House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) has tapped Greene to head up the new committee, which was conceptualized by tech entrepreneur Elon Musk and former businessman Vivek Ramaswamy. The two businessman were tasked with heading up the “Department Of Government Efficiency,” or “DOGE,” by President-elect Trump a little over a week after his re-election bid.

Greene’s committee will work with the two on carrying out the department’s tasks, which, according to Ramaswamy, will consist of massive cuts to several departments and the outright elimination of several federal agencies.

During an appearance on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures,” Greene provided an early look at some of the committee’s first priorities, which includes the reduction or outright cancellation of funding for National Public Radio (NPR).

“We’ll be looking at everything from government-funded media programs like NPR that spread nothing but Democrat propaganda, we’ll be going into grant programs that fund things like sex apps in Malaysia, toilets in Africa,” she told host Maria Bartiromo. […]

— Read More: trendingpoliticsnews.com

The most convincing argument for US government funding of NPR has faded away over the decades since the media organization’s creation in the pre-internet and even quite limited cable television age. Nowadays, there is easy access to news and entertainment sources aplenty at the click of the mouse or remote control. There is no arguable need for Uncle Sam to provide a helping hand to a select media organization.

Fundamentally, though, the US government supporting NPR has been wrong from the beginning. Providing news and entertainment to Americans is an activity many steps removed from the few powers the US Constitution sets forward as delegated to the US government. Further, it is inconsistent with the tenor of the First Amendment for the US government that is prohibited from making any law abridging the freedom of the press to be selectively providing funding for one media organization, thus giving it a leg up on the competition.

Relevant for the Trump administration and Republicans in the US House of Representatives and Senate as well would be that NPR, since the 2016 presidential election, has placed a target on Trump’s back. Attacking Trump relentlessly has been pursued across NPR programs for the past eight years. How is it acceptable for the US government to be funding a media organization that has as part of its editorial policy the belittling and demonizing of this man who for most of this time period was either serving as president or running for president? Election interference anyone? Hopefully, some Democratic Congress members would join in condemning the unfairness of the situation even though their presidential candidates were the beneficiaries.

On April 9, longtime NPR employee Uri Berliner went public with his insights on how “an open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR” and how instead there is a “distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population.” He also discussed how NPR engaged in “efforts to damage or topple Trump’s presidency.” If, like most Americans, you listen little or not at all to NPR, Berliner’s article, which you can read here, is a good introduction to some of the intense bias you have missed out on hearing.

To reach two trillion in savings, Musk and Trump would certainly find some spending cuts difficult. Eliminating US government support for NPR, in contrast, seems like something that should be an easy choice.

The hearing stemmed from a debate sparked by an online essay a month ago in The Free Press by longtime NPR editor Uri Berliner, who alleged that the network was both extremely biased and had abandoned its commitment to quality journalism.

Berliner, who considers himself a liberal, wrote in his essay that NPR had become deeply biased and that its news coverage had alienated all but a narrow, left-wing audience. He said the network needed to change or it would erode not only its own credibility, but the credibility of media in general.

Berliner resigned about a week after the controversy erupted.

NPR’s CEO, Katherine Maher, was asked to appear before the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on Wednesday. However, the day before, she said she couldn’t make it because she didn’t have enough time to prepare. Maher also said that she had an NPR board meeting to attend.

“NPR respects the Committee and its request, and has offered to testify on a date in the near future that works for the Committee and Maher,” an NPR spokesperson said, according to Fox News.

A spokesperson for the committee responded to Maher’s absence.

“It speaks volumes that Ms. Maher has chosen not to appear [Wednesday] to answer for how her taxpayer-funded news outlet discriminates against the viewpoints of millions of Americans,” the committee spokesperson said, according to Fox News.

Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va., who was to chair the hearing, said in his opening statement that the committee was investigating whether allegations of ideological bias and censorship of conservative and moderate voices were true.

Griffith said that the subcommittee had invited Maher and that he hoped she would appear before the committee in the near future.

“The only reason not to appear in front of this committee at some point in the near future is if the allegations are both true and NPR doesn’t care,” the Virginia lawmaker said.

Democrats on the committee were dismissive of the hearing, and said that allegations of NPR’s bias are baseless.

Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., said that NPR isn’t biased at all, that its reporting is valuable and objective, and that Republicans listen to too much conservative media.

“Despite the clear benefits of public radio, Republicans have brought us here to discuss an alleged bias at NPR,” she said. “Republicans say that NPR is biased against conservatives, but what they point to are examples of objective journalism. Disagreeing with reporting does not mean that the information is biased.”

Democrat Rep. Kathy Castor seriously believes NPR is unbiased journalism.

"Republicans say NPR is biased against conservatives, but what they point to are examples of objective journalism." pic.twitter.com/ENUsE6UjIf

— Media Research Center (@theMRC) May 8, 2024

The Florida Democrat suggested that the committee should instead focus on covering the gun deaths of children, preparing for the next pandemic, what she said were the successes of the Biden administration-backed Inflation Reduction Act, or climate change.

“Members may want to step out of the right-wing echo chambers, which have routinely peddled lies and conspiracy theories,” Castor said.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., said that it was crucial to conduct oversight of NPR, which receives taxpayer dollars, and that there is no free-speech right to get taxpayers’ money to fund a media organization.

“It is a fundamental principle under the First Amendment for news agencies to report on stories however they see fit,” she said. “It is not, however, a fundamental principle for news organizations to receive public funding to express their viewpoint.”

McMorris Rodgers said that the hearing was to be about discussing accusations from within NPR that the news network is “actively censoring viewpoints” while taking taxpayer money.

“Note for the record that we invited NPR CEO Ms. Maher to participate in today’s hearing,” McMorris Rodgers said. “She declined to do so, stating that she needed more time to prepare and that she had a conflict with an NPR board meeting.”

The Washington congresswoman said that it was “especially troubling” that an organization funded with taxpayer money has “mocked, ridiculed, and attacked the people who fund their organization.”

McMorris Rodgers pointed to the Berliner essay and said that it was telling that NPR declined to report stories that could help President Donald Trump in the 2020 election, no matter “how true and important to the public conversation they were.”

She cited how Berliner wrote that an editor at NPR thought the news network shouldn’t report on the Hunter Biden laptop story in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election because it could help Trump.

It was also revealing, she said, that Berliner said he found 87 editors registered as Democrats, but no Republicans.

“Today’s NPR has strayed from their core mission,” McMorris Rodgers said. “When an entity that was created by Congress and receives taxpayer funding strays from their core mission, there needs to be accountability and oversight.”

Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said that the hearing was a waste of time. He said that it was unfair for Republicans on the committee to call in the NPR CEO to testify, given that she only had a week to prepare and that she had a board meeting scheduled at the same time.

The New Jersey Democrat also said that, given that Maher had only been the CEO for six weeks, she shouldn’t have to answer for a “former, disgruntled employee,” referring to Berliner.

Pallone said that NPR plays a “vital role in democracy” in providing information. He said that public funding for the network goes to support mostly local programming that provides the last line of defense in “news deserts.”

He said that instead of investigating the publicly funded NPR, Congress should investigate “the vast landscape of right-wing media” that he said promotes “misinformation.”

Pallone said that investigating NPR hearkens back to the days of “McCarthyism.”

Howard Husock, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who had served on the board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, testified that he wanted to remind the committee of where public broadcasting began.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is the organization that oversees NPR.

It began with the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, he said, and of particular relevance is the mandate from Congress that “public broadcasting from radio and television should, it says, be ‘responsive to the interests of people both in particular localities and throughout the United States.’”

Husock said that that’s where he has concerns about NPR. He pointed to a poll by the Pew Research Center that found “87% of NPR listeners describe themselves as Democrats, 12% as Republicans.”

He said that contrasts sharply with commercial television newscasts, “which are close to 50/50.”

The AEI fellow said that NPR doesn’t act like a “national taxpayer-supported service.”

NPR’s audience is not the product of limited reach, he said, “instead, it produces a product which seems not to attract a broad swath of America.”

That’s largely because of the selection of stories NPR reports. He suggested that changing the outdated Public Broadcasting Act would help alleviate the crisis of the decline of local newspapers.

Husock said that direct funding does not account for most of the taxpayer dollars NPR receives. Instead, “31% of revenues” come from fees charged to local affiliates. That means, he said, that federal money sent through grants to local NPR affiliates is recycled back to the national network.

