8MEDIA AGENCIES
U.S. AGENCY FOR GLOBAL MEDIA
Mora Namdar

MISSION STATEMENT

The mission of United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM) is to inform,
engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy.1 However, this mission statement does not reflect the current work of theagency. The mission is noble, but the execution is lacking. To fulfill its mission,
USAGM should also aim to present the truth about America and American policy—
not parrot America’s adversaries’ propaganda and talking points.2
OVERVIEW

Originally formed as the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) in 1994, the BBG
changed its name in 2018 to the United States Agency for Global Media. The USAGM isa sub-Cabinet agency of the U.S. government with a budget of just under $1 billion. The
agency oversees two government broadcasting networks: the Voice of America (VOA)
and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting (OCB). USAGM also oversees 100 percent of the
grant funding for several “independent” grantee organizations, including the Middle
East Broadcasting Network (MBN), Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Europe/Radio
Liberty (RFE/RL), and the newly formed Open Technology Fund (OTF).3l

The Voice of America provides news and information in 48 languages toa weekly audience of more than 326 million people worldwide. For more

— 235 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promisethan 80 years, VOA journalists have supplied news and information about
the U.S., audience-specific regions of interest and concern, and the world atlarge. VOA radio and television signals are broadcast to approximately 3,500
affiliates, and satellite transmissions reach countries where free speech isbanned or where civil society is under threat.4
VOA uses digital, web, and mobile media as well, which, while sometimes
useful in propagating valuable information globally, has created specificviolations of the agency’s prohibition against broadcasting to the domestic
U.S. audience—particularly with regard to flagrantly political content, as
has been the practice with recent and current VOA content directors andmanagers.5 The network once had a generally well-received brand value,
but it has deteriorated under decades of poor leadership and a loss of its
once-prized unbiased reporting. There are bright spots within VOA, but
mismanagement and declining production values have diluted its oncegreat reputation as a singular voice in American news broadcasting abroad.
lll

The Office of Cuba Broadcasting oversees Radio and Television Martí, amultimedia hub of news, information, and analysis that provides the peopleof Cuba with programs through satellite television, radio, and digital media.
These programs present news and information about Cuba’s oppressive
government from the outside world that would otherwise be heavily
restricted.6 The OCB remains a critical avenue of truth to the Cuban people
but has been threatened with crippling budget and operational constraints,
including empathetic attitudes toward Communist Cuban leadershipcoupled with organizational hostility toward the OCB by certain elementsof USAGM leadership. During the Biden Administration, the OCB has been
threatened with closure, while also suffering chilling reductions in force.7
The Middle East Broadcasting Network is an Arabic-language news
organization with a weekly audience of 27.4 million people in 22 countries
in the Middle East and North Africa. The MBN consists of two television
networks, radio, websites, and social media platforms. Together, they deliver
news and analysis on the region, American policies, and Americana. The
MBN has correspondents throughout the Middle East and North Africa.8
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty is a private, nonprofit, multimedia
broadcasting corporation that serves as a surrogate media source in 27
languages and 23 countries, including Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Russia,
and Ukraine.

— 236 —

2025 Presidential Transition ProjectFounded in the early days of the Cold War (Radio Free Europe in 1949
and Radio Liberty in 1953) and merged in 1976, Radio Free Europe andRadio Liberty were intended to execute edgy and daring information
operations and unrestricted news reporting deep behind the Iron Curtain.
Unfortunately, like other broadcast organizations under USAGM, RFE/RL
has surrendered much of its rich history to an approach that favors politicaltrends as opposed to operations that support and represent America abroad.
While there are some bright spots within RFE/RL, much of the network has
redundant programming with certain VOA language services, often withcompeting, counterproductive, or dissimilar messaging.
The recent addition of RFE/RL’s Hungarian-language service, Szabad
Európa, falls outside the intended scope of RFE/RL’s charter by targeting a
democratically elected, pro-American European and NATO ally.
Not least, RFE/RL has been plagued by several serious espionage-related
security risks within its ranks.9lRadio Free Asia is a private, nonprofit multimedia news corporation thatbrings news and uncensored content to people in six Asian countries that
restrict free speech, freedom of the press, and access to reliable information.
RFA also provides educational and cultural programming, as well as forums
for audiences to engage in open dialogue and freely express opinions. RFA
utilizes on-the-ground reporters and networks of in-country sources, citizen
journalists, and eyewitnesses who provide leads, tips, images, and video.10
Several reports from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) were released
showing waste and self-dealing, including security vulnerabilities and RFA leadership awarding insiders millions of dollars of grant funding.11 For example, as
the OIG stated in one report, the then-president of RFA “established the Freedom2Connect Foundation (Foundation)” and thereafter “awarded two contracts,
totaling $1.2 million” to the foundation she herself founded.12 Furthermore:[The] OIG found that RFA did not comply with Federal procurement
requirements for grantees. OIG identified instances in which RFA and
its agents did not comply with OMB [Office of Management and Budget]
conflict-of-interest procurement requirements for grantees. Specifically,
OIG found that RFA entered into 14 contracts, totaling $4.0 million(51 percent of the amount of OTF FYs 2012 and 2013 project-related
contracts), with organizations that had some affiliation with either RFA
officials or members of OTF Advisory Council.13— 237 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative PromiseThis same leadership proceeded to wastefully form the Open Technology
Fund as its own independent grantee with the help of USAGM senior
management prior to the tenure of Trump-appointed leadership.
l

