Prohibiting Federal Funding on National Public Radio

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1076, a Republican bill to prohibit federal funding for National Public Radio.

Congress has been in session this year for nearly three months, and what have the American people gotten?

The House voted to repeal new patients' rights and benefits and to strengthen the rights of insurance companies.

The House voted to cut funds for education and Pell Grants at a time when we need to build up, not tear down, our educational and economic competitiveness.

The House voted to eliminate funds for Planned Parenthood, a highly regarded source for medical and health information and services for women.

The House voted to take away the rights of workers to contest workplace abuses by their employers, weaken the reporting system for workplace safety violations, and lower the wages of construction workers on federal contracts.

And now, today, the House is voting to kill the small amount of federal funding for National Public Radio, an important and unbiased source of news for tens of millions of Americans across the country.

Not one bill so far to create jobs. Not one bill so far to invest in America. Not one bill that makes it clear America will be ready to compete in the global economy and win the race to produce the best college graduates in the world.

Instead, the American people are being fed a steady diet of right-wing ideological attacks on our rights, on our values, and on middle class economic opportunities. American families are desperate for work, but they are getting nothing but a cold shoulder from the House of Representatives under this new leadership.

The attack on NPR, just like the attack on Planned Parenthood, or on Head Start, and on workers' rights and safety, has nothing to do with reducing the deficit and the debt. It is nothing more than a partisan political agenda that is out of step with, and very dangerous to, the American people.

The attack on NPR is outrageous and it should be rejected. The American people benefit greatly having this source of news that is free from the influence and demands of corporations and that consistently delivers top quality, in-depth, and breaking news on foreign affairs, science and technology, politics, the arts, and business.

If this leadership is so concerned with the deficit, why hasn't it called up legislation to reduce tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies to major oil companies, companies with record profits quarter after quarter and no need for subsidies to carry out their work?

Why hasn't this leadership called up legislation to reduce some of the billions of dollars in Pentagon waste documented year after year?

And why was this leadership's first major action in the House a bill that would increase the deficit over the next ten years by more than $210 billion by repealing our historic health care law?

Why? Because their rhetoric about deficit reduction is just a cover for a divisive political agenda that they hope will help them in the next election.

I strongly support eliminating wasteful government spending, and I have a long and documented track record of deficit reduction. Whether it was my successful effort to increase student loan aid by reducing taxpayer support to private lenders, or passing the health care reform law, or through my early support for Pay-As-You-Go budgeting, I have always made this a priority.

I know how hard it is to make tough choices about saving taxpayer money and being fiscally responsible.

I know it is not hard for politicians to cut Head Start, but it's really hard on low-income mothers trying to educate their children. And I know it is not hard to cut the small amount of federal funding for NPR, but it is really hard on the millions of Americans who hunger for information from a wide variety of sources.

I'll tell you what's hard to cut. It is really hard to cut land subsidies to multi-national mining companies, or royalty subsidies to oil companies, or water and price subsidies to major agricultural corporations. I know, because I have fought to make those cuts. And corporations fight back, hard.

So, Mr. Speaker, again I rise in opposition to this bill that will not reduce our deficit but will reduce the level of information Americans have about really complex and important issues facing our country. And I rise in opposition to the past three months of partisan, ideological and political attacks on the basic rights, values and services that are so important to our country.

And I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source