tv Corporation for Public Broadcasting Officials Warn Against Proposed... CSPAN March 29, 2017 3:22am-5:27am EDT
everybody in a moment that the ceo of the corporation for public broadcasting to the subcommittee on labor, hhs and education discussed the agency's budget. looking forward to hearing her testimony especially since it's been quite a while since a subcommittee has held a hearing on the corporation's budget. akamai staff tell me it's literally been 10 years since we last had you hear so welcome back. we will try to make it more than
once a decade appearance. i also want to thank you for accommodating some schedule changes due to the timing of the budget this year. we have had a few schedule modifications and i really appreciate it personally and the entire committee does your flexibility to work with us. we are really happy that you are here congress created the corporation to give a stronger voice to commercial-free educational radio and television programs. in addition to providing education public broadcasters are often the only source of content to remote areas of the nation or the high-quality content available through public art testing continues to receive recognition. just last year receiving more than 80 emmy nominations. millions of americans every day and into public radio stations and television stations for news, weather and entertainment. thousands of children and teachers use the educational programming and classrooms across america. corp. represents a unique public-private partnership with
most radio and tv stations leveraging five non-federal dollars for each dollar made to nonfederal investment or we look forward to hearing the corporation's accomplishments over the past years and plans for the upcoming fiscal year. as a reminder to the subcommittee and their witnesses will abide by the five-minute rule served by the will have a chance to get their questions asked and answered it before you'll then want make a couple personal points if i may. first of all in full disclosure pat harris was co-chairman republican national committee would have is the chief of staff we can black male one another ad infinitum. she has been my dear friend for 16, 17 years now and have watched with admiration the job you done over the corporation for public broadcasting and appreciate very much that job. second i'm going to have to excuse myself. mr. whoa is headed to the same meeting could we have the defense subcommittee members
meeting but i will be coming back to join you and again thank you for accommodating. satellite data here and i'm looking or two -- i read your testimony but i'm looking forward to the panels for full and robust participation as this is an agency we all admire. with that i want to yield to my good friend the ranking member for opening statement excuse myself if i may. >> mr. chairman he talked about a sordid past so you have to find the relationship of a sordid past. >> in my absence mr. flashman has agreed to. >> thank you very much and i'm delighted to have this hearing today and i want to welcome you pat harris and present ceo of
the corporation for public broadcasting. we look forward to your testimony but i first want to say congratulations to you and to everyone as a corporation on the 50th anniversary of the public broadcasting act of 1967. signed into law by lyndon b. johnson so here we are but it's also interesting to note when i was reading through material that president isenhour leaved the origins come out of the space race and out of the cold war and at the time of resident isenhour and congress saw the educational programming as a way for the united states to compete in science technology mathematics as part of our national defense. so you stand on solid ground my friends. as we reflect on the last 50
years of the early learning programs local journalism and partnership it is a particularly opportune time for committee to discuss the importance of public broadcasting in our local communities and as the trump administration proposes to eliminate federal support for public television and public radio we need to consider the profound impact that this organization has had in our community. as you noted in your testimony our appropriations for cpb supports approximately 1500 locally owned and operated public television and radio stations. 99% of the american people in rural and urban communities and all 50 states and the district of columbia and four commonwealth and territories. the vast majority of federal funds are allocated to local stations. as ms. harrison noted in her
testimony 95% of all funding, $432 million goes to support programs and services. the dollars don't stay in washington. they are directly infused into local communities across this country and quite frankly i won't go through it but i do have a list and particularly members of the subcommittee of the stations in our area that are beneficiaries of the grants that you distribute. 20048 of the 5705 station grantees currently receive cpb supporter considered. [roll call] presentations provide trusted local journalism high-quality educational programming and they play a crucial role in public safety. an example, pbs affiliated debut
tct via cookeville tennessee is a perfect example. the situation is the only one that the majority of residents and upper cumberland county can receive within off guarantee enough so the station manager i know quote is hard for people who are sitting in washington and urban areas to comprehend that people still need an antenna to be able to receive only one station but it's a fact. she also said and i quote i really wish i could talk to president trump. i really wish he would let me show him where we live. i wish you could see the difference this station makes in the lives of the people that we serve. maybe he would see that funding differently. if we cut federal funding we are killing stations like w. cte. studies have shown alternative sources of hunting are unrealistic. 2012 companies requested the subcommittee to do an exhaustive
