creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Deb Saunders
Debra J. Saunders
27 May 2012
When Will Obama Reform Presidential Pardons?

As a candidate for president in 2008, Barack Obama pledged to "immediately" review federal … Read More.

24 May 2012
In the House, Is 80 Over the Hill?

When Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., lost the GOP primary to challenger Richard Mourdock this month, Beltway … Read More.

22 May 2012
Democrats' War on Money

Cory Booker, mayor of Newark, N.J., came across as a moderate, sensible Democrat when he said on "Meet … Read More.

National Public Racket

Share Comment

Forget the recent scandals involving National Public Radio. Go back to the days before NPR chief exec Vivian Schiller resigned, before a conservative prankster videotaped NPR fundraisers disparaging tea party participants as "seriously racist, racist people" — to even before NPR fired senior news analyst Juan Williams after he said on Fox News that he got "nervous" flying with passengers in Muslim garb.

Banish from your mind the recent controversies involving NPR's perceived or (I believe) real liberal bias. Even then, fiscal conservatives in Congress had called for cuts in federal funding for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting.

Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., introduced a bill to end taxpayer subsidies to the CPB — $420 million last year — back in June 2010 to reduce the federal debt.

"If we can't eliminate or at least seriously reduce the funding for a nonessential government program that has outlived its original purpose," Lamborn told me Thursday, "then I fear that we're not serious about our future.

It's true that he is a conservative and that NPR has done things that didn't sit right with him, Lamborn continued. But, he said, his prime motivator was "the spending."

The chairs of the bipartisan fiscal commission named by President Obama — Republican Alan Simpson and Democrat Erskine Bowles — targeted CPB, which provides 10 percent to 15 percent of funding that goes to local public broadcasting TV and radio stations, for elimination. They made no charge of bias, just the fact that CPB's funding level is "the highest it has ever been" and that its elimination should save taxpayers just under $500 million in 2015.

NPR boosters scoff at this measly sum. This year's budget will spend $3.8 trillion, they argue; CPB is a drop in the bucket. But Washington has to eliminate programs in order to reach the Simpson-Bowles goal of reducing domestic spending by $100 billion over 10 years.

Obama hardly helps his claim of wanting to cut the deficit when he himself wants to raise CPB's take to $451 million next year. White House spokesman Jay Carney says that the president understands the need to make "tough choices." But the administration won't even yank this, the Grey Poupon of federal subsidies.

I understand that if Washington pulls the plug, rural public broadcasting affiliates will be hit hardest.

?If Washington eliminates the CPB subsidy, then viewers and listeners will be asked to pony up. There may be added pressure on liberal benefactors, such as liberal billionaire George Soros, to provide seed money to send to the locals. And if that fails, some affiliates may have to consolidate with others — which would be painful, as "tough choices" usually are.

Lamborn believes that if Congress eliminates CPB funding — the Senate just voted down a House bill that included the CPB cut — then stations may have to change their business model, but "they still have every opportunity to continue on in the private sector and prosper, and I believe they would."

If they want to save a few bucks, public broadcasting execs might want to look at top salaries. According to the Washington Post, NPR President Vivian Schiller's salary was $450,000 last year — plus a $112,500 bonus. PBS President Paula Kerger's compensation exceeded $630,000 in 2009. When you think about those poor rural stations scrimping on federal crumbs, those tony salaries almost make you want to cry.

Now it turns out, even some NPR biggies don't think the broadcaster should get federal funds.

Now, I am no fan of the smarmy tactics of conservative prankster James O'Keefe, the guy who pretended he was a pimp in order to discredit ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. If I ever shake his hand by mistake, I'll wash it right away.

But just as Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has to live with comments he made on the phone to a left-leaning liar, NPR now has to live with O'Keefe's tapes. While trying to land a $5 million donation from the fictitious Muslim Education Action Center Trust, now-former NPR fundraiser Ron Schiller (no relation to the president) said NPR would be " in the long run ... better off without federal funding."

He also said, "In my personal opinion, liberals today might be more educated, fair and balanced than conservatives." I am sure he meant that, too.

Lamborn tells me that the O'Keefe videos increase the likelihood that Washington will cut the CPB cord because the videos show "the disarray at NPR."

