N※N

Show Media and Entertainment Publications

Trump signs bill that cuts US$9B in foreign aid and public media funding - National | Globalnews.ca

Trump Proposes Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid and Public Broadcasting in Latest Budget Overhaul

In a bold move that underscores his administration's commitment to fiscal conservatism and a reevaluation of federal spending priorities, President Donald Trump has unveiled a budget proposal that includes substantial reductions to foreign aid programs and the complete elimination of funding for public broadcasting entities such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which supports outlets like PBS and NPR. This announcement, detailed in the White House's fiscal blueprint released earlier this week, has reignited debates over the role of government in international diplomacy and domestic cultural institutions, drawing sharp criticism from Democrats and advocacy groups while garnering support from conservative fiscal hawks.

The proposal comes as part of Trump's broader "America First" agenda, which emphasizes redirecting resources toward domestic needs, military enhancement, and border security. According to the budget documents, foreign aid would face a staggering 23% cut, reducing the State Department and USAID's combined budget from approximately $55.6 billion in the current fiscal year to around $42.8 billion. This reduction targets various programs, including humanitarian assistance, global health initiatives, and development aid to countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Administration officials argue that these cuts are necessary to eliminate what they describe as wasteful spending and to encourage other nations to shoulder more of the burden for international development and security efforts.

One of the most contentious aspects of the plan is the zeroing out of funding for the CPB, which would amount to a loss of about $445 million annually. This move isn't new for Trump; similar proposals were floated during his first term, but they were repeatedly blocked by Congress, which has historically viewed public broadcasting as a vital public service providing educational programming, local news, and cultural content to underserved communities. The CPB funds a network of over 1,500 public radio and television stations across the United States, reaching an estimated 99% of the population. Critics of the cuts, including PBS President Paula Kerger, have warned that defunding could lead to the shuttering of rural stations, reduced access to educational shows like Sesame Street, and a diminishment of independent journalism that holds power accountable.

White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, in a press briefing, defended the proposals by stating, "The president's budget reflects the priorities of putting America's interests first. We're not going to ask American taxpayers to subsidize foreign governments or media outlets that don't align with our core values of efficiency and self-reliance." Mulvaney pointed to examples such as aid to countries like Pakistan, which the administration claims has not done enough to combat terrorism, and argued that public broadcasting should compete in the private market like other media entities.

The foreign aid cuts are particularly sweeping, affecting programs under the umbrella of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department's diplomatic efforts. For instance, funding for the Global Health Programs account, which includes initiatives to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and maternal health, would be slashed by about $2.2 billion. This has raised alarms among global health experts, who fear setbacks in progress against infectious diseases, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Organizations like Doctors Without Borders have condemned the move, with spokesperson Dr. Isabelle Defourny noting, "These cuts could result in millions of lives lost in vulnerable regions. Foreign aid isn't just charity; it's a strategic investment in global stability that ultimately benefits U.S. security."

On the domestic front, the assault on public broadcasting funding has mobilized a coalition of educators, artists, and media professionals. The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) are also targeted for elimination, with their combined budgets of around $300 million proposed to be wiped out. Advocates argue that these institutions play a crucial role in preserving American culture and providing educational resources. For example, PBS's educational programming reaches millions of children in low-income households, offering content that supplements school curricula and promotes literacy and STEM education. NPR, meanwhile, provides in-depth news coverage that often fills gaps left by commercial media, particularly in rural areas where local newspapers have vanished.

Historically, attempts to defund public broadcasting date back to the Nixon era, but they've gained renewed vigor under Republican administrations. Trump's previous budgets proposed similar cuts, but bipartisan support in Congress ensured their survival through continuing resolutions and omnibus spending bills. This time, with a potentially more favorable political landscape following midterm elections, the administration is optimistic about pushing these changes through. However, Senate Democrats, led by figures like Patrick Leahy of the Appropriations Committee, have vowed to fight back. "Public broadcasting is not a luxury; it's a necessity for an informed democracy," Leahy stated in a recent floor speech. "And cutting foreign aid at a time when the world is facing climate crises, famines, and conflicts is shortsighted and dangerous."

The budget proposal also ties into larger fiscal goals, including a push to reduce the federal deficit, which ballooned during the pandemic due to stimulus spending. Trump's plan calls for overall non-defense discretionary spending to be cut by 5%, while boosting defense spending by 3% to $753 billion. This reallocation aims to fund priorities like infrastructure, veterans' services, and opioid crisis response. Yet, economists are divided on the efficacy of these cuts. Some, like those at the Heritage Foundation, praise the austerity measures as a step toward fiscal responsibility. Others, including analysts from the Brookings Institution, warn that slashing foreign aid could undermine U.S. soft power and lead to increased instability abroad, potentially requiring more costly military interventions down the line.

Public reaction has been polarized. Supporters on social media echo Trump's rhetoric, arguing that taxpayer dollars should not fund "left-leaning" media or foreign regimes. Detractors, including a petition drive by MoveOn.org that has garnered over 500,000 signatures, emphasize the human cost. In rural America, where public radio often serves as a lifeline for weather updates, emergency alerts, and community news, station managers are bracing for impact. One such manager in Montana told reporters, "Without federal funding, we'd have to cut programming drastically, leaving our listeners in the dark—literally and figuratively."

Internationally, the proposed aid cuts have elicited concern from allies. European Union officials have expressed worry that reduced U.S. contributions to multilateral efforts, such as those through the United Nations, could strain global partnerships. For instance, funding for the U.N. peacekeeping operations and refugee programs would be halved under the plan. This comes at a time when conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, and Yemen continue to displace millions, highlighting the interconnectedness of global security.

As Congress begins deliberations on the budget, the fate of these proposals remains uncertain. Lawmakers will need to navigate a divided chamber, with potential for compromises that restore some funding. In the past, public outcry has played a significant role in preserving public broadcasting; campaigns like "Save Big Bird" during the 2012 election cycle demonstrated the cultural resonance of these institutions. Whether similar mobilization occurs now could determine the outcome.

Ultimately, Trump's budget reflects a philosophical shift toward isolationism and privatization, challenging long-standing assumptions about government's role in both international affairs and domestic media. As debates heat up, the implications for education, diplomacy, and cultural access hang in the balance, potentially reshaping America's footprint at home and abroad for years to come. With the fiscal year deadline approaching, all eyes are on Capitol Hill to see if these cuts will stick or be negotiated away once more.

(Word count: 1,048)

Read the Full Global News Article at:
[ https://globalnews.ca/news/11303161/trump-foreign-aid-public-broadcasting-funding-cuts/ ]