The Open Technology Fund’s goal is to provide funding to support
the research, development, and implementation of Internet freedom
technologies that circumvent censorship. OTF was formed under dubious
circumstances by using consolidation rules to usurp the mission andfunding of USAGM’s pre-existing Office of Internet Freedom (OIF), which
funded far more diverse technologies with much greater transparency. OTF,
however, operates with far less transparency and strictly restricts funding to“open source” technology. OTF does not support any technology with evenpartially “closed source” code, notwithstanding that such closed-sourcecode would provide more protection against hacking.
Although OTF touts large user numbers, this could not be substantiatedupon requests for information, and it was discovered by former senior
USAGM leadership that OTF makes extremely small, insubstantial
donations to much larger messaging applications and technology to bolster
its unsubstantiated claims.14 Despite its vibrant self-lobbying and publicity
efforts, OTF remains a wasteful and redundant boondoggle. Its grantee
status was suspended by Trump-appointed USAGM leadership for a numberof reasons, including noncompliance with its grant terms and for actions
that resulted in several fraud and waste investigations.15
The OIF, which predates OTF, was historically under USAGM’s Office ofChief Strategy Officer and for years had been performing the same tasks as
OTF within USAGM headquarters for the benefit of all USAGM broadcast
networks. With much greater transparency, OIF succeeded with fewer staff
while simultaneously fielding more diverse and robust technologies. Absent
a meaningful organizational impact analysis to justify the wastefulness ofthe decision-making process, OTF usurped the entire OIF budget and was
set up as a new grantee organization.
Exacerbating matters, OIF was shut down in order to provide massive
grants to the opaque activities of OTF and its founding leadership, who went
on a free-spending boondoggle for high-end Washington, D.C., office space,furnishings, and top salaries for its leadership team. Numerous career staff
whistleblowers came forward to sound the alarm about OTF to Trumpappointed leadership, citing concerns about the OIG reports, wastefulspending, and other substantive performance matters.16 Nonetheless, the— 238 —

2025 Presidential Transition Project

Biden Administration reinstated OTF to full operational status and ceased
all investigations immediately after assuming office.
ATTEMPTS AT REFORM

Late in the Trump Administration, following the long-delayed Senate confirmation of Michael Pack as USAGM Chief Executive Officer (CEO),17 agency leadershiprapidly initiated long-overdue and necessary reforms,18 including security reforms
repeatedly requested by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Officeof the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) that had been ignored by USAGM
leadership.19 Unfortunately, as was the case with the OTF, the Biden Administration
immediately reinstated personnel who had been fired for gross security violations,placing the agency back into its previously failed posture—one that poses a danger
to national security.
The Firewall Saga. The vital error in USAGM’s current organizational/cultural calculus is the agency’s selective application of a journalistic “firewall.” Theamorphous interpretation of a firewall shifts, depending on which Administration
is in office and who is asking questions.
Although a firewall should ensure journalistic independence, it has been usedwithout formal regulation for decades in order to shirk legitimate oversight ofeverything from promoting adversaries’ propaganda to ignoring journalistic safety.
Often, the “firewall” is touted when journalists are either promoting anti-American
propaganda that parrots adversarial regime talking points or promoting politicallybiased viewpoints in opposition to the VOA charter.20
Such weak oversight, alien to any other large media network or news organization—particularly one derivative of U.S. foreign policy and national security
goals—was erroneously enshrined in a document known as the Firewall Regulation.21 The Firewall Regulation was entered into the Federal Register on the eveof the Senate confirmation of President Donald Trump’s USAGM CEO, Michael
Pack. It was the quintessential “midnight reg” designed to throttle the statutory
and executive authority of the agency head. It stipulated that agency management,by standards unknown to most large broadcast companies, was forbidden fromengaging in oversight and direction of content in any way—even false content.
It ran counter to the law, including the Smith–Mundt Act,22 and it was harmful
to the agency itself and to the foreign policy and national security goals of the
U.S. government.
Even content that went well beyond fair and accurate reporting on U.S. domestic
and political problems could not be reined in by front office leadership under the
Firewall Regulation. Soon, VOA’s White House correspondent was posting content
highly critical of, and personally insulting to, the U.S. President—in contradictionof VOA’s own journalistic standards, policies, and procedures. USAGM career officials considered such content sacrosanct and bravely independent “journalistic”— 239 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promisecontent protected by the “spirit of” the Firewall Regulation—despite ample evidence to the contrary.
Late in the Trump Administration, USAGM political leadership, following an
intensive U.S. Department of Justice review, revoked the Firewall Regulation overthe protests of journalistic organizations—none more vociferous than VOA itself.23
While the abuses of the Firewall Regulation are particularly disconcerting, they
encompass just a fraction of similar overreaches of the agency’s journalistic mission.
Current and former USAGM/VOA leadership who wanted to maintain virtuallyzero accountability and oversight waged a campaign of interference, resistance, anddisinformation to stifle change at the agency. Perhaps not coincidentally, various
media outlets with relationships to former and future USAGM leadership publishednear-daily criticisms of Trump Administration appointees and also of grantee organization leaders who were appointed by CEO Pack to implement long-overdue reforms.24
Agency Mission Failure. Currently, the USAGM, by and large, is not fulfillingits mission, which remains so ill-defined and ambiguous that it enables the organization to go about its business largely unguided with little to no oversight. Rather
than providing news and information in an accurate, reliable way that promotes
and supports freedom and democracy, the agency is mismanaged, disorganized,
ineffective, and rife with waste and redundancy.
These shortfalls are either oriented toward, or directly contribute to, the agency’s media organizations joining the mainstream media’s anti-U.S. chorus anddenigrating the American story—all in the name of so-called journalistic independence. Indeed, content during the Trump Administration was rife with typicalmainstream media talking points assailing the President and his staff. The few
bright spots within VOA and the OCB are often stifled instead of supported. Toplevel talent often leaves the agency or is met with obstacles rather than support.25
Opportunities for modernization and effective strategy are ignored, and wastefulspending and misallocation of resources are the norm in an environment in which
nepotism is rampant and political gamesmanship protects bad actors.
Amanda Bennett26 was confirmed as USAGM CEO in 2022 after two yearsof being blocked by several Members of Congress. Legal advocacy organization
America First Legal Foundation even wrote to President Joe Biden asking him towithdraw her nomination,27 citing several severe national security failures while
she was director of VOA.28 Her tenure as director during the Obama Administration(and her holdover into the beginning of the Trump Administration) was marredwith operational failures, security failures, and credibility failures. Those failures
are reportedly ongoing during her current tenure as CEO.29
NECESSARY REFORMS