Media Research Center Executive Editor Tim Graham said in his testimony that bias at NPR isn’t a recent phenomenon and that reporters at the network have intentionally tried, for instance, to derail Republican presidents’ Supreme Court nominees going back decades and that they continued that with the 2018 nomination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“In March, between ‘Morning Edition’ and ‘Fresh Air,’ Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford was granted an hour of taxpayer-funded airtime to reiterate her unproven charges of teenage sexual assault,” Graham said.

Yet, the network has failed to cover stories that might damage Democrats. He cited the case of Hunter Biden’s laptop, the salacious contents of which were dismissed by many “so-called mainstream media” outlets as “Russian disinformation.”

Graham said that many media outlets were biased when it came to covering that story, but “NPR stood out.” NPR’s public editor dismissed the story as a “politically driven event,” even though the network gave extensive coverage to Blasey Ford’s unproven allegations.

The MRC editor pointed to other examples of what he called bias at the network.

“NPR covered the [former House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi-picked House Jan. 6 Committee live for every minute, and then it couldn’t do a two-minute story on the Biden impeachment inquiry,” he said.

NPR has also “encouraged chaos and disorder in society,” Graham said:

In 2020, NPR’s blog ‘Code Switch,’ with the slogan ‘Race in Your Face,’ posted an interview promoting a new book titled ‘In Defense of Looting.’ On ‘The NPR Politics Podcast’ in 2021, they promoted a book by Yale law professor Elizabeth Hinton saying that protests against policy shouldn’t be called riots; they should be called ‘rebellions.’

On NPR’s ‘Fresh Air’ on April 15, 2023, the movie critic John Powers praised the movie ‘How to Blow Up a Pipeline,’ hailing it as ‘hugely timely.’ You know, this is what NPR is doing.

That’s what NPR is doing with taxpayer dollars, Graham said, “getting behind looting, rioting, and blowing up pipelines. And yet, NPR represents the Republicans as uniquely extreme.”

When they made the decision to invite journalist Camila Domonoske with them on their four-day trip, they didn’t expect the headline to be, “Electric cars have a road trip problem, even for the secretary of energy“.

According to the article:

But between stops, Granholm’s entourage at times had to grapple with the limitations of the present. Like when her caravan of EVs — including a luxury Cadillac Lyriq, a hefty Ford F-150 and an affordable Bolt electric utility vehicle — was planning to fast-charge in Grovetown, a suburb of Augusta, Georgia.

Her advance team realized there weren’t going to be enough plugs to go around. One of the station’s four chargers was broken, and others were occupied. So an Energy Department staffer tried parking a nonelectric vehicle by one of those working chargers to reserve a spot for the approaching secretary of energy.

That did not go down well: a regular gas-powered car blocking the only free spot for a charger?

In fact, a family that was boxed out — on a sweltering day, with a baby in the vehicle — was so upset they decided to get the authorities involved: They called the police.

Clearly, it’s not what NPR was expecting nor what the White House was hoping to happen, but kudos to the radical left-wing state-run outlet for not killing the story.

A family with a baby in the sweltering Georgia heat were victims of White House privilege. It’s truly disgusting that they would be so desperate for positive press that they would cause harm to this family for the sake of good optics. Thankfully, those optics have been upended.

Regular people don’t have advance teams to reserve charging slots for them. But even without the advance team causing problems, this story would have highlighted the idiocy of the green push onto a country that has nowhere near the proper infrastructure for mass adoption of electric vehicles.

As Nick Arama from Red State noted, we may not have even heard about this story if the family hadn’t accelerated their grievance:

Good for the family who wasn’t taking that nonsense and called the police on them. The police couldn’t do much, however, because it’s not illegal to do what the Secretary’s team did. But realizing they had a potential PR nightmare on their hands, they “scrambled to smooth over the situation, including sending other vehicles to slower chargers, until both the frustrated family and the secretary had room to charge.”

Americans need to see how low the White House is willing to go to try to prove EVs are good. They tried to manufacture good optics. Leaving a family with a baby to suffer in the Georgia heat ain’t it, chief.

Join the conversation at The Liberty Daily’s Substack.