study that did not common myths about financing of public broadcasting. the report found and i quote there is simply no substitute for the federal investment to accomplish the public service commission that congress has assigned for public broadcasters and the american people overwhelmingly support end quote. the stations of vitter ones where federal funding accounts for 40 to 50% of their budget. they write and i quote in the absence of the federal appropriation a domino effect results in the loss of the stations most at risk first and cascading debilitating effects on remaining stations. the loss of federal support for public broadcasting risk the collapse of the system itself. we cannot afford to let this happen. the trump administration's proposal to eliminate funding for cpb means evidence-based
early learning program is on the line. according to cpb, pbs is the number one source of media content for preschool teacher. public broadcasting is responsible for high-quality content that aligns with literacy math and science. early learning goals and state standards. evidence-based programs of these programs are critical when it comes to bridging the achievement gap. educate children at home and in school. parents use these resources developed with public broadcasting support that they see increased awareness in their child's learning. in the body of more than 100 research studies completed in 2005 the public media's literacy and math content engages children and enhances their ability to learn skills that cpb in partnership with pbs is a
ready to learn grantee, ready to learn established in 1992 reauthorizes bipartisan support and the every student succeeds act of 2016. it makes grants to support development of education of television digital content targeted at preschool kids and their families. this is what cpb represents, free accessible goal outlined early learning resources that benefit every family. that is what is at stake. meanwhile cpb is reported -- requesting flat funding for the seventh and eight years in a row. their reality eight years of flat funding is a equipment to cut a 13% after just for inflation could the trump administration is proposing to cut $54 billion in non-defense discretionary spending. that cut includes the complete elimination of federal funding
for the corporation are for public broadcasting. the outlined that would be a tragedy. if we are serious about supporting high-quality educational programs we should be talking about an increase of 13% for the corporation for public broadcasting not a flat funding or certainly not a cut or elimination. the border wall is projected to cost $21.6 billion. i suggest that we save that, that we use those funds to support public broadcasting in the next 50 years years. would have to support essential programs. we cannot do more with less. we can only do less with less so i thank you for everything that you have done and we look forward to hearing your testimonies. >> thank you ranking member delauro and at this time i would like to recognize the full committee ranking member
ms. lowey for her opening remarks. >> thank you very much and welcome. i do want to thank ranking member delauro for holding this hearing and i do welcome you. pat harrison, anne brachman you come before is at a critical time following the recent trump administration budget proposals to defund cpb. in washington it seems bad ideas never die and in 1995 i brought bert and ernie to the subcommittee through a call to protest proposed budget cuts by then speaker newt gingrich. i thought i would let them rest in the office today and just speak for them. the american people, congress
reject these cuts in here we are decades later the corporation for public broadcasting providing even more critical programming and yet another effort to give bert and ernie a pink slip. the trump administration proposal to eliminate funding to cpb would devastate local broadcast stations which are supported by more than 90% of cpb funding. it would be forced to make up as much as half of their annual budgets putting at risk sustainability of local television and radio broadcast and communities throughout the country. i fear many stations would not survive. particularly in rural and undeserved areas. in years past the subcommittee
led by chairman cole has not brought god into this misguided pursuit. it is my sincere hope that this subcommittee's commitment to cpb will continue. we know why you have hands on the subcommittee that the congress. everyday you bring the arts and high-quality educational programming for all ages into households throughout our country. the public broadcasting service which is brought to nash -- households nationwide by cpb was rated number one for 13 consecutive years with public trust among nationally known -- eight out of 10 people say it's taxpayer money well spent. eight of 10 americans trust pbs at a time when the trump
administration de-legitimizes any reporting it doesn't like estate news. it's hard not to suspect that an effort to undermine public broadcasting is a transparent attempt to keep americans in the dark about their failures and improprieties. i am particularly inspired by cpb's legacy of early childhood programs from the new pbs kids service providing 24/7 programming to classics such as "sesame street," curious george, thomas and friends, cpb has a long history of making quality early childhood education available to children nationwide particularly for disadvantaged children. studies show these investments produce impressive results including an increase in school
