The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Why Big Bird Wins

Betsy Woodruff has a very good piece up at NRO about why it is so hard to cut federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting — and it is good not merely because she quotes me, but because in a very short space she captures the essence of the difficulties. For instance:

It’s politically tricky, in part because of local boards that oversee PBS affiliates. Franc argues that since so many powerful appropriators have spouses on the boards, they feel pressure to keep the money flowing. Giving federal funds to causes that benefit the arts lets them enjoy the social advantages of philanthropists without contributing any of their own money.

She quotes me explaining some history on why CPB’s funding keeps surviving, But one thing that isn’t clear is that I completely, wholeheartedly support cutting the funding — indeed, eliminating it entirely. I was not arguing in favor of keeping it, but instead explaining why cutting CPB is a political loser unless, unless those who would cut it lay some careful groundwork first and plan out our strategy and tactics for winning the fight. I do think it is a winnable fight… but a hard one.

Those who want to win the battle should read Woodruff’s article to get a sense of some of the obstacles — and then strategize accordingly.

View all comments (9) |

RJ| 10.12.12 @ 5:37PM

No doubt you are right Quin that it is difficult to obtain political support to end government sponsored "speech" and "culture." But we must eliminate it. It is not a legitimate government function and government spending has us in a debt crisis. All cuts in government spending are hard to obtain, but subsidies for "public broadcasting" is one of the least justifiable expenditures of taxpayer money.

Everyone has heard of separation of church and state. How about separation of arts/culture and state?

Oldefarte| 10.12.12 @ 9:24PM

In my humble opinion, I am totally against taxpayer funding of any such commericial etc venture, as same does not fit the definition of government functions. Unfortionately local, state and national government pay for things that should not be funded, and then ask the taxpayers to pay for same through increased levies [which is wrong]. If the Constitutional experts here were to research the original document, no doubt that no intent of the framers could be discovered to any such venture. We have a sales tax increase in my area that was being fought with elements as to whether or not music festivals, arts councils etc sould be funded, and I say definately and absolutely NOT!!!!!!!!!!!

JimH| 10.13.12 @ 8:01AM

The CPB, like every other claimant to the public purse are concentrated, motivated and focused. They have much to gain and so expend great effort in obtaining what they want via lobbying and other means of persuading congress. Unfortunately, the other side, taxpayers, have no such organized influence. It is inevitable the claimants will get what they want until countering influence is brought on Congress or the Constitution is properly interpreted so as to limit Congressional spending to things, such as defense, that it may properly be involved in.

clemsberry| 10.13.12 @ 10:02AM

would pbs be alive today if it were conservative?

clemsberry| 10.13.12 @ 10:08AM

off topic but,,,,a bedrock of capitalism that we all are familiar with is "the sale". why don't a car dealer simply raise the price of the cars to increase revenue? how can lowering the price lead to more revenue?

Oldefarte| 10.13.12 @ 12:01PM

Any art should be kept "alive" by its supporters. Why should I be forced by my government to keep "alive" an entity that I do not wish to contribute my money to? Why should government be in the business of keeping "alive" any private entity/business? As to your car question, the only reason prices are increased is due to the manufacturer's increased costs/expense of producing same, which cannot be nullified/eaten by technology and productivity increases. Lowering the price alternative can add customers wish to take advantage of same for their benefit and therefore increased sales, allowing the increased volume of sales to negate the increased costs and still maintain or increase a car manufacturer's profits. Capish? [oh and also it should be DOESN'T, not DON'T]!!!!

clemsberry| 10.13.12 @ 2:45PM

oldefrte,,your response to my post is babble. doesn't-don't -bite me.

Oldefarte| 10.14.12 @ 11:09AM

It's not big enough, you dumb DIP-EXCREMENT, and even if it was, your mother would be in the way!!!!

Oldefarte| 10.14.12 @ 11:11AM

PS: You may wish to take a fifth grade English class before attempting to blog here again, as most here know how to spell, punctuate, capitalize etc words properly when doing thus!!!!!

More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/10/12/why-big-bird-wins

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

The IRS Immigration Fraud Scandal

Jeffrey Lord | 6.18.13

Foreign Policy as Farce

Jed Babbin | 6.17.13

The Biggest Fool of All

Doug Bandow | 6.17.13

Can Liturgical Music Be Saved?

Patrick O'Hannigan | 6.17.13

Revenge of the Fruitcakes

Peter Hitchens | 6.17.13

Obama's Climate of Intimidation

Matthew Sheffield | 6.18.13

Obama's Unaffordable Act

Peter Ferrara | 6.19.13

Whither Suburbia?

Steven Greenhut | 6.18.13

ADVERTISEMENT