House Passes Rescissions Package; Cuts $1 Billion in Funding to PBS, NPR
This legislation will block $8 billion in funding to the U.S. Agency for International Development and $1 billion to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Just after midnight, the House of Representatives approved a $9 billion rescissions package by a 216-213 vote. The bill now heads to President Donald Trump’s desk for his signature which is expected on Friday.
Two Republicans, Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Mike Turner of Ohio, voted against the measure. Fitzpatrick, you may recall, also voted against passage of Trump’s big, beautiful bill earlier this month. He is a moderate from a swing district in the state that Democrats are hoping to flip in next year’s midterms.
Noting that Turner had not publicly discussed his opposition to the bill, Spectrum News contacted his office for a comment. Turner’s office replied, “His vote will be his statement.”
🚨🚨It is finished. At 12:04 a.m. Eastern, the House passes the $9 billion rescissions package that would claw back $1 billion in taxpayer dollars from PBS and NPR, 216-213. pic.twitter.com/IKf9tYclAZ
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) July 18, 2025
The bill, formally called H.R. 4 – Rescissions Act of 2025, can be viewed here. It initially proposed $9.4 billion in cuts, but ultimately passed with approximately $400 million less. Republicans decided to abandon their proposal to slash funding from a federal program dedicated to combating AIDS globally.
This legislation will block $8 billion in funding to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and $1 billion to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for the remainder of the fiscal year. Fox News reported that “the dollars had been allocated by Congress for the duration of fiscal year 2025.”
Congress faced an end-of-day Friday deadline to pass this bill. Had this deadline not been met, the funds would have had to go toward their originally assigned purpose.
According to Fox, passage of this bill was seen “as a test run of a fiscal claw-back process. … The last time a rescissions package was signed into law was 1999.”
House Democrats tried to turn debate on this measure into an opportunity to exploit the divisions between Republicans over the Trump administration’s decision not to release the Epstein documents.
CBS News reported that Democrats were trying to force a vote on a bipartisan measure introduced by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA) that “would force the Justice Department to release Epstein-related files within 30 days. … Instead, Republicans voted against the effort and offered a resolution that carries no legal weight to make the files public.”
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) argued, “If every Republican votes to block our attempt to release the records, they are telling Epstein’s victims, you don’t matter as much as our political convenience. And that should disgust every single one of us.”
It’s this kind of gamesmanship that has driven public approval of congressional Democrats down to 19%.
In the end, their tactics served only to delay the inevitable.
In one sense, it’s remarkable that $9 billion in spending cuts caused so much strife between lawmakers. As Sen. John Kennedy pointed out to Fox News host Will Cain earlier this week, it represents one tenth of 1% of the federal budget. But USAID and PBS/NPR are two of the Democrats’ favorite programs, making them politically symbolic targets.
If Republicans can’t come together to cut one tenth of 1% of the budget, we ought to hide our head in a bag.
— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) July 15, 2025
Shortly after the midnight vote, Trump touted its passage in a post on Truth Social:
HOUSE APPROVES NINE BILLION DOLLAR CUTS PACKAGE, INCLUDING ATROCIOUS NPR AND PUBLIC BROADCASTING, WHERE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR WERE WASTED. REPUBLICANS HAVE TRIED DOING THIS FOR 40 YEARS, AND FAILED….BUT NO MORE. THIS IS BIG!!!
Although $9 billion may not sound like a significant savings, Republicans have been trying to defund PBS and NPR for decades. And, as revealed in February, USAID has largely functioned as a global charity for progressive causes.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
got to love the dems response was
hey its only 1/100000 of the budget so its not worth it
as usual…they dont care that america is going BK and ANY help in delaying that is a win for patriots..of which they are not
Re: Epstein, the Statute of Limitations has passed, no one can be prosecuted anymore. Further, he did have legitimate clients, releasing their names risks smearing good people who may or may not have known certain rumors,) which is unethical.
And aside from Guthrie, how many of the girls, now women, are asking to open up the case?
Epstein is right up there with “trans” and “racism” as topics about which my give-a-hoot meter doesn’t budge.
