New Bill Aims to Cut Public Funding of NPR, PBS

A new bill introduced by Republican lawmakers seeks to eliminate federal funding for NPR, citing concerns over biased reporting and unnecessary government spending. The proposal has reignited the debate over whether taxpayer dollars should support public broadcasting.

Key Facts:

Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) and Sen. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) introduced the “Defund NPR Act,” which would eliminate all federal taxpayer support for NPR.
NPR receives about 1% of its direct funding from the federal government, but local affiliates rely more heavily on federal grants.
Banks argues NPR’s dependence on public funding reflects the poor quality of its journalism.
A separate bill, the “Defund Government Sponsored Propaganda Act,” targets both NPR and PBS, aiming to remove federal subsidies.
Supporters of the bills believe that public broadcasting should compete in the private market rather than rely on taxpayer money.

The Rest of The Story:

The push to defund NPR and PBS is part of a broader effort by Republicans to curb government spending and reduce taxpayer-funded support for media outlets.

NPR insists that public funding is essential, arguing that its local affiliates would struggle without federal grants.

However, critics say NPR has become a vehicle for left-leaning political narratives, making its public funding inappropriate.

This is not the first time lawmakers have attempted to cut NPR’s funding.

Sen. Banks introduced a similar bill in April 2024, and the debate over whether taxpayer dollars should fund public broadcasting has been ongoing for years.

With the federal budget under increased scrutiny, GOP lawmakers see this as the right time to revisit the issue.

This afternoon I proudly introduced the Defund NPR Act in the House. With @SenatorBanks as our Senate lead, we're opposing federal funding for NPR as its liberal propaganda production reaches new heights. Read more here! 👇https://t.co/jgweto9UN9

— Rep. Cammack Press Office (@RepKatCammack) February 26, 2025

Commentary:

For decades, taxpayers have been forced to fund NPR and PBS, despite the overwhelming number of media choices available.

In an era of streaming, digital news, and private radio, there is no justification for the government subsidizing any media outlet—especially one that routinely promotes a left-leaning agenda.

NPR’s defenders claim that federal funding is only a small portion of its budget.

If that’s true, why not cut the funding entirely and let the network prove it can survive without taxpayer money?

Private media outlets compete in the marketplace without government handouts, and NPR should be no different.

Beyond the financial argument, there’s a serious concern about fairness.

NPR’s reporting consistently aligns with liberal viewpoints, yet Americans across the political spectrum are forced to fund it.

If an openly conservative network were receiving government funds, there would be widespread outrage.

The principle should be the same for all media: no taxpayer support.

Sen. Mike Lee put it best when he said that public broadcasting should compete in the “marketplace of ideas” without government assistance.

NPR and PBS can continue operating through private donations and sponsorships, just like other media organizations.

If their content is valuable, they’ll find an audience willing to support them.

The Bottom Line:

The debate over NPR’s federal funding is long overdue.

With so many news options available, there’s no reason for taxpayers to subsidize media organizations—especially ones with a clear ideological bias.

Whether this bill passes or not, the conversation about ending government-sponsored media should continue.