Security Issues. The Office of Personnel Management30 and the Office of
the Director of National Intelligence flagged severe security failures during four

— 240 —

2025 Presidential Transition Projectextensive investigations of the USAGM, each conducted during a 10-year period
between 2010 and 2020.31 Security personnel and former agency senior leadership
ignored these issues and allowed them to persist.32
In brief, the USAGM is vulnerable to exploitation by foreign spies. During thelast six months of the Trump Administration, known foreign intelligence operatives were removed from the OCB and RFE/RL. During the 10-year period between
2010 and 2020, both the OPM and the ODNI found that the USAGM’s Office ofSecurity (under the Office of Management) had grossly ignored and flouted manyof the federal government’s most critical and long-standing information and personnel security protocols, regulations, and practices.33
During the investigative period—in which the findings were largely, if not
wholly, ignored by agency senior leadership—over 1,500 USAGM personnel(nearly 40 percent of its total workforce) were performing their Tier 3 and Tier 5
national-security-sensitive positions with falsified and/or unauthorized suitability-for-employment determinations and with access to sensitive federal buildings
and information systems. In many cases, records (including Social Security numbers), were falsified or replaced with notional placeholders, and fingerprints (inmany dozens of cases) were never submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation
for basic background investigations.
By the time these issues were addressed by members of the Trump Administration, more than 500 personnel with unauthorized access and clearances had
left the USAGM and rolled into other federal agencies with reciprocal clearance
authorizations. Many others disappeared into U.S. society. As of January 2021, theUSAGM had not yet determined the whereabouts of these individuals.34
The USAGM must never again be entrusted with delegated authority over its
personnel security programs and suitability determinations until such time as it
can prove that these failures will not happen again. These responsibilities mustremain with the Department of Defense and the Office of Personnel Management,
to which they were transferred in the final weeks of the Trump Administration.
Journalists’ Security. Agency journalists, both on and off American soil, have
faced danger,35 yet their superiors have done little to protect them. Whistleblowers
and Trump Administration officials found that protection of USAGM Americanand foreign journalists employed by USAGM networks and grantee organizations
was severely lacking.
Against often-significant resistance, political appointees forced action to
enable broadcasters (who were under verified threats) to broadcast from remotelocations while being protected by federal law enforcement officers. Likewise,
political appointees met resistance from senior career officials when insistingthat foreign-based journalists in high-risk countries make their locations known
to the agency in the event they required rescue, extraction, or safe housing. Suchsafety measures, argued career officials, would somehow represent a violation of— 241 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise

journalistic independence. With only rare exceptions, resistance to the most basic
journalist safety measures was the knee-jerk response from USAGM career officials.
Wasting Taxpayer Dollars. The USAGM’S current operations, properly managed, can be conducted on less than $700 million per year. Prior to the arrival of
President Donald Trump’s appointees in June 2020, budgeting, financial responsibility, and spending totaled over $800 million per year, with virtually no oversightor supervision. Waste, unnecessary spending, nepotism for pet projects, redundant
programs, and unnecessary hiring abounded.
Consolidation and Reduction of Redundant Services. Currently, the USAGM
funds numerous redundant services through its own offices, through Voice of America and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting, and through its grantees. For example, VOA
has a Mandarin-language service but also funds redundant services through RadioFree Asia. VOA also has a Farsi-language service that duplicates one funded throughRadio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Surplus services in the same languages are often
unnecessary and counterproductive. Fiscal responsibility and transparency should
return to the USAGM, with consolidation being a cornerstone of the strategy.
As noted previously, the Open Technology Fund duplicates activities that
already existed at the USAGM in the Office of Internet Freedom. Numerous careerwhistleblowers came forward to sound the alarm to President Trump’s USAGM
political team about OTF’s abuse and overreach.36 Its opaque, expensive, andunnecessary usurpation of an existing USAGM office is an egregious example ofgovernment waste and illustrates the general disdain for U.S. taxpayers that is rife
within this agency. Full reinstatement of OIF would allow full agency and congressional oversight into how so-called “Internet freedom” money is being spent.37
J-1 Visa Program Abuses. Rather than use the appropriate I visa38 intended
for foreign journalists, the USAGM uses the J-1 “cultural exchange” visas to allow
foreign nationals to transition easily into jobs that American citizens with cultural and linguistic expertise could satisfy. The J-1 visa is intended for cultural andacademic exchange programs, among others—none of which include journalism.39
Additionally, J-1 visas are meant for non-immigrant temporary exchanges. The
USAGM’s J-1 visa holders often go on to apply for permanent residency, which
violates the intention of this visa.
Shortwave Transmission Upgrades and Improvements. Non-web-based
technologies that are proven and durable, such as shortwave radio transmission
stations, have been grossly deemphasized in budgeting in favor of newer webbased technologies. This move is dangerously short-sighted and puts the U.S. at aperilous strategic disadvantage in the event of a major conflict, particularly with
Russia or China.
There is great concern about the vulnerability of undersea cable trunks thatmake up the Internet cloud. The vast majority of global Internet traffic—95 percent—is transmitted through these cables, including news transmissions and— 242 —

2025 Presidential Transition Project

web-based content produced by the USAGM’s broadcast networks. While therobust and popular use of the Internet is ideal during peacetime, during times ofmajor conflict, widespread damage to the undersea cables that carry communications across the globe can reasonably be expected. Long-lasting power outages
are also likely, such as those Ukraine experienced in the aftermath of Russia’s2022 invasion.
The USAGM’s responsibility for the only U.S. global shortwave radio capability isof critical strategic importance if America is to carry its message to people seeking
information and freedom within conflict zones. Shortwave technologies also makeit possible to carry broadcasts in areas where Internet traffic is severely restricted,
as it is in many authoritarian states today.
ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES

Personnel. Personnel is one of the biggest concerns for the USAGM and its
grantees. Attracting talented staff who will stay and letting go of poorly performing personnel are hurdles. Additionally, whistleblowers have come forward withnumerous credible allegations of illegal nepotism and improper hiring practices.40 Past agency leaders have ignored national security procedures when hiringand have failed to adequately vet staff.41 Government hiring policies and federal
law must be followed, and serious policy changes must be implemented to end
these practices.
Relevant Government Entitiesl

The White House. As an executive branch agency, the USAGM ostensibly
should report to the President and coordinate activities with the
National Security Council (NSC)—especially given the direct and implied
national security aspects of the agency’s messaging globally. However,there currently is no specific office in the White House or NSC liaison
for the USAGM.

The original network, VOA, functioned under the Office of Coordinatorof Information as early as 1941, the War Department’s Office of War
Information from 1942 to 1945, the State Department from 1945 to 1953,
and the U.S. Information Agency from 1953 until the creation of the
independent Broadcasting Board of Governors in 1999. Although someoversight and management functions of the agency are provided by theState Department, the USAGM otherwise has little connectivity to larger
departments or agencies and even less to the White House. With thedissolution of the U.S. Information Agency in 1999, the USAGM has virtually
been under its own supervision and guidance. The results have been dismal.