Epstein is high up on my list as an exploitable remedy against our two-tiered standard of justice for elected officials and government bureaucrats.
That will never be fixed. Kennedys will kill and maim with no repercussions. Arimonys will rob charities blind with nothing done.
The common man has SWAT teams break down their doors, kill their pets (and maybe them) and destroy their homes with qualified immunity.
I don’t like it but it is how it is
Justice is for those who can buy the best lawyers.
The kerfuffle over Epstein isn’t about Epstein. If you think it shouldn’t be further investigated, you should ask yourself why people in positions of power want you to think that way. Epstein is a rock that should be turned over to see what’s under it.
you arent not wrong
but ,,this is a war we’re in for survival of this country to have some rennements of freedoms not yet stolen by the government
and lefty is leading the war with maga making inroads to break them as they mount their communist offenisives all across the country
you think mn and nyc and oakland etc etc etc that are pure socialism should take a back seat to pos epstein??? hopefully not
we can deal with epstein like they did with jfk …60 years later
How many care about Epstein and how many are just rubbing their hands because they revel in a good scandal?
And no leaders direct my thinking. I just think the entire Epstein scandal is the latest “squirrel!” to distract from more important things like the national dept and the land grabs in Los Angeles and Naui to cite two examples.
It has been turned over jackass.
Federal Judges rule on what case details go to the public.
You are demanding “:MUUHHHHH FILLLLLEESSSSSS”
You do realize those files are the child pornography Jeffrey Epstein had right? Along with things like who he had on the phone?
Judges correctly seal parts of cases to keep jackasses like you from ruining peoples lives on the say so of conspiracy theorists.
I don’t know. Thousands of VIP clients sexually abusing minors, and ten of thousands of videos revealing this, and a list which existed, and then didn’t exist, I would give a hoot about that.
Sex crimes in which the victim is a minor have NO federal statute of limitations.
Great
Well the living perpetrator is appealing her life sentence to the supreme court and likely to lose, and the other chose death over life in prison as a child rapist.
If you have evidence of something else produce it or stop slandering Donald Trump.
The one and the other, and that’s all she wrote?
Geez, Danny — while others are playing checkers, you’re playing beer pong.
How about the dozens or hundreds of CLIENTS who also committed sex crimes with minors?
This isn’t about Epstein, dimwit.
Release the information, all of it to the public and put this to bed through transparency. The PR campaign trotted out of ‘trust me’ or ‘move along, nothing to see’ and ‘that’s old, it’s too late’ isn’t gonna prevent constant ankle biting on this. Frankly it shouldn’t, we should all be disgusted that minor children were potentially subjected to sex trafficking by prominent people.
except we cant know b/c the girls themselves to give themselves high status WITH THE FEDS CAN give false info for their own importance
WE KNOW EPSTEIN IS/WAS A POS
females traded their lives for a life style of lavishes
any pos who KNOWINGLY slept with children need prison
BUT ITS NON STOP …”young girls” “underage” girls
and they wont substantiate what that means
Its like when the left says ..so and so made a racist remark,,,but they wont say what it is so we have to take their word for it
Who?
which epstein victims?
the ones who greedily went along with it knowing they were entering a world of glitz and glam
(and unless forced dont give me this underage argument…lefty pushes the underage “positivity” all the time ..not buying their faux outrage)
ITS LIKE A HOLLYWOOD MOMAGER
they put their kid(s) in a notorious environment known for its pedo activity and in some cases go along with bad activities
Of course the dems are using this epstein for leverage b/c supposed magas are also for it
no,, we are for not only knowing the truth BUT WE ALSO KNOW that we are in a war and will not surrender to yet another lefty pgate ..demvid19
CONTROL OF AMERICA
NO MORE
Whether or not the minors agreed to the activities nor how much they may have enjoyed or benefitted from them isn’t relative to the types of crimes committed by the adults in their interactions with them (the minors). Minors can’t legally give consent for the types of activities for which Epstein drafted them.
