6-16-05, 11:00 am

Perhaps it is because the little cuddly monster is red. Maybe they fear his ideology of letters, imaginary friends, and childish creativity. The decade-long war the Republicans have waged against Elmo and his friends at Sesame Street and other PBS shows that inhabit the imaginations of millions of children may be nearing its end.

Since right-wing ideologue and corrupt member of Congress, Newt Gingrich, took up the anti-PBS standard in 1994, it appears they may now have finally won. A House subcommittee voted last week to reduce federal funding for public broadcasting and the underwriting of popular children’s shows like Sesame Street, Reading Rainbow, Arthur and others.

If this version of the bill makes it into law, within two years all federal money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) would be eliminated. Next year, the CPB would see their funds cut by 25%.

The CPB was created in 1967 as a non-profit and federal funds that support it are crucial for small TV and radio stations to stay afloat.

Supporters of PBS have accused the GOP of aiming their guns at public broadcasting because of a perceived 'liberal bias.' The CPB’s chair Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, an avowed Republican, initiated the effort to eliminate funding. Rep. David Obey (D-WS), the ranking Democrat on the House subcommittee that voted to cut the funding, said, 'Republican leaders are trying to bring every facet of the federal government under their control.'

Obey added, 'Now they are trying to put their ideological stamp on public broadcasting.'

To be frank, the GOP just doesn’t like publicly funded or subsidized programs – unless the beneficiaries of public funds are very large corporations or very wealthy people who are oppressed by taxes, regulations, and labor unions. After all, they don’t really mind giving huge tax breaks, subsidies, and special inside deals to large corporations like big media companies or Wal-Mart.

While the Republicans claimed that fiscal problems required that cuts be made (no mention of repealing any tax cuts for the rich) and that they weren’t doing this out of ideological motives, the record is clear. Republicans have historically attacked public television and National Public Radio for not advancing biased views that slant to the political right.

Gingrich led the charge against public TV because it was a symptom of 'big government.' Jesse Helms took on the purple TeleTubby (Tinky-Winky) because Helms thought he was gay. More recently Republican-affiliated groups again criticized PBS shows for advancing the 'homosexual agenda' or for presenting less-biased views about the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Supporters of public television and radio insist that mostly commercial free educational programs deserve full funding. Where else can children get such programming?

Another important part of the GOP cuts targets small TV and radio programmers. This version of the bill cuts support for smaller projects such as a $39.6 million public TV satellite distribution network and a $39.4 million program that helps public stations upgrade their technology.

Small public radio stations, particularly those in rural areas and those serving minority audiences, will be most vulnerable to federal cuts because they currently operate on shoestring budgets.

So what will be the out come of eliminating support for PBS shows and small TV and radio stations? Aside from assuring homophobes that a stuffed, purple TV character suspected of homosexuality, or guaranteeing that Elmo’s red agenda of singing songs about feet, letters, and the weather and others shows that challenge children to read, examine their environment, solve complex problems, and deal with weighty issues that arise in their young lives are done away with, what will be lost?

Eliminating public support for public broadcasters opens up hundreds of new stations to predatory mass-market media conglomerates. The GOP plan favors the Wal-Martization of the media – when the giants move in the small people get squeezed out.

An already too narrow political discourse will become even narrower. Such a tightening of discussion, debate, and access to real news favors the right wing’s ability to dominate not only political and ideological discourse, but it also increases their ability to dominate the reigns of power.

Isn’t it amazing how far-right ideology manages to mesh so well with the corporate agenda?



--Joel Wendland can be reached at jwendland@politicalaffairs.net.