In a significant move, the House of Representatives has given final approval to President Donald Trump’s request to rescind approximately $9 billion earmarked for public broadcasting and foreign aid programs. This decision comes as Republicans intensify their scrutiny of institutions and initiatives they consider excessive or misaligned with their policy objectives.
This marks the first instance in decades where a president has successfully navigated such a rescissions request through Congress, with indications from the White House that more may follow.
The final vote in the House was narrowly passed at 216-213 and now awaits President Trump’s signature.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., emphasized the need for ‘fiscal sanity,’ describing the move as an essential step towards achieving that goal.
However, the vote has drawn criticism from opponents who raise alarms over the potential implications of Congress yielding its spending authority to the executive branch. They argue that this sets a concerning precedent, as established bipartisan investments are being repealed along party lines without previous levels of bipartisan support.
The Senate had already passed the same measure with a 51-48 vote, which saw no Democratic backing. Finalizing the bill in the House took longer than expected due to internal Republican discussions in response to Democratic pressures surrounding the release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein.
The rescission package eliminates around $1.1 billion dedicated to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, as well as nearly $8 billion allocated for various foreign aid initiatives, many of which address crises including drought, disease, and political instability.
This financial clawback comes shortly after Republicans managed to push through Trump’s tax and spending cut legislation without Democratic input, which the Congressional Budget Office predicts will contribute an additional $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.
Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries dismissed the justification that Republicans are genuinely addressing wasteful expenditure, stating, ‘No one is buying the notion that Republicans are actually trying to improve wasteful spending.’
The cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which total $1.1 billion, equate to the total funding the corporation would receive over the next two years.
The Trump administration characterizes the public media system as politically biased and an unnecessary fiscal burden.
The Corporation distributes about two-thirds of its funding to over 1,500 locally operated public television and radio stations, allocating the remainder to support national programming for entities such as National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service.
Democratic efforts to restore this funding in the Senate proved unsuccessful.
Concern for the cuts to public broadcasting is particularly pronounced among lawmakers representing rural areas, who fear the potential ramifications for local stations. Senator Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, underscored the vital role these stations play in disseminating crucial information, such as tsunami and landslide alerts, especially highlighted by a recent 7.3 magnitude earthquake near the Alaska Peninsula.
Additionally, Senator Mike Rounds, R-S.D., disclosed that he had reached an agreement with the White House to reallocate some funds from the Interior Department to aid Native American public radio stations across multiple states.
However, Kate Riley, the president and CEO of America’s Public Television Stations, criticized this arrangement as merely a temporary and insufficient measure that will still lead to funding cuts and reduced services at the affected stations.
Shifting focus to foreign aid, the proposed cuts include $800 million from a program designed to provide emergency shelter, water, and family reunification for refugees. Also slashed is $496 million intended for food, water, and healthcare for regions afflicted by disasters and conflicts, alongside a significant $4.15 billion reduction for programs aimed at fostering economic growth and democratic institutions in developing nations.
Democrats contend that the Republican administration’s disdain for foreign aid will damage America’s international standing and create a power vacuum that could be exploited by China.
Jeffries remarked, ‘This is not an America first bill. It’s a China first bill because of the void that’s being created all across the world.’
In response, the White House maintained that the cutbacks are designed to encourage other nations to take greater initiative in addressing humanitarian crises, emphasizing that the reclaimed funds are fundamentally the taxpayers’ money.
‘We ought not to forget that,’ stated Representative Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., who chairs the House Rules Committee.
During the legislative process, Senate GOP leaders ultimately removed a proposed $400 million cut to PEPFAR, an initiative that has been instrumental in combating HIV/AIDS and has garnered bipartisan support since its inception under President George W. Bush.
Looking ahead, Democrats have raised concerns about the bill’s implications for a legislative process that typically necessitates bipartisan collaboration to secure funding for the nation’s priorities.
The bill’s expedited passage, driven by the White House’s official rescission request, allowed it to advance in the Senate with only a simple majority rather than the usual 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. This enabled Republicans to push the bill forward along party lines with their 53-47 majority.
While two Republican senators, Murkowski and Susan Collins of Maine, voted against the bill alongside the Democrats, some other Republicans also expressed unease regarding the procedural aspects of the process.
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker of Mississippi, who supported the legislation, cautioned against making this method of passing legislation a regular occurrence, voicing concerns over the lack of transparency regarding what exactly will be eliminated.
Russ Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, asserted that the successful passage reflects a shared determination to control the nation’s fiscal situation.
Vought indicated that while the $9 billion cuts may seem modest, they were intentionally limited in scope to facilitate passage through Congress. He also hinted that more extensive rescission packages could emerge in the near future.
image source from：pbs