And there have already been proven liars among them out to make names for themselves by naming high profile people.
Judges seal accusations that can ruin a persons life on grounds of the accusation being unsubstantiated and unlikely to be true all the time.
But go ahead keep taking marching orders from communists like Bernie Sanders and Nazis like Tucker Carlson that is much better than a qualified federal judge who saw all the evidence and determined there is nothing there.
So, when minors are sexually abused by very rich and powerful predators, then we blame the minors?
Would anyone care to speculate on the future of NPR and PBS? Frankly, I would like them to shut down.
Underwriters now become sponsors and things keep chugging along as they always have.
Or, underwriters no longer feel the warm fuzzies of virtue signaling their support for PBS/NPR and the whole mess goes the way of the Dodo bird.
Either way, I haven’t watched/listened in years due to their progressive so it makes no nevermind to me.
NPR may be in real danger of folding, I have heard. Somewhere I read that PBS should have enough income from licensing agreements (whatever that means, maybe merchandise from popular programs) to stay afloat.
As I said on another thread NPR will have problems because their competition is podcasts. PBS should be fine because some of their intellectual property is valuable and they’ve been making money off of it for years. Time will tell though.
I believe that the FCC has veto authority over several frequencies at the end of the broadcast dial used by NPR. NPR’s broadcast authority on those particular frequencies may be revoked.
Take their spectrum for the benefit of rural communities, justice.
I haven’t listened to them since the Tappet Brothers. Reckon this means my neighbors will be sporting a lot of new tote bags.
the government should not be allowed to use tax money for ads on tv
unless they have to do with the military (cause I cant see why the courts or the treasury would need ads)
no more ads with tax money to feed the networks
B/C THATS JUST ANOTHER TRICKY WORK AROUND they use to subsidize networks
look how many states/cities give tax breaks to the hollywood/ media
sure hollywood could stay on location and set up the background to make it like like they are in another location …then let them
see, they like to travel too and that traveling then opens them up to tax subsides which then is filtered into the accounting which pays for their lifestyle CHOICES
again,,the tax payers are not only subsidizing welfare for lifers but the very wealthy with these schemes
shut er down gop ..shut er down
They travel when shooting on location either provides them with what they need (and the budget will support it) or to save money (set construction can cost more than location shooting, esp. when shooting a unique or short scene). States give tax breaks because they understand that there is no “lost tax revenue” (just no taxes at all) for shoots that don’t occur in their States, but when shoots are conducted in their States, they produce tax revenues. So it’s fiscally responsible to give tax breaks to any business that wouldn’t be there but for the break. When the business wouldn’t be in the State but for the break, it’s the break that actually results in revenue. This should be obvious. Also, each State is in competition with every other state to bring in work and jobs that otherwise wouldn’t necessarily come to them. A director shooting a move set in Arizona could just as easily shoot in New Mexico, and he will unless he can shoot in Arizona for less. So it would behoove Arizona to entice the director with a tax break. There can only be a net gain of money and no loss, as taxes paid in NM won’t do AZ any good.
Running a State is no less a business than making movies.
“minors” 17 16 15 year old?
they dont even lie when they say they want those ages and younger to trans their bodies
yeah epstein =pos
but the double standards as played by lefty and NOW maga is bowing TO THEM!!???
no way
from one of the females:
, gave them money for transportation, you know, private planes, etc, etc.,” she said, according to the docs.
“So if I didn’t have sex with Jeffrey, I would be homeless and starving in New York, so — and my dream of getting a full- time education at one of the top fashion institutes in the world would be diminished.”
yeah,, thats wrong that he ( and I am believing her story) would exploit her and others
but this double standard is wrong as we know and LEFTY NEVER GIVES IN TO US//CIVILITY
I was talking about Epstein, not transing.
