U.S. House Cancels Spending for Public Broadcasting and Foreign Aid
WASHINGTON – Early Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to eliminate $9 billion in previously sanctioned funding for public broadcasting and foreign aid. This decision allows Congress to request presidential assistance for over three decades.
The vote was narrowly passed with a tally of 216-213, largely along party lines. It now awaits President Donald Trump’s signature, marking another legislative success for the administration after recent tax and spending cuts were enacted in early July. Notably, Brian Fitzpatrick from Pennsylvania and Mike Turner from Ohio joined Democrats in opposing the measure.
Earlier this week, the Senate voted to remove a provision that would have cut significant funding—hundreds of millions—for the president’s emergency AIDS relief program, known as Pepfar.
Senator Minecround from South Dakota reached an informal agreement with the White House Budget Director, reallocating $9.4 million from internal accounts to support rural Native American radio stations.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting will forfeit its planned fiscal year budget starting October 1st, alongside $1.1 billion earmarked for the following year. This organization funds not just national public radio but also various local stations across the nation.
Once the president signs this legislation, an additional $8 billion in foreign aid will be rescinded.
The original budget cut requests made by the White House included over 12 accounts targeted for reductions—many of which contribute to global health and democracy initiatives.
A proposal within the bill sought to eliminate $500 million intended for the U.S. International Development Agency, which supports programs addressing child and maternal health, HIV/AIDS, and other infectious diseases. Proponents argued that these cuts would not compromise treatment but would remove programs seen as conflicting with U.S. interests, including family planning and various equity initiatives.
The final bill maintains some protections; it ensures that key health programs like HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and nutrition remain funded but does not apply to family planning initiatives.
The administration also called for $83 million to be drawn from the State Department’s Democracy Fund, asserting that this aligns with efforts to cut waste and reallocate resources toward American priorities.
Lawmakers included these budget requests in the bill without additional safeguards, which raised some eyebrows.
Congress last passed a similar independent budget bill in 1992, based on several requests from President George H.W. Bush. During the first Trump administration, a related bill passed the House but didn’t get Senate approval.
House Debate Highlights Divisions
Discussions in the House mainly reflected partisan divides. Republicans cited dissatisfaction with how the Biden administration managed allocated funds as justification for reclaiming money initially released under Trump.
Virginia Fox, a Republican representative from North Carolina, characterized the $9 billion as a prime example of government overspending by the Biden-Harris administration. She mentioned, “The American people faced the financial fallout caused by the prior administration, which is why they chose Republicans to restore fiscal responsibility.”
The federal government spends roughly $6.8 trillion annually, with a significant portion—$4.1 trillion—going toward vital programs like Social Security and Medicare.
Another $1.8 trillion funds discretionary programs, covering various departments, while about $900 billion is allocated for interest on national debt.
Democrat Rosa Delauro, a leading member of the Appropriations Committee, voiced strong opposition during the floor debate, claiming that the bill represents a theft from the public. She warned that the cuts would jeopardize local broadcasting, potentially endangering public access to emergency information and children’s programming.
Delauro expressed concern that the reduction in foreign aid might strip crucial support from vulnerable populations and allow authoritarian countries to gain influence. “When we withdraw our support globally, America stands isolated. And who benefits? Countries like China, Russia, and Iran,” she stated.