readiness. "sesame street" in particular has been shown to help children stay at the appropriate grade level and decrease eye as much as 14% the likelihood of being behind in school. that is why these proposed budget cuts are so foolish no matter where you live or your income level. public broadcasting must be available for every american and i look forward to your testimony. thank you. >> thank you ranking member lowey. ms. harrison good morning. i am chuck fleischmann and i represent the great people of tennessee. my local public broadcasting station is wtc i. it's in chattanooga that i want to thank you for being here today and i would like to recognize you now for your opening statement. >> thank you chairman fleischmann. ranking member delauro and
distinguished members of this subcommittee i greatly appreciate the time allotted to me today to talk about the corporation for public broadcasting stewardship of the federal appropriation and really put it means to the american people. we are keenly aware of the budget constraints facing our nation and in that regard we have not asked for an increase in our funding for eight years. today's cpb is requesting level funding in the amount of 445 million for fy2020, 55 million for interconnection system in public broadcasting television and radio and 30 million for the department of education's ready to learn program. although cpb was created 50 years ago our mission truly is more relevant than ever to serve every american with high-quality trusted projects that really
does educate inform inspire and entertain free of charge and commercial-free. in order to achieve this vision we carefully manage these taxpayer monies. 71% of which goes directly to nearly 1500 local public television's and radio stations. we support patient collaboration and innovation enabling public media to extend its reach and impact delivering our national and local content on all platforms to current and new diverse audiences on air or on line and in the community. our mission directs us to help our nation's children to prepare to succeed in school especially those in low-income families living in urban in rural communities. we also serve as reliable trusted source of in-depth journalism and through our award
winning documentaries in series we connect americans to their history in ways that truly matter to our democracy through initiatives such as american graduates addressing the high school dropout rate and veterans coming home and connecting those who have served with the resources and the support they deserve with telling america's story and we are inspiring civic responsibility. the federal assessment is just the beginning of the american public media story because unlike any other public media service in the world american public media as a public private partnership with stations building on vital and essential support and raising nonfederal funds. federal funding represents on average 10 to 19% of the stations budget but the station serving brito minority and other underserved communities, federal funding can be as much as 40 to 80% of their budget.
more informed society. the country in which all citizens can learn. mr. chairman, through the financial support and public media made true to its mission and continues to deliver value to the american people where ever you live and whatever circumstance free of charge and commercial free. thank you. >> thank you so much for that opening statement. in the past, we've had some criticism regarding the role of the federal government broadcasting several stations do a variety of mechanisms support their operating costs such as private donations and merchandise licensing. as a matter of fact, part of my tenure in congress, they used to actually have an option that was
wonderful that we participate and raise funds as a great thing to do and i enjoyed that immensely. can you discuss some of the alternative financing option that stations are now using and i will try to finance options to support public broadcasting and the odds and of -- absence of support. >> thank you. we have done our due diligence responding to the congress to look at alternative sources of funding for the public media, and i think this was mentioned earlier in 2007 the general accounting office did a study and at that time, they basically said there was not an alternative viable source of funding to link that to the 2012 study.
the bottom line that i thought was interesting because they were both very independent would mean the collapse of public media. and what they mean by this is congress in its wisdom 50 years ago created such an amazing construct and everybody has a responsibility. that initial investment by the federal government ten to 15% in the stations are much more and it's been matched by the station and view referred to the station pledges. through their support they say we are benefiting from the content and the communities try to meet more than the federal investment in some cases it is
six times that amount. the problem is in the rural stations, they don't have this in depth database. they really depend upon the federal investments. so, what would happen if the federal government would start first with the rural stations. i don't know how much time i have to use but i grew up in brooklyn and i'm embarrassed to say i didn't know the states for a long time. we didn't leave or go anywhere. we went to the wonder bread factory and it was only when i got older and started traveling, the chairman mentioned i visited
every single state, and at this point i had an opportunity to go to a vote of public media stations. at the state department, we get international visitors that came in and wanted to visit the stations and in my job at the last 11 years i've come up with a statement if you don't go, you don't know. and i have to say i wish becky were here because i met people who depend on the content and they said this has been our whole life, this is our education for our children. with the stations do raising money as part of the public-private partnership. >> i appreciate the talk about brooklyn. my mother grew up in the wron bx and my mother grew up in queens.
