Not quite. All the groups listed only get a portion of their funding from the US Government, the highest amount listed was 15%. So the broadcasts would likely continue, just with fewer resources. The article also states that the funding is guaranteed by Congress, and the President can’t impound it, but we’ve seen that Congress is letting the President break the law with impunity.
The article says that member stations rely the most on federal dollars. It would be ironic if cuts force member stations to close, and those stations happen to be predominately rural (and Republican). I bet Trump would use that as “evidence” of further bias …
Not quite. All the groups listed only get a portion of their funding from the US Government, the highest amount listed was 15%. So the broadcasts would likely continue, just with fewer resources. The article also states that the funding is guaranteed by Congress, and the President can’t impound it, but we’ve seen that Congress is letting the President break the law with impunity.
The article says that member stations rely the most on federal dollars. It would be ironic if cuts force member stations to close, and those stations happen to be predominately rural (and Republican). I bet Trump would use that as “evidence” of further bias …
As if their funding wasn’t already not enough.
Neo-con playbook 101: bleed public services dry until you can claim that they’re no good anyhow, and abolish them completely.