You’re the one who questioned “what epstein victims?” I was replying to this question.
no problem but the connection is there
be it trans issues epstein etc
its a war and the time to worry about females giving themselves up in return for lavishes ( where the f are their parents??) is not going to matter if we lose this war
trump is the best chance we have had to tryyy and bring this country even with a few degrees of civility
and yeah, its uncivil for epstein and others to exploit anyone let alone “minors”
but lefty is controlling the definitions and changing them to fit their agenda
AND THATTT is how countries lose their culture /identity etc
so I am not blowing off the epstein case,, Im blowing off the lefty and their ability to
CONSTRUCT our way of life like they have done for well over a century and so well ingrained they have PEOPLE BELIEVING THAT MEN CAN HAVE BABIES
just b/c me and you dont ,,its not about us
ITS ABOUT THE KIDS THEY HAVE BELIEVING THEIR SH
thats a war
its not fiscally responsible to give tax breaks to anyone
thats why and how “politicking” has ruined this country
then why should so and so get a tax break etc
no tax breaks
PAY A FLAT FEW for taxes with no income tax no more write offs
write downs etc
“running a state is no less a business”
REALLY????
BUSINESS ARE PROFIT AND LOSS and should be the subject of a fair justice system
A government that “runs a business” has CREATED a conflict -of- interest
correction: pay a flat % for taxes
Newsom runs California like it’s not a business. He spends more than he takes in. This is what happens when a government isn’t run like a business. A business will go under if it doesn’t make a profit. Governments don’t make profits, but they should still balance their books. If that’s not clear to you, then I can’t help you understand. The idea that tax breaks for some cheat others is generally nonsense when the breaks bring in revenue that wouldn’t otherwise be realized, because it’s revenue that can be spent on the “general welfare,” creating a benefit for the public.
A desire for tax breaks across the board (i.e., lower taxes) isn’t incompatible with tax breaks (that bring in revenue that otherwise wouldn’t have been accrued). This “he got a break and I didn’t” type of argument smacks of class envy. I am envious of nobody who gets to keep any portion of what he makes. I may wish my taxes were lower, but not having lower taxes doesn’t lead me to disapprove of lower taxes for anyone else (when those people aren’t similarly disposed as I – I am not going to bring hundreds of thousands of dollars of revenue into a State like a movie production does).
My state found itself with a 14 billion dollar shortfall. It should not offer tax breaks to businesses that would otherwise not set up shop in the State in order to generate more revenue, revenue it would not otherwise have? I tell you what, as a person on the short end of my State government’s fiscal irresponsibility, I’d much rather have those businesses enticed to open shop here, rather than paying ever increasing taxes for every goddamn thing.
Now, if you want to argue that more revenue won’t improve a State’s level of fiscal responsibility, fine. But that is not an argument against developing more sources of tax revenue that don’t add to the burden of those, businesses and citizens, already in the State. Because if tax cuts were going to happen, they would happen. If they’re not happening, that’s a separate matter.
“govs dont make profits but they have to balance the books if you dont get that..”
WRONG
Balanced Books by the government doesnt mean they didnt cheat us /do wrong
it only means they need to take in to COVER UP THAT MISUSE OF FUNDS
so when govs say..look we have a balanced budget what does it really mean??
Look we soaked the taxpayers for $500 but we took in $500 so our books are balanced
You say you are “lower tax breaks” for the other guy shows envy
NO IT MEANS FAVORITISM by a government that in a free society should remain impartial so justice can be dealt out as fairly as possible..which is why no one gets a lower/higher tax rate
just a flat tax which is BLIND to who pays it
the remedy for government mis management IS NOT TO GIVE THEM MORE MONEY AT THEIR DISPOSAL but to fire/unelect them..but certainly at the least dont give more money /favors
And here’s the opposite argument.
I don’t get the AIDs issue. Why are we worried about AIDs globally. Let WHO do it. Yes it’s a deadly disease if not treated but it is preventable and after all this time everyone should know how to prevent. There are no excuses not to.
Here’s something you will never see from government scientists.
This victory brought to you by
DONALD TRUMP
Remember that when deciding if you should believe DONALD TRUMP or notorious vile Neo-Nazi Tucker Carlson (who has hosted Daryl Cooper again).
Neo-Nazi Tucker Carlson will bring a second Nazi century
Donald Trump brings positive victories for making America Great Again.
