How many kids grew up on Sesame Street and all its characters? How many of us watched Downton Abbey religiously? How many of us record American Experience and learn about our past?

Cutting funding for PBS could very well eliminate those programs. Good grief, many kids have learned to read and count because of children’s programing. Public television is particularly important in rural areas were there is no internet. Those families don’t get HBO, Netflix or Amazon Prime. They do get public television though because it can go right to an antenna.

Then there is the Meals-on-Wheels Scandal. The federal government kicks in 35% of the funding for MoW. MoW feeds many elderly and disabled people who otherwise might go hungry. A spokesman said that this administration saw no visible signs that the program worked. What are they talking about? What measurable signs are there?

This administration is a national disgrace on so many levels. Meals-on-Wheels and Big Bird are just a few examples.

28 thoughts on “Is Big Bird out of a job?

  1. Pat.Herve

    A whopping $1.35 per year. That is how much of my money goes to PBS. Nice. Meanwhile, lets cut the taxes and increase spending in other areas – much more than the money cut from PBS. Trump is on his way to become a one term President – and will take the House and Senate with him.

    We are in the game again – Deficit and Debt do not matter. Obama is gone and lets start spending.

      Quote  Reply

    1. Trump and his administration are basically dishonest, miserable liars. PBS has enriched the lives of generations. That’s a lot of bank for my buck–$1.35.

      I doubt if Trump and gang will make it a full 4 years. I smell impeachment and removal from office. The Senate and house representatives had better hold on for dear life and do the right thing. McCain, Graham seems to be coming out heroes.

        Quote  Reply

  2. Robin Hood

    Now that his version of the Blue Collar Comedy Tour has been interrupted with the responsibilities of his office the fact checking can catch up with him despite his best efforts.

    He wasn’t able to keep the lid on Flynn’s business with the Russians and Turks and now it comes up that the federal DA he fired in New York was investigating his HHS secretary, Mr. Repeal and Replace. Even the diversionary tweets are coming back to haunt him with real consequences.

      Quote  Reply

  3. Kelly_3406

    If you go to the Meals on Wheels web site, you will see that most of its federal funding (~35% of its total budget) comes from the Older Americans Act which has NOT been announced as a cut. The cut program was the Community Block Program, which is used only sometimes to supplement Meals on Wheels.

    The vast majority of its funding comes from private sources. I donate money directly and through my church, bring a bag of groceries almost every week; and my family and I volunteer at a local food pantry for the poor.

    Which leads me to the next point — I completely question the rhetoric about the importance of public funding for PBS and NPR. What makes you think that Downtown Abbey and Sesame Street would not be picked up by a different network and/or shown on podcast? But if it is so important to you (and only costs $1.35), why don’t you just donate $2.70 to cover the cost for yourself and one other?

    I believe that feeding the poor is vitally important. Public TV– not so much.

      Quote  Reply

    1. Jerome Doublas

      Then there is the Meals-on-Wheels Scandal. The federal government kicks in 35% of the funding for MoW.

      What scandal? If anyone believes that Trump’s budget ‘guts’ MoW funding I highly suggest that you expand, or rethink, the sources you get your news from.

      As Kelley mentioned before, MoW gets most of their federal funding from the Older Americans Act. The only thing being canceled is the CDBG grants which isn’t entirely used for MoW funding anyway. Since localities have discretion as to where the CDBG grant money goes it’s not surprising that it is open to corruption. Not all of that money gets to MoW because politicians skim off of it for other things.

      If you want to be mad at someone about MoW funding get mad at politicians who use CDBG grants for something other than MoW.

        Quote  Reply

      1. 35% loss in revenue can gut most programs. In some areas, the program would go on. In other, less affluent areas, the MoW program could be shut down.

        Why are you defending this hideous human being, just out of curiosity? I can’t think of one redeeming attribute.

          Quote  Reply

      2. Jerome Doublas

        MoonHowler,

        I don’t think you quite understand how MoW gets it’s federal funding and it appears you may have been misled by fake news. Again, MoW gets 35% of it’s funding via the Older Americans Act, which is NOT being cut.

        The only thing being cut is the CDBG grants which makes up a very small percentage of federal MoW funding because politicians have discretion as to how to allocate the funds. It is ripe with corruption hence the reason for cutting it because little of that money actually gets to MoW.

        35% loss in revenue can gut most programs. – That is good to know, it’s also good to know that the 35% of federal funding that MoW gets via the Older Americans Act is not being cut.

          Quote  Reply

      3. Ripe with corruption? I assume you can prove that point using something other than brietbart news? Let’s get away from using the term “fake news” on this blog. It is demeaning and adds nothing to proving one’s point. I feel confident your idea of “fake news” is vastly different than my idea of “fake news.”