— 243 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promisel

The State Department. VOA was most effective before and during theCold War when it was under the direct supervision and control of the War
and State Departments, respectively. If VOA is not put in the direct chain ofcommand under the NSC, serious consideration should be given to putting
VOA under the direct supervision of the Office of Global Public Affairs at the
Department of State. The Office of Global Public Affairs was formed during
the Trump Administration by consolidation of the State Department’s Bureau
of International Information Programs and Bureau of Global Public Affairs.
Ensuring that taxpayer-funded TV, radio, and messaging tells America’s
story is imperative and should be coordinated with the existing foreignlanguage social media platforms at the State Department. Currently, VOA’s
foreign-language TV programming is unreliable in telling America’s story,
given its amorphous interpretation of its independence firewall and its
waning adherence to certain provisions of the Smith–Mundt Act dependingon which political party is in office.
The VOA firewall is meant to protect broadcasters from government
interference with content; however, USAGM staff have abused the firewall
and used it as an offensive measure to block oversight. Additionally, theSmith–Mundt Act stipulates that USAGM services are meant to tell the
American story abroad—never to domestic audiences—but the agency has
used its taxpayer funding to promote partisan messaging in the U.S. One of
the most egregious examples was when, in 2020, it bought ads on its foreignlanguage social media sites to disseminate a Biden campaign ad and targeted
it to a major Muslim population in Michigan.42 Moreover, VOA often airs
foreign adversaries’ propaganda, which is antithetical to its congressionallymandated core mission. State Department oversight or “command” may be
one way to ensure that VOA and the rest of the USAGM returns and adheres
to its original mission.
Clear lines of command and communications between the USAGM and an
appropriate office of the National Security Council are also sorely lacking,as has been any reasonable accountability for USAGM senior leadershipand strategy. The State Department’s Assistant Secretary for Global Public
Affairs and Undersecretary for Diplomacy and Public Affairs should also
be in the accountability loop for agency actions. While the U.S. Secretary ofState technically has a seat on the board of the agency, it is a toothless seatthat is often deferred to the undersecretary and/or assistant secretaries
noted above. This position should be relevant and directive when U.S.
foreign policy and strategic communications are at stake.

— 244 —

2025 Presidential Transition Project

For example, the years-long delay in confirming the Trump-appointed
CEO left disastrous holdover leadership from the previous Administration.
Employing effective leadership, even in an acting capacity, while a new CEO isawaiting Senate confirmation is necessary to prevent a repeat of this behavior.
llCongress. The USAGM receives its budget and mandates directly from
Congress. Often, changes in major functions at the agency happen becauseof the lobbying efforts of a few connected individuals—often grantees
lobbying for more funds and less accountability. Those changes can anddo handcuff leadership from any meaningful oversight. An overhaul of theagency with review from Congress to modernize, streamline, and reduce
waste must be done with congressional support.
Key nongovernmental stakeholders, allies, and non-allies. These include
industry groups, nonprofits, trade associations, foundations, and activist
organizations, for example, America First Legal Foundation,43 USAGM
Watch,44 BBG-USAGM Watch,45 and Whistleblower Protection Project.46

CONCLUSIONThe USAGM is a story of a lost opportunity both to help restore the world’s confidence in the promise and ideals of America and to set a high mark for journalistic
integrity and unbiased reporting. These two areas have suffered severely under two
decades of USAGM mismanagement and lack of oversight. Finding solutions tothese problems and the restoration of the agency’s networks must be the priorities
of future agency leadership.
To accomplish this, the USAGM must be fully reformed top to bottom withcongressional and White House support. The possibility of consolidating not only
the agency’s subparts, but bringing the entire agency under the supervision of the
NSC, the State Department, or both would dramatically aid that reform.
If the de facto aim of the agency simply remains to compete in foreign markets
using anti-U.S. talking points that parrot America’s adversaries’ propaganda, thenthis represents an unacceptable burden to the U.S. taxpayer and a negative returnon investment. In that case, the USAGM should be defunded and disestablished.
If, however, the agency can be reformed to become an effective tool, it would be
one of the greatest tools in America’s arsenal to tell America’s story and promote
freedom and democracy around the world.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was a collective effort involving many individuals towhom thanks is owed. These individuals include, but are not limited to, Victoria Coates, Michael Pack, Frank
Wuco, and several brave whistleblowers who prefer not to be named. Their efforts were integral to the chapter
and are greatly appreciated.

— 245 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise

CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING
Mike GonzalezEvery Republican President since Richard Nixon has tried to strip the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) of taxpayer funding. That is significant notjust because it means that for half a century, Republican Presidents have failed toaccomplish what they set out to do, but also because Nixon was the first President
in office when National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service(PBS), which the CPB funds, went on air.
In other words, all Republican Presidents have recognized that public fundingof domestic broadcasts is a mistake. As a 35-year-old lawyer in the Nixon WhiteHouse, one Antonin Scalia warned that conservatives were being “confronted witha long-range problem of significant social consequences—that is, the developmentof a government-funded broadcast system similar to the BBC.”47
All of which means that the next conservative President must finally get
this done and do it despite opposition from congressional members of his
own party if necessary. To stop public funding is good policy and good politics.
The reason is simple: President Lyndon Johnson may have pledged in 1967
that public broadcasting would become “a vital public resource to enrich ourhomes, educate our families and to provide assistance to our classrooms,”48
but public broadcasting immediately became a liberal forum for public affairs
and journalism.
Not only is the federal government trillions of dollars in debt and unable toafford the more than half a billion dollars squandered on leftist opinion each year,
but the government should not be compelling the conservative half of the country
to pay for the suppression of its own views. As Thomas Jefferson put it, “To compel
a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagations of opinions which
he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.”49

A DEMONSTRATED PATTERN OF BIAS

Conservatives will thus reward a President who eliminates this tyrannical situation. PBS and NPR do not even bother to run programming that would attractconservatives. As Pew Research demonstrated in 2014, 25 percent of PBS’s audience is “mostly liberal,” and 35 percent is “consistently liberal.” That is 60 percent
liberal compared to 15 percent conservative (11 percent “mostly conservative” and4 percent “consistently conservative”).50
NPR’s audience is even to the Left of that, with 67 percent liberal (41 percent“consistently liberal” and 26 percent “mostly liberal”), compared with 12 percent
conservative (3 percent and 9 percent “consistently conservative” and “mostly conservative,” respectively).51 That may be an acceptable business model for MSNBC
or CNN, but not for a taxpayer-subsidized broadcaster.

— 246 —

2025 Presidential Transition Project

DEFUNDING THROUGH THE BUDGETARY PROCESS

Cutting off the CPB is logistically easy. The solution lies in the budgetaryprocess. In 2022, the CPB submitted to the Labor, Health and Human Services,
Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittees of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees its budget justification for fiscal year (FY) 2023. In it, theCPB requested that Congress give it a $565 million advance appropriation—a $40
million increase compared to its FY 2022 funding.52 Unlike most other agencies,
the CPB receives advance appropriations that provide them with funding two years
ahead of time, which insulates the agency from Congress’s power of the purse andoversight. This special budgetary treatment is unjustified and should be ended.
The 47th President can just tell the Congress—through the budget he proposes
and through personal contact—that he will not sign an appropriations spending billthat contains a penny for the CPB. The President may have to use the bully pulpit,
as NPR and PBS have teams of lobbyists who have convinced enough Members ofCongress to save their bacon every time their taxpayer subsidies have been at risk
since the Nixon era.
Defunding CPB would by no means cause NPR or PBS—or other public broadcasters that benefit from CPB funding, including the even-further-to-the Left
Pacifica Radio and American Public Media—to file for bankruptcy. The membership model that the CPB uses, along with the funding from corporations andfoundations that it also receives, would allow these broadcasters to continue tothrive. As George Will wrote, “If ‘Sesame Street’ programming were put up forauction, the danger would be of getting trampled by the stampede of potential
bidders.”53 Indeed, “Sesame Street” is on HBO now, which shows its potential asa money earner.
PUBLIC INTEREST VS. PRIVILEGE

Stripping public funding would, of course, mean that NPR, PBS, Pacifica Radio,
and the other leftist broadcasters would be shorn of the presumption that they act
in the public interest and receive the privileges that often accompany so acting.
They should no longer, for example, be qualified as noncommercial education stations (NCE stations), which they clearly no longer are. NPR, Pacifica, and the otherradio ventures have zero claim on an educational function (the original purpose
for which they were created by President Johnson), and the percentage of on-air
programming that PBS devotes to educational endeavors such as “Sesame Street”(programs that are themselves biased to the Left) is small.
Being an NCE comes with benefits. The Federal Communications Commission, for example, reserves the 20 stations at the lower end of the radio frequency(between 88 and 108 MHz on the FM band) for NCEs. The FCC says that “onlynoncommercial educational radio stations are licensed in the 88–92 MHz ‘reserved’band,” while both commercial and noncommercial educational stations may— 247 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise

operate in the “non-reserved” band.54 This confers advantages, as lower-frequency
stations can be heard farther away and are easier to find as they lie on the left endof the radio dial (figuratively as well as ideologically).
The FCC also exempts NCE stations from licensing fees. It says that “Noncommercial educational (NCE) FM station licensees and full service NCE television
broadcast station licensees are exempt from paying regulatory fees, provided thatthese stations operate solely on an NCE basis.”55
NPR and PBS stations are in reality no longer noncommercial, as they run ads
in everything but name for their sponsors. They are also noneducational. The next
President should instruct the FCC to exclude the stations affiliated with PBS and
NPR from the NCE denomination and the privileges that come with it.

— 248 —

2025 Presidential Transition Project
ENDNOTES

1.
2.

3.
4.
5.

6.
7.

8.
9.
10.
11.

12.
13.
14.

15.
16.
17.
18.

19.

20.

21.
22.
23.

24.