That may be a polite way of saying that the tapes make NPR execs look like complete frauds — the same way they looked when they very publicly fired Juan Williams. Vivian Schiller said the move had nothing to do with Williams' regular appearances on the right-leaning Fox News. Apparently, she believes the American public is stupid. Could that be because, until very recently, the American public very generously subsidized her perch?

E-mail Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com. To find out more about Debra J. Saunders, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
I live in Canada where our national broadcaster, the CBC, aka Mother Corp, has been receiving public funds ever since it was created. Mother Corp periodically has had its hands slapped; presidents have changed; small and metro station have stopped and then resumed delivering the news based on budgets. Conservatives have railed against it, while Liberals have protected and harmed it equally. It competes for commercial dollars against a universe of cable stations. It has survived. Sadly, it programming has reflected it. We have had some stellar shows -- some that reflect Canada's culture and aspirations. We have had some dogs too. Still, beyond a doubt, most Canadians whom I have spoken with, after watching PBS television for any period of time will admit that the American broadcaster is far more educational and entertaining than it northern peer. Why is that?
Notwithstanding the salaries of NPR executives I believe that the actual membership funding has a lot to do with what is seen on the screen. I believe that PBS is closer in understandings its customer base. In all the years that I have watched it I have not worried about whether one show or another was conservative or left-wing. Rather, the takeaway has been almost always about how much knowledgeable have I become from the experience. Even though I don't get a tax-credit for my donation, I have given for having the privilege of being enriched. Republican and Democratic politicians can battle out for whose influence is best to do what with NPR -- surely NPR executives could voluntarily pare down their salaries to help avoid involuntary cuts -- but anything drastic that occurs due to politicking will as a consequence negatively affect your nation and mine. So I ask you, in a time of global change that we are living what direction do you want to be going: forward or back? My vote is forward, and I think NPR/PBS broadcasting is the right vehicle to help us go in that direction.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Darryl Darwent
Sun Mar 13, 2011 2:37 PM
I live in Canada where our national broadcaster, the CBC, aka Mother Corp, has been receiving public funds ever since it was created. Mother Corp periodically has had its hands slapped; presidents have changed; small and metro station have stopped and then resumed delivering the news based on budgets. Conservatives have railed against it, while Liberals have protected and harmed it equally. It competes for commercial dollars against a universe of cable stations. It has survived. Sadly, it programming has reflected it. We have had some stellar shows -- some that reflect Canada's culture and aspirations. We have had some dogs too. Still, beyond a doubt, most Canadians whom I have spoken with, after watching PBS television for any period of time will admit that the American broadcaster is far more educational and entertaining than it northern peer. Why is that?

Notwithstanding the salaries of NPR executives I believe that the actual membership funding has a lot with what is seen on on the screen. I believe that PBS is closer in understandings its customer base. In all the years that I have watched it I have not worried about whether one show or another was conservative or left-wing.Rather, the takeaway has been almost always about how much more knowledgeable have I become from the experience. Even though I don't get a tax-credit for my donation, I have given for having the privilege of being enriched. Republican and Democratic politicians can battle out for whose influence is best to do what with NPR -- surely NPR executives could voluntarily pare down their salaries to help avoid involuntary cuts -- but anything drastic that occurs due to politicking will as a consequence negatively affect your nation and mine. So i ask you, in a time of global change what direction do you want to be going: forward or back? I say forward. I believe with the programming of NPR/PBS it is the vehicle that will help us adapt and move us in this direction.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Darryl Darwent
Sun Mar 13, 2011 2:40 PM
top99shopping.com
Classic Handbags,UGG Boots,Whosale shoes
Wholesale sale of professional ,Classic Handbags,UGG Boots,Wholesale shoes
and so on.Cooperation brand : nike,puma,affliction,prada,Polo,AF,gucci,chanel,lacoste,Louis Vuitton,ED hardy,coogi,dior,armani.when you receivr the order,if you do not like our products, returned at any time.
Comment: #3
Posted by: ailsalinlin
Mon Mar 28, 2011 2:31 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Debra J. Saunders
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

1 Feb 2009 Prison or Versailles?

22 Apr 2012 Proposition 29 -- Forget Ballot Box Budgeting

29 Jul 2007 John Doe Versus Flying Imams