i know you touched on the interconnection system in the testimony. can you provide us some additional information about why the upgrade is needed and how it will contribute to the distribution of programming and what will be the total cost and what benefits will this bring? >> this is a story that i am so proud to tell because in 2014, the omb, is the bottom of the interconnection system is basically the infrastructure for the entire system that allows the contents to go to stations and then be shared each with one another. in 2014, they provide u provideh 197 million then congress appropriated 40 million, which provided interconnection services to look at public television and radio so going
back 14 and 15 we've been focused on doing our due diligence and interconnection systems for several years. we hired cognizant technology solutions. we work with engineers from npr, and i was very proud to report earlier we brought out 197 down to 150 million we are the stewards in this process and it has been an intensive and extensive process and we were told our responsibility at the end of the day is to be able to report that for these monies, we are going to have the most cost effective and most advanced system for public television and
public radio and now we are looking at public radio as well. >> thank you and i appreciate your testimony. at this time i would like to recognize the ranking member for five minutes to ask questions. >> thank you so much for your testimony as much as interconnection i was reading at the outset we were just hand delivering content which is pretty extraordinary about how the times have changed and we need to keep up with the times. a couple pieces that have to do with eliminating funding underserved and rural communities. i understand the smaller stations don't have a donor base with this much money. federal funds can be up to about 40%.
in 2012, the report submitted found the funding if it was eliminated, 54 public television stations, 19 states, 76 radio stations and 38 would be at risk and no longer operating. 47 radio stations are predominantly in the rural areas, that is 12 million losing access to public television, nearly 3.5 no longer having access to public radio. from your perspective because you have been there and mentioned that person now, what does this mean for those americans in the underserved communities that rely on public television and radio? and i'm going to add an adjunct to death because you made the case and i won't deal with the quotes about the directors and public safety and all those issues, but talk to us about the
examples of life-saving services that your stations offer and what that impact would be if the dollars and corporations were eliminated. >> thank you for that question. maybe we haven't done a good job in talking about this essential part of the service media provides because we connect to 99% of all americans in terms of public safety and emergency. to make it a little more personal, let's look at west virginia for example, it is not just an idea of public safety and service because of what they do and also because the interconnection system, the emergency alert is life-saving. they've documented without public media the losses are on so many different levels, public emergency, safety, letting
people know what is happening but even more importantly, the difference with public media stations is once the emergency is over, the station because it is still part of the community, they are part and they help work with them to rebuild the community whether it is helping schools as we did in louisiana, using them as shelters in boston after sandy and in california we worked with six radio stations called the great california shakeout to really help people utilize technology and work with homeland security making sure they get this vital information in time. unfortunately there's a lot of crisis connected with schools and they are able t to in an encrypted way with homeland security to provide schools so
people know exactly where they are going and what they need to do and sometimes the schools use shelters as well so it is a domino effect and if the funding were to go away, the vital service for the communities in addition to emergency alerts and public safety i could talk all day about education in terms of what we do with early learning. and i know there has been a lot of talk about the coal miners and we serve those people. this is an anomaly i realize, but in west virginia public television there was a story that this man had lung cancer and it was a coalminer and no one really knew.
he didn't have any means to get the help he needed and so the station told his story. this is local content that matters to local people, pride, connection. he is now talking about the value of what happened to him. we reach more underserved minority kids and sometimes we forget, you know, achalasia, opioids come as a general manager of the west virginia station they said to me this is an epidemic. the public media was there but we tell the local story because we know these people but we also don't want to just be known for that silliness wha silliness wha
local level and i've seen this comic is a great deal of pride. they may be poor, but they are proud of their culture and where they are and when they can connect to local history and music, it's made suc it made sun impression on me they had this case that's just amazing. it started as loca a local contt and now it's national content. telling these stories in a profound way is what connects us to one another and there has to be a point if we are talking about our civil society, we have to stop identifying ourselves as red state or blue state and think of what it means to be an american. >> that was long-winded. >> you are eloquent and we are
appreciative of what you've done. >> sorry i went over my time. >> at this time i would like to recognize my friend and colleague from michigan. >> thank you for your testimony and for being here with us to help us understand the work that you are doing. i wanted to just get your thoughts on how they've transitioned over 50 years. because it strikes me that early on there were three stations on television and now there's 500. people are getting information in all sorts of different ways. and that strikes me as a big change. i also wanted you to speak to -- you were doing some innovative
things. earlier it was mentioned getting a pink sli slip but slip that tt they've become private contractors in some ways because now there is a contract for five seasons and sesame street i understand and later episodes would be delayed. but can you talk about some of the ways you have adapted to forming partnerships especially this whole area of sesame street and i also worry about the areas that seem like there would be a commercial success and how that relates to your overall adapting to a new environment. >> thank you for the question. i believe the reason public media is so vital and vibrant today is because we have evolved. we haven't embraced the status
quo in any way. we look for ways to be relevant in people's lives and especially with the democratization of technology, we want our content to be everywhere americans are and in any way they want to access it so i think that's one of the ways we have remained vital, that we get this question a lot. in an environment of 500 plus and who knows maybe there will be 2,000 channels. we just don't know what the future holds. why do we still need public media? this is what i truly believe. and i consume tons of commercial media. i have a subscription to amazon, subscription to netflix. everything i have is behind a pay wall and my feeling is that there are people who can afford
to get on a plane and go to broadway and get it what is it now, thousand dollar ticket tico hamlet, go to the opera. there seems to be this feeling that because maybe you live in a rural area that you are not interested in those things. in a way it may not stand completely that it remind but if what president bush said, so, people in this country you're in for a content they can trust and where are we right now? we are living in this environment of fake news. i have kids and grandchildren. we are very proud of our commitment to funding fact-based journalism. we have a priority.
sometimes we mess up, but our priority is the same as npr as well. so in terms of the plethora of channels, our mission is different from commercial media. our mission is to serve the people with education and things that matter in their lives and how do we know plaques because we measure and evaluate. with things that uplift you, with local content, it's the whole menu. it's not just down to natty. it's local content, it's bluegrass, it is a story if you can believe it about farming and it's what we do with our kids. so in terms of getting back to what you said about sesame street, i'm no i am not going to minimize our challenge because
we are asking for a base funding and we will be grateful and appreciative to get it, but we are competing with filmmakers and content producers. netflix just announced that they will be paying ten times more than hbo for content so we are competing for the best of the best and we are so grateful for those who have chosen public media. in terms of sesame street, what we have is moving some of their contents to hbo, but we didn't lose them, the content is still on a very dynamic and innovative pbs 24 hours seven days a week kids channel so we still have it, but we are existing in a very commercial world. i don't know if any of you were a fan of mercy street, it was an
original channel content focused on the civil war and there were two seasons. it was so well done but they are not doing a third season. they can't raise the money. we are fortunate that we were able to get the content. even down to now be that le nata loss of educational modules about world war i -- i'm going to have to ask my good friend -- your time has expired. >> i'm sorry. >> we let you go on longer than normal because i love that stuff
with that let me go to my good friend the gentle lady from california. i'm sorry, i thought you had testified. the ranking member of the full committee. >> no problem. and i want to once again express my appreciation to you. i particularly appreciated your reference to the environment of fake news and even though i kind of go around to see what everyone is saying, i still watch the news hour because i know i'm getting the real news, and i really, really appreciate it. i want to thank you for the grant if you provided the life blood to the community and the
healthcare transportation and another emergency alert. i hate to think what would happen if there were budget cuts. but one other area that i want to mention before my time is expired, or i expired, something like that, i appreciate the work they were doing on professional develop and. it is so crucial in supporting and maintaining teachers, allowing them to bring skills classroom and a quotation of publiprovision ofