Obama has only actually presided over the mess for 1 year, but nonetheless blame it all on him...interesting...I would actually be concerned if during Obama's term he DIDN'T have to put us in more debt to dig us out from the steaming pile Bush left us with.

0

malmark 2 years, 6 months ago

if it really was averaging 500 billion dollars (?) he must have picked up all 4 trillion of it in his last year when his bubble finally burst and averaged it over 8 years. Now just going by your figures asuming they're correct, Obama came in while the economy was tanking and he's only 1.45 trillion behind? I gotta give him credit for that considering the size of the economy that is at stake.

0

malmark 2 years, 6 months ago

oh yeeah....by the way, I believe the figures ConcernedCitizen was referring to are taken from.....(Source: CBO Historical Budget Page and Whitehouse FY 2011 Budget - Table 7.1 Federal Debt at the End of Year PDF, Excel, Senate.gov) ...I do believe the historical information the CBO has published, i just don't trust their estimates in this economy. Now the key word in that is "Historical", not 'predicted' or 'estimated' and I'm also wondering what you mean by misinformation since my source is the same as the one you are defending?!

0

ConcernedCitizen 2 years, 5 months ago

Could you be any more transparently partisan? Besides, politics are just a distraction, a safety valve for public unrest. Jim Crow laws came about when the Populist movement started gaining momentum with both blacks and poor whites. It was meant to set them against each other, and it worked. Now we have two parties that should be working together, but instead are pretty effective at stopping each other from doing anything, which is exactly what the corporatocracy wants. Debt is control, no wonder the federal reserve(incidentally not federal, or a reserve) is so willing to lend to either party. The most we can do is lift ourselves and be the change we want to see in the world and not expect politicians or the elite to save us.

0

fultonian 2 years, 6 months ago

doesn't cutting taxes increase cash flow? the more cash the citizens have the more they spend, so they pay more taxes since they're spending more money. If I'm not mistaken an economy's strength is based on how often money changes hands, not how much cash the government has. Why should the government support public radio anyway?

0

malmark 2 years, 6 months ago

yeah it can help that way in the long term as people get their confidence back but short term you take a hit I believe. I mean honestly I think people are just holding onto what money they have to see how things are going to turn out.

0

MichelleHohlt 2 years, 5 months ago

I almost spit my coffee on my keyboard @ ConcernedCitizen, there is a reason Wikipedia is not used in college, this my friend is a very unreliable source to get your info from, anyone can go in and write what they want on that site. Both of these presidents are useless...hows that for some Wikipedia info!

0

ConcernedCitizen 2 years, 5 months ago

A recent study showed that Wikipedia is as accurate as Encyclopedia Brittanica. I agree that Wikipedia shouldn't be the only source someone uses, but it's often an excellent starting place and in the case of spreadsheets of national debt spending the information is footnoted and comes directly from the government itself. Perhaps I should I have linked to the government site as well, but it doesn't invalidate Wikipedia as a useful or reliable resource.

0

Sign in to comment