Common Sense

On Monday, Breitbart posted an article about Oklahoma’s Republican Governor Kevin Stitt’s move to defund the state’s Public Broadcasting System (PBS).

The article reports:

Oklahoma’s GOP Gov. Kevin Stitt is defending his move to defund the state’s Public Broadcasting System (PBS) over its biased, left-wing agenda, and in particular, is wondering why the state should be “using taxpayer dollars to overly sexualize or indoctrinate children.”

Stitt made his comments in an appearance on Fox Business Network on Monday’s broadcast of Varney & Co. to defend his decision to stop allowing state pension funds to invest in businesses that engage in fossil fuels boycotts.

But Stitt was also asked about his move to defund PBS, spurring him to note that PBS does not “line up with Oklahoma values.”

Last week, Stitt vetoed a bill that would have renewed funding for Oklahoma’s statewide PBS station because, in his view, PBS indoctrinates kids with radical gay and transgender agendas.

Last Wednesday, Stitt vetoed funding for the Oklahoma Educational Television Authority (OETA), the state’s public broadcasting service which broadcasts PBS programming.

“I don’t think Oklahomans want to use their tax dollars to indoctrinate kids. And some of the stuff that they’re showing, it just overly sexualizes our kids,” he said after signing his veto, Fox News reported.

I disagree with his decision to stop allowing state pension funds to invest in businesses that engage in fossil fuels. However, as long as the Biden administration is in power, that actually may be a wise investment strategy. As for his refusal to fund the PBS station, I don’t think we should be funding public broadcasting to begin with. I truly think Sesame Street can fund itself and many other programs with the sale of items related to the show.

The article concludes:

During the interview, Stitt also said that he has gotten pushback on the veto from the left but feels that most of his voters support him and noted that he would prefer to spend the money on the state’s education system, not some antiquated TV broadcasting system.

“Let’s educate kids, let’s not indoctrinate them, let’s spend those dollars in education, not propping up some television station,” he explained, citing all the forms of entertainment available today—from the Internet, to broadcast TV, to cable—concluding, “We don’t need to fund a public television station in 2023.”

I hope more Governors will take the stand that Governor Stitt has taken. The trash that is being thrown at our children and grandchildren should not be permitted mush less government funded.

I Love Elmo, But This Is Ridiculous

Reuters reported on Friday that a “Million Muppet March” is being planned for November 3 at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. The event is a response to Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney‘s statement that he loves Big Bird, but it is time to stop subsidizing PBS with taxpayer money. The implication is that it is time to kick Big Bird out of the public nest.

I like Big Bird too, but enough is enough. If Dora the Explorer can survive without public assistance, why can’t Big Bird? Do you know how many “Tickle-Me Elmo‘s” I have bought for my grandchildren? How many Sesame Street books? Sesame Street coloring books? I realize that Public Broadcasting is more than Sesame Street, but it seems that with an income generator like Sesame Street, it ought to be easy to make Public Broadcasting profitable. What about the fund raisers they do throughout the year? I understand that ‘they do not do commercials,’ but what about all the names mentioned of contributors in between shows?

Anyway, I hope those supporting Big Bird have a happy march. I also hope that someone comes up with a few ideas on some small places to cut the federal budget. If we can’t make little budget cuts, how will we ever make big ones?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Does Big Bird Need Taxpayer Money ?

As a grandmother who has purchased numerous ‘Tickle Me Elmo” stuffed animals, Big Bird Books, and various Bert and Ernie dolls, and watched numerous fund raisers on PBS (and occasionally donated), I wonder why Public Broadcasting still needs my tax money. Well, I may have found a clue in an old news article.

In March of 2011, Jim DeMint posted an article at Fox Nation detailing some of the financial information of the Public Broadcasting Network.

The article reports:

...The executives at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which distributes the taxpayer money allocated for public broadcasting to other stations, are also generously compensated. According to CPB’s 2009 tax forms, President and CEO Patricia de Stacy Harrison received $298,884 in reportable compensation and another $70,630 in other compensation from the organization and related organizations that year. That’s practically a pittance compared to Kevin Klose, president emeritus of NPR, who received more than $1.2 million in compensation, according to the tax forms the nonprofit filed in 2009.

I will admit that normally I don’t care how much executives make–that’s between them and their stockholders–but this is a non-profit organization which receives large amounts of taxpayer money (much of which is borrowed from China and will eventually have to be paid back by the children watching Big Bird!). As taxpayers, we are funding this. Is this the best possible use of resources?

The article further points out:

 Meanwhile, highly successful, brand-name public programs like Sesame Street make millions on their own. “Sesame Street,” for example, made more than $211 million from toy and consumer product sales from 2003-2006. Sesame Workshop President and CEO Gary Knell received $956,513 in compensation in 2008. With earnings like that, Big Bird doesn’t need the taxpayers to help him compete against the Nickleodeon cable channel’s Dora the Explorer.

 I had not considered the fact that Dora does not receive taxpayer money, yet seems to be doing very well. I have seen numerous Dora the Explorer backpacks, coloring books, and other goodies among my grandchildren’s toys.

It truly is time to stop borrowing money from China to fund Big Bird.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some Common Sense On The Campaign Trail


Me wit elmo

Image via Wikipedia

The New York Daily News reported today that Mitt Romney has stated that if he is elected President, Big Bird is going to have to do his own commercials.

The article reports:

Romney said he’s a fan of the Public Broadcasting Service, the government-funded nonprofit that carries “Sesame Street,” but that “it’s immoral for us to keep spending money we don’t have and passing on to our kids our obligations.”

He added that he would maintain endowments for the arts and humanities, “but they’re going to be paid for by private charity not by taxpayers — or by borrowers.”

“Sesame Street” currently has a constellation of public and private sponsors. Corporate sponsors of the program include Beaches Family Resorts, Earth’s Best organic foods, PNC, United Healthcare and the Good Egg Project, according to the website of Sesame Workshop, the nonprofit educational organization that produces “Sesame Street.” Taxpayer support for the program comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the U.S. Department of Education, among others.

This is not an endorsement of Mitt Romney. It is, however, an illustration of the difference in thinking between a businessman and a politician. I bought two of my granddaughters counting Ernie’s for Christmas. Someone made a profit on them. Someone made a huge profit on tickle-me-Elmo a few years ago. Why can’t those profits support Sesame Street and other PBS programming? Why shouldn’t the Public Broadcasting Service have to find a way to make its programming profitable?



Enhanced by Zemanta