If you have hard time picking between them you are either an ass, stupid or both.
Calling Carlson a Nazi is as unhinged as calling Trump a fascist.
Real Nazis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ly1cPYSqgR4
You are a god damned liar who is lying and you are lying on behalf of the Neo-Nazi movement and against Trump and you know it.
FUCK YOU NEO-NAZI.
Real Nazi TUCKER CARLSON ASSHOLE.
You know the man who HOSTS HOLOCAUST DENIERS AND HAS THEM BACK ON HIS SHOW
The man who PROMOTES ANTI-SEMITISM TODAY
The man who PROMOTES THE IDEA THAT AMERICA WAS AT FAULT IN WW2
The man who PROMOTES THE IDEA THAT TRUMP DOES THE BIDDING OF THE JEW BECAUSE NETANYAHU HAS SEX BLACKMAIL ON HIM
I could go on but after you host holocaust deniers and bring them back for a second round yes you are a neo-nazi.
By the way it is possible for a neo-Nazi to support Trump it is disgusting BUT
NOTORIOUS VILE NEO-NAZI TUCKER CARLSON MADE A TURNING POINTS USA SPEECH ABOUT HOW ALL TRUMP DOES IS COVER UP PAEDOPHILE RINGS AND GIVE US APPETIZERS AND HOW HE IS AT FAULT FOR THE STATE OF OUR CITIES.
It isn’t me it is Tucker who makes you chose.
Pick Tucker as you are clearly doing (showing you are an asshole an idiot or both) and Tucker is what the next generation of the Republican Party looks like
Don’t believe me?
Do Democrats look more like Clinton 1996 or Al Sharpton today?
You have very explicitly just announced you are stupid and fully support Tucker Carlson hijacking the Republican Party even after he accused TRUMP of giving appetizers and covering up for child rape.
Don’t you dare pretend you have anything to do with anything positive especially when it relates to Trump while declaring it is ok to claim he shelters pedophiles don’t you dare.
I bet you even with his health problem Donald J Trump would punch you as hard as he could if he heard you backing people who accuse him of that.
If Tucker Carlson promoting Holocaust Denial does not make him a neo-Nazi Hitler wasn’t a Nazi either.
You could worship god or Tucker you can support Trump or Tucker, you could love America or Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany.
Wipe off your spittle-flecked monitor and go soak your head in your toilet, Danny-boy.
Maybe that will cool you down a bit.
Not quite as unhinged. T qataralson just a clickbait whore who doesn’t mind coddling enemies:Muslims n marXistss
Another way of stating it is that the federal government cut 12 hours of spending to save that $9 billion and fought tooth and nail to hold onto that 1/2 hour’s spending of $400 million.
These people are not serious about the fiscal mess.
Goodbye Nova.
Goodbye This Old House.
Goodbye Austin City Limits.
Goodbye All Creatures Great and Small.
Goodbye America’s Test Kitchen.
Goodbye Cook’s Country.
Goodbye Masterpiece Theater.
Goodbye Ouside Beyond the Lens
…
Hello Bob Ross reruns.
Hello Julia Childs reruns.
…
if they are good shows and I suspect many are
then they will have no problem being picked up by ngo
see thats one of the problems with these gov run tax funded propaganda pieces
they make it to be that if they didnt carry the shows no one would
but they have been proven wrong since the beginning
Hello commercials.
Hello laugh tracks.
Hello stupid sound effects.
etc.
Goodbye Family Guy, Futurama, Brooklyn Nine-Nine, JAG, Baywatch, Stargate SG-1, Arrested Development…
Oh! Hello again… on different networks!
This is what’s called “a good start.”
I’ve seen multiple headlines calling this a MASSIVE WIN or words to that effect.
These headlines are lies. Wake me up when they’ve cut 100 times this much. Then I’ll call it a (small but significant) win.
By midnight:
A Federal Judge in Sacramento has blocked the defunding of PBS and NPR citing the “No Take-backs” clause of the Constitution.
Got to start somers