U.S. Agency for Global Media, https://www.usagm.gov/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
Ben Weingarten, “Security Failures USG Media Agency Prove Need to Hire Americans First,” Newsweek,
August 10, 2020, https://www.newsweek.com/security-failures-usg-media-Agency-prove-need-hireamericans-first-opinion-1523895 (accessed March 20, 2023).
U.S. Agency for Global Media, “Who We Are,” https://www.usagm.gov/who-we-are/history/ (accessed
March 20, 2023).
U.S. Agency for Global Media, “Voice of America,” https://www.usagm.gov/networks/voa/ (accessed
March 20, 2023).
Daniel Lippman, “Deleted Biden Video Sets Off a Crisis at Voice of America,” Politico July 30, 2020, https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/30/deleted-biden-video-sets-off-a-crisis-at-voice-of-america-388571(accessed March 20, 2023).
U.S. Agency for Global Media, “Office of Cuba Broadcasting,” https://www.usagm.gov/networks/ocb/(accessed March 20, 2023).
Rafael Bernal, “Bipartisan Group Asks Office of Cuba Broadcasting to Rescind Layoffs,” September 13, 2022,
The Hill, https://thehill.com/latino/3641445-bipartisan-group-asks-office-of-cuba-broadcasting-to-rescindlayoffs/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
U.S. Agency for Global Media, “Middle East Broadcasting Networks,” https://www.usagm.gov/networks/mbn/(accessed March 20, 2023).
U.S. Agency for Global Media, Consolidation Report, p. 13, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/FA/
FA00/20210930/114085/HMKP-117-FA00-20210930-SD002.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023).
U.S. Agency for Global Media, “Radio Free Asia,” https://www.usagm.gov/networks/rfa/ (accessed
March 20, 2023).
U.S. Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors, Office of the Inspector General, Audit ofRadio Free Asia Expenditures, June 2015, https://www.stateoig.gov/uploads/report/report_pdf_file/aud-fmib-15-24_1.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023).
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 16.
Susan Crabtree, “‘Lax’ Internet Freedom Group Balks at New Pack Oversight,” https://www.realclearpolitics.
com/articles/2020/08/24/lax_internet_freedom_group_balks_at_new_pack_oversight_144043.html(accessed March 22, 2023).
Ibid.
Ibid.
Nomination of Michael Pack to the Broadcasting Board of Governors, 116th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2020), https://www.congress.gov/nomination/116th-congress/1590 (accessed March 20, 2023).
James Robbins, “More Rot at America’s Public Diplomacy Mouthpiece,” The Hill, November 7, 2020, https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/524924-more-rot-at-americas-public-diplomacy-mouthpiece/(accessed March 20, 2023).
U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Suitability Agency Executive Programs, Follow Up Review of U.S.
Agency for Global Media, July 2020, https://bbgwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/OPM-SuitEAJuly-2020.pdf (accessed March 20, 203).
If the agency were not an extension of U.S. foreign policy and national security goals, then its staffing
positions would not be classified in their entirety as Tier 3 and Tier 5 national-security sensitive positions,which they are. See U.S. Agency for Global Media, Consolidation Report, p. 13.
Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 115 (June 15, 2020), pp. 36150–36153.
U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (“Smith–Mundt Act”), Public Law 80–402.
Jessica Jerreat, “USAGM CEO Criticized Over Move to Rescind Firewall Regulation,” October 28, 2020, https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_usagm-ceo-criticized-over-move-rescind-firewall-regulation/6197671.html(accessed March 20, 2023).
Byron York, “America’s Lost Voice,” Washington Examiner, February 4, 2021, https://www.washingtonexaminer.
com/politics/americas-lost-voice (accessed March 20, 2023).

— 249 —

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise
25. Sasha Gong, “VOA Problems: Racism, Xenophobia, Mediocrity, and Nepotism,” BBG-USAGM Watch, December
25, 2018, archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20220105101300/https://bbgwatch.com/bbgwatch/voaproblems-racism-xenophobia-mediocrity-and-nepotism/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
26. U.S. Agency for Global Media Watch, “Big Mistake in Rewarding Failed Voice of America (VOA) Managers
U.S. Agency for Global Media Managers,” November 11, 2022, https://www.usagmwatch.com/big-mistakein-rewarding-failed-voice-of-america-voa-and-u-s-Agency-for-global-media-usagm-managers/ (accessed
March 20, 2023).
27. America First Legal Foundation,“AFL Asks Biden Administration to Withdraw Nomination of Amanda
Bennett Citing National Security and Related Failures,” June 30, 2022, https://aflegal.org/afl-asks-bidenadministration-to-withdraw-nomination-of-amanda-bennett-citing-national-security-and-related-failures/(accessed March 20, 2023).
28. U.S. Agency for Global Media, Consolidation Report, p. 13.
29. U.S. Agency for Global Media Watch, “Extraordinary Leadership Dysfunction at USAGM Continues,” October 4,2022, https://www.usagmwatch.com/extraordinary-leadership-dysfunction-at-usagm-continues/ (accessed
March 20, 2023).
30. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Follow-Up Review of the U.S. Agency for Global MediaSuitability Program.
31. Ibid.
32. U.S. Agency for Global Media, Consolidation Report, p. 13.
33. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Follow-Up Review of the U.S. Agency for Global MediaSuitability Program.
34. Robbins, “More Rot at America’s Public Diplomacy Mouthpiece.”
35. U.S. Department of Justice, “Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Kidnapping Conspiracy Charges Against
an Iranian Intelligence Officer And Members Of An Iranian Intelligence Network,” July 13, 2021, https://www.
justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/manhattan-us-attorney-announces-kidnapping-conspiracy-charges-against-iranian(accessed March 20, 2023).
36. James Robbins, “The Trouble with the Open Technology Fund,” Newsweek, August 9, 2020, https://www.
newsweek.com/trouble-open-technology-fund-opinion-1528998 (accessed March 20, 2023).
37. Susan Crabtree, “Lax Internet Freedom Group Balks at New Pack Oversight,” Real Clear Politics, August 24,
2020, https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/08/24/lax_internet_freedom_group_balks_at_new_
pack_oversight_144043.html (accessed March 20, 2023).
38. U.S. Department of State, “Visas for Members of the Foreign Media, Press, and Radio,” https://travel.state.
gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/employment/visas-members-foreign-media-press-radio.html (accessed
March 20, 2023).
39. Authorized positions for J-1 visas include: au pair, camp counselor, college/university student, government
visitor, intern, international visitor, physician, professor, research scholar, secondary school student, short-term
scholar, specialist, STEM initiatives, summer work travel, teacher, and trainee. See U.S. Department of State,“Exchange Visitor Visa,” https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/study/exchange.html (accessed
March 20, 2023).
40. News release, “McCaul Demands Answers on USAGM Personnel and Management,” Foreign Affairs
Committee, October 28, 2021, https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press-release/mccaul-demands-answers-onusagm-personnel-and-management/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
41. U.S. Agency for Global Media Watch, “USAGM: Past Leaders Ignored National Security Procedures, Failed toAdequately Vet Staff,” August 8, 2020, https://www.usagmwatch.com/usagm-past-agency-leaders-ignorednational-security-procedures-failed-to-adequately-vet-staff/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
42. U.S. Agency for Global Media, “CEO Pack Launches Investigation Into Pro-Biden VOA Content, U.S. Election
Interference,” July 30, 2020, https://www.usagm.gov/2020/07/30/ceo-pack-launches-investigation-into-probiden-voa-content-u-s-election-interference/ (accessed March 22, 2023).
43. America First Legal Foundation, “AFL Asks Biden Administration to Withdraw Nomination of Amanda
Bennet Citing National Security and Related Failures,” June 30, 2022, https://aflegal.org/afl-asks-bidenadministration-to-withdraw-nomination-of-amanda-bennett-citing-national-security-and-related-failures/(accessed March 20, 2023).

— 250 —

2025 Presidential Transition Project
44. U.S. Agency for Global Media Watch, https://www.usagmwatch.com/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
45. BBG-USAM Watch, https://bbgwatch.com/bbgwatch/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
46. Whistleblower Protection Project, “Congress Releases Long-Awaited Investigative Report on Chronically
Mismanaged USAGM,” February 9, 2022, https://whipproj.org/congress-releases-long-awaited-usagminvestigative-report-revealing-Agencys-chronic-mismanagement/ (accessed March 20, 2023).
47. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, “Nixon Administration Public Broadcasting
Papers, Summary of 1971,” February 23, 1979, https://current.org/1979/02/nixon-administration-publicbroadcasting-papers-summary-of-1971/ (accessed March 21, 2023).
48. President Lyndon B. Johnson, State of the Union Address, January 10, 1967, https://www.infoplease.com/
primary-sources/government/presidential-speeches/state-union-address-lyndon-b-johnson-january-10-1967(accessed March 21, 2023).
49. Joyce Appleby and Terence Ball, eds., Jefferson: Political Writings (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1999), p. 390.
50. Pew Research Center, “Where News Audiences Fit on the Political Spectrum,” October 21, 2014, http://www.
journalism.org/interactives/media-polarization/outlet/pbs/ (accessed March 21, 2023.
51. Ibid.
52. Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Corporation for Public Broadcasting Appropriation Request andJustification FY 2023/FY 2025, Submitted to the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related
Agencies Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee and the Labor, Health and Human Services,
Education and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, March 28, 2022,
p. 2, https://www.cpb.org/sites/default/files/appropriation/FY-2023-2025-CPB-Budget-Justification.pdf(accessed March 21, 2023).
53. George F. Will, “Public Broadcasting’s Immortality Defies Reason,” The Washington Post, June 2, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/public-broadcastings-immortality-defies-reason/2017/06/02/f5de02be46fe-11e7-a196-a1bb629f64cb_story.html?utm_term=.8df3a01f6ca6 (accessed March 21, 2023).
54. Federal Communications Commission, “FM Radio,” https://www.fcc.gov/general/fm-radio (accessed
March 21, 2023).
55. Federal Communications Commission, “Regulatory Fee Exemptions for FY 2021,” FCC Regulatory Fees
Factsheet No. DA-21-1142, September 10, 2021, p. 2.

— 251 —