          Quote  Reply

      4. Jerome Doublas

        MoonHowler,

        Here is one example from of corruption in the CDBG grant program from ‘Thing Progress’: https://thinkprogress.org/how-corrupt-officials-screwed-up-an-extremely-poor-towns-big-break-b8d32677e969#.z5f6t7nq5

        There are many many many more…

        Can you now provide me with proof that all 35% of federal funding to MoW from the Older Americans Act will be cut? I’ll wait…

          Quote  Reply

      5. Jerome Doublas

        Jerome Doublas,

        Soooo…. no luck on finding proof that all 35% of federal funding for MoW is going to be cut due to the CDBG cuts?

          Quote  Reply

    2. Pubic television is pretty damn important if you live in the middle of nowhere and have an antenna rather than cable or satellite TV. We assume everyone has these things. Hell, not everyone even has electricity. Ask a Navajo living on the Rez.

      Most western nations have public TV. Not everyone is middle class.

      As for MoW, Not everyone receiving this service is poor. Many folks are older or handicapped or in some way, incapacitated temporarily or permanently. It is also a way for shut-ins to have outside access to the world, keeping folks from having to go into nursing homes and assisted living. 35% is a pretty big chunk of money. I wouldn’t want cutting MoW on MY score card. I wouldn’t want the lies, the character flaws, the vulgar rhetoric or the bad judgement on my score card either.

        Quote  Reply

  4. Jerome Doublas

    A spokesman said that this administration saw no visible signs that the program worked. What are they talking about? What measurable signs are there?

    Also, I’m not sure where you’re getting your information but that statement is not accurate as well. I know you do not like the term ‘fake news’ but I’m not sure what else to call it…

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/17/for-the-record-wh-budget-director-did-not-say-meals-on-wheels-did-not-show-results/?utm_term=.65c16a8d2bbb

      Quote  Reply

    1. Mulvaney made the remark in a press conference. I heard him say that.
      It was all mis-mash anyway. Not feeding kids doesn’t make the shame go away. How do you measure the impact of food?

      Actually I think what I heard him say was that kids weren’t doing any better in school now. Give me a break. No one ever said there was a one to one correspondence with food and grades.

        Quote  Reply

  5. Pat.Herve

    The US currently spends more on DoD than the next 7 countries combined. The US currently spends 5-6% of GDP – compared to 2% or less for most countries (including #2 China). Yet, we are going to spend more on Military spending…..without even taking one look at the infamous waste, fraud and abuse. But that $1.35 for PBS will go a long way to pay for the additional $54 Billion….

      Quote  Reply

    1. Jerome Doublas

      Pat.Herve,

      Providing tax dollars to Big Bird is not only subsidizing the rich but the mega rich. Big Bird is a 1%’er of the highest order. According to License Magazine the ‘non-profit’ Sesame Workshop raked in $1,600,000,000.00 ($1.6 billion) in global retail sales of licensed merchandise. That ranks them at #33 in the top licensors on the planet.

      That puts them above other global corporate giants such as the Hershey company, Polo clothing company and even Coca-Cola. When Big Bird is raking in more money in licensed merchandise than Coca-Cola I think it is safe to say that Big Bird doesn’t need our help.

        Quote  Reply

      1. Big Bird doesn’t need the help but the children who watch educational programs very much do.

        Plenty of areas in the country don’t have cable. PBS goes across the airwaves.

        Finally, what’s wrong with programming being part of our national treasure? Do you want to get rid of National Parks and monuments also? Not everyone can afford Fios or a dish.

          Quote  Reply

      2. Pat.Herve

        Jerome Doublas,

        The funding being cut is for PBS – not Sesame Street. Sesame Street is ONE very successful program – there are many other PBS programs that are not as successful. I am willing to put in my $1.35 to fund PBS.

          Quote  Reply

  6. Robin Hood

    Arnold Schwarznegger said that cutting PBS and Meals on Wheels doesn’t make America great. I hope the FBI nails Trump’s gang of collaborators with Russia and (here it comes) locks them up.

      Quote  Reply

    1. Jerome Doublas

      Robin Hood,

      What about Hillary’s campaign staff and their Russian connections?

        Quote  Reply

      1. What about them? Where did you pull this one from? Is Hillary in office? Noooooooooo.

        Do you want Russians involved in our election process? I sure don’t. While I was growing up, Russians were bad dudes. The only reason we weren’t attacked is because they lacked the delivery systems to do so…or at least we hoped that to be the case. That’s why people went nuts over the Cuban missile conflict. Nukes 90 miles off our coast line.

        Russians are still the bad guys.

          Quote  Reply

      2. Jerome Doublas

        MoonHowler,

        Is Hillary in office?

        No, thank God…

        * Hillary’s campaign staff met with the same Russian official that got Flynn pinched, Sergey Kislyak.

        * Her campaign chairs’ lobbying firm, the Podesta Group, worked directly for Sberbank and VTB Capital which are the #1 and #2 banks in Russia connected to the Russian government. The Podesta Group lobbied congress vigorously on behalf of Russia to ease sanctions that were put into place after Russia invaded Crimea.

        * John Podesta is a busy man, he also sat on the board of an energy company called Joule Unlimited. While he was on the board the company received $35,000,000.00 from Putin’s Rusnano.

        So Hillary’s campaign chairman worked directly for the Russian government but that doesn’t matter? Hillary hid $2,350,000.00 in donations to the Clinton Foundation from Russian officials while she was SoS and that doesn’t matter? Got it.

          Quote  Reply

      3. Provide proof that includes names, dates and places from a reliable source or two por favor.

          Quote  Reply

      4. Robin Hood

        I’m not falling for that absurdity! Comey finished investigating Clinton. It’s over. That diversionary tactic used to work in the middle of the campaign but that’s in the past.

        Stick that half-baked notion back in Kellyanne’s microwave until it’s done.

        Jerome Doublas,

          Quote  Reply

      5. Jerome Doublas

        Robin Hood,

        So the DNC sever was ‘hacked’ by the Russians, is that what you’re telling me with 100% certainty? Odd, the DNC refused to turn over their server to the FBI for forensic cyber analysis.

        You may want to do yourself a favor and do a little research on the Awan brothers, the prime suspects of the DNC leaks.

          Quote  Reply

      6. Robin Hood

        Jerome Doublas,

        You guys were ready to lock her up before the investigation was done and now you want to put words in my mouth and assign me homework? I trust the FBI more than I trust the fake news all over the internet and Fox.

          Quote  Reply

      7. So do I. Robin, I think maybe the wrong group was chanting “lock ‘er her up.” I think maybe it should have been Lock HIM up.

          Quote  Reply

      8. Jerome Doublas

        Robin Hood,

        You have no clue who the Awan brothers are and what they have been caught doing… do you?

        Let me see if I can help… the reason the FBI doesn’t currently have an open investigation into the Awan brothers is because Democrats did not want them to investigate it. The DOZENS of Democrat members of Congress (victims of this mass data theft operation) insisted that the Capital Police head up the investigation because the Awan brothers allegedly stole some office supplies. I’m not bullshitting you. Read the Politico hyperlink above.

        Odd right? I know… it gets better! So the DNC claim that the Russians hacked their system and exposed their email. Right? So then why did they not hand over the DNC server(s) to the FBI so that they could perform a forensic cyber analysis on it?

        Can you at least fake an answer for this question? No? Okay, I’ll help you again Robin Hood…. because it would destroy their narrative of ‘Russia hacked the election’.

        So in short Robin Hood… yes, please do some homework. You’re gonna need it bro.

          Quote  Reply

  7. Elena

    Any reduction of critical resources that provide food to people in need is outrageous, especially considering the gross amount of money Trump is spending on his weekend jaunts to his “west” White House. Don’t even get me started on that “let them eat cake” analogy.

    That people don’t see the irony of possibly cutting funding to programs like GEAR up, School lunch programs, and MoW is unconscionable when in its place Trump will be building a freaking wall, taking private property to build said wall, all to the tune of BILLIONS.

    Does Trumps budget technically CUT those vital programs, no. But when you slash an already miniscule amount of funds, by any amount, what do you expect will happen?

    http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/03/20/520848721/could-meals-on-wheels-really-lose-funding-yes-but-its-hard-to-say-how-much

    “But by far, the biggest source of federal funding for Meals on Wheels programs comes from another source: the Older Americans Act Nutrition Program, which is run by the Department Of Health and Human Services. In the aggregate, Bertolette says Meals on Wheels programs across the country rely on the HHS program for 35 percent of their funding.

    The White House has proposed slashing the Health and Human Services budget by nearly 18 percent, but the details of those cuts have not been released. Will the Older Americans Act Nutrition Program be affected? No way to know.

    But Bertolette says “it’s difficult to imagine a scenario in which these critical services would not be significantly and negatively impacted if [the budget proposal is] enacted into law,” she says.
    Even at current federal funding levels, some Meals on Wheels programs are struggling to meet demand.

    “We have a waiting list for home-delivered meals of 815 seniors, and it’s growing,” says Mark Adler, executive director of Meals On Wheels South Florida, which gets 65 percent of its $5.2 million yearly budget through the federal Older Americans Act.”

      Quote  Reply

Leave a Comment