[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 32 (Tuesday, February 18, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1007-S1008]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




SETTING FORTH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 AND SETTING FORTH THE APPROPRIATE BUDGETARY LEVELS 
                   FOR FISCAL YEARS 2026 THROUGH 2034

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the concurrent 
resolution by title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 7) setting forth the 
     congressional budget for the United States Government for 
     fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary 
     levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.


                          Public Broadcasting

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, with me today is my colleague from my 
office Mr. John Lowery, and I appreciate his help.
  Last week, I spoke a few minutes about the Corporation for Public 
Broadcasting--we called it the CPB--and the Public Broadcasting 
Service--most people know what that is, PBS--and the National Public 
Radio, which most people know is NPR.
  And I am not going to repeat everything I said last week, but I do 
want to revise and extend my remarks.
  The U.S. Congress created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting 
back in the sixties, 1967, I think. Those were very different times. 
There was no internet. There was no Facebook. There was no Twitter. 
There was no cable TV. There were no podcasts. There were basically a 
handful, maybe a few more, of radio stations throughout America. And 
the television was still pretty new. There were three main television 
stations with local affiliates.
  And many Americans, particularly in rural areas, didn't have access 
to radio and television for their news because that is all there was. I 
remember those days.
  And so Congress decided to start providing money for what it called, 
at that time, public broadcasting, to make sure that everybody had 
access to news, radio, and television, even if they didn't live near a 
big city.
  And Congress intended that that news be news, factually based. Now, 
those were the days in America of true journalism. I remember them, 
perhaps the Presiding Officer does too.
  Those were not the days that we experience today, opinion journalism, 
where young journalists are taught to report on who, what, when, where, 
how, and their opinion. Those were days when the news was really the 
news, and it was fair and balanced.
  So the U.S. Congress created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 
CPB still exists, and here is its relationship--CPB's relationship--to 
NPR and PBS. We give CPB, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, 
about half a billion dollars a year, a lot of money.
  And the Corporation for Public Broadcasting turns around and picks 
certain local television and radio stations and gives most of that 
money to them.
  And then those local television and radio stations, the chosen few 
that get money from the American taxpayer through the Corporation for 
Public Broadcasting, buy programming and content from two other 
organizations. If they are a radio station, they buy that from NPR, and 
if they are a television station, they buy that content from PBS.
  So up here you have got Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The 
American taxpayer, through Congress, gives them a half a billion 
dollars a year. That money flows down to certain select local 
television and radio stations, and those local television and radio 
stations then buy content from NPR, if they are a radio station, or 
PBS, if they are a TV station, which were loosely affiliated with the 
Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
  Since this scheme was established, the American taxpayer has given 
all of these entities about--oh, I don't know--$14.5 billion, $14.5 
billion. That would be enough to build 2,700 miles of paved roads 
throughout America. And I based that on--the roads I am talking about 
are not gavel roads--regular paved roads, 10 feet each lane, actually 
12 feet each lane, with a 3-foot shoulder on each side.
  But instead of building 2,700 miles of roads in our rural areas and 
in urban areas that need infrastructure, we have decided to give this 
money to CPB, which gives it to the local stations, which gives it to 
PBS and NPR.
  I mentioned the local stations. Only a select few local stations get 
this taxpayer money. And in my State, we have over 500 radio stations. 
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, in its unfettered discretion, 
only picks seven to give the money to. The other 493 get nothing.
  We have over 150 TV stations in Louisiana. The Corporation for Public 
Broadcasting only gives the taxpayer money for 3 of them, so 147 get 
nothing.
  Now, I probably wouldn't object to this if the Corporation for Public 
Broadcasting and NPR--National Public Radio is what I am referring to, 
of course--and PBS had been consistent with its original mission, which 
is to report factually the news to the American people.
  The government doesn't need to subsidize the media anymore because 
the world has changed. Ninety-seven percent of the people in America 
have the internet, but I still probably wouldn't object that much if 
the reporting by these entities were fair and balanced. But it is not.
  No fairminded person in America can look at this programming and 
believe that it is unbiassed. It is decidedly prejudiced in favor of 
one point of view. That is not just my opinion. I think most Americans 
would agree with that because most Americans see the headlines that are 
produced by these three entities.
  I talked about some last week. This is what Americans' taxpayer money 
is going to, to provide.
  Here are just some headlines from NPR. I mentioned these last week. I 
won't belabor them.

  ``Michael Avenatti: A Profile Of The Media-Savvy Attorney.''
  This is NPR. They love Michael Avenatti, who of course is in jail 
today. He is a crook. But NPR loved him because he was anti-Republican, 
and he was anti-President Trump.
  NPR published another article:
  ``How racism became a marketing tool for country music.''
  Now, you don't have to be Euclid to see the implication here that 
country music is racist, according to NPR. I don't think any fairminded 
person would call that factual or fair and balanced.
  Here is another headline from NPR:
  ``Donald Trump's Long Embrace of Vladimir Putin.''
  I also talked last week about a few other headlines from NPR.
  Here is one:
  ``Monuments And Teams Have Changed Names As America Reckons With 
Racism. Birds Are Next.''
  That is what your tax dollars paid for.
  ``Eating less beef is a climate solution. Here's why that's hard for 
some American men.''
  ``How the Taliban adds to Afghanistan's woes when it comes to 
climate-fueled disasters.''
  No fairminded person with an IQ above a single-cell organism would 
conclude that this is anything but biased to certain points of view.
  And there are more. I could do this all night, but I am not.
  Here are some more headlines from NPR:
  `` `There is no neutral': `Nice White People' Can Still Be Complicit 
In A Racist Society.''
  That is what your tax dollars paid for.
  Another one:
  ``Ibram X. Kendi Says No One is `Not Racist'. So What Should We Do?''

[[Page S1008]]

  Another one:
  ``How [artificial intelligence] could perpetuate racism, sexism, and 
other biases in society.''
  Another:
  ``Scientists Debunk Lab Accident Theory of Pandemic Emergence.''
  Here is another one:
  ``As Trump Pushes Theory of Virus Origins, Some See Parallels In 
Lead-Up to Iraq War.''
  Your tax dollars at work.
  ``As U.S. Confronts Russia, Trump's Admiration Of Putin Is 
Consistent.''
  Another headline from NPR:
  ``The History of Policing And Race In The U.S. Are Deeply 
Intertwined.''
  Another:
  ``After Biden's debate performance, the presidential race is 
unchanged.''
  This was the debate performance that President Biden gave after which 
he got out of the race.
  If you believe that headline, you believe in the tooth fairy and the 
Easter Bunny and that Jimmy Hoffa died of natural causes, but that is 
what NPR reported with your tax dollars.
  Here is more:
  ``Democracy on Trial, Part One: A Blueprint For the Case Against 
Trump.''
  Is that fair and balanced? That is from PBS.
  ``Racism in the Era of Trump: An Oral History.''
  Another headline, January 13, 2020.
  Another, this one is really special:
  `` `A Serial Liar': How Sarah Palin Ushered in the `Post-Truth' 
Political Era in Which Trump Has Thrived.''
  Now, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and NPR and PBS have the 
right, whether I like it or not or whether you like it or not or 
whether Americans like it or not to publish these articles and to 
broadcast this news. That is the First Amendment, but they don't have 
the right to do it with taxpayer money.

  At least half of America would look at these headlines and be 
offended. They would be offended, first, because they would--really for 
three reasons: No. 1, they disagree with opinion journalism; No. 2, 
they would disagree with the headline; and, No. 3, they would disagree 
with the fact that these headlines are not fair. They are not 
objective. They are obviously slanted to one point of view, and they 
are using taxpayer money.
  If someone introduced a bill tomorrow--I will just pick a 
publication--to prohibit the New York Times, I would vote against that 
bill and argue against it. If someone introduced a bill to get rid of 
FOX News, I would have the same position. If someone introduced a bill 
to get rid of the Washington Post, that would be my position as well. 
Whether I agree with those media outlets or not, we have a First 
Amendment that we cherish, and I am rather fond of the Constitution.
  But if somebody introduced a bill to give money to CNN, taxpayer 
money to CNN or to the New York Times or to FOX News, I would oppose 
that as well.
  This is simply wrong, and we are spending half a billion dollars a 
year, $14.5 billion over time, to give to people at the Corporation for 
Public Broadcasting and NPR and NPS to participate in opinion 
journalism, which they are entitled to do. But they can't do it on the 
taxpayer dime. They are doing it on the taxpayer dime, but they 
shouldn't be able to.
  I would also point out that the folks at PBS and NPR and PBS are 
doing pretty well for themselves. NPR just bought a $201 million office 
space just up the road from the Capitol--$200 million. It came from the 
American taxpayers so they could publish this stuff.
  NPR pays its hosts as much as $532,000 a year, taxpayer money. It 
pays its chief diversity officer about $320,000 a year.
  And you know what? Despite all this money that the American taxpayers 
are giving to these left-of-center entities, their viewership has 
declined because people don't need them anymore. So why are we giving 
them money?
  I have introduced legislation, not to eliminate the Corporation for 
Public Broadcasting, not to eliminate the Public Broadcasting Service, 
and not to eliminate the National Public Radio--they can go exist on 
their own if they want to, but I do want to defund them.
  We are running $36 trillion in debt. This is disgraceful in 2025. It 
is disgraceful whether it is left-of-center opinion journalism or 
right-of-center opinion journalism. It is disgraceful to the American 
people to have to fund this rot. It doesn't mean the rot doesn't have a 
right to exist, but they don't have a right to taxpayer money.
  It is late. So I am not going to go to my second topic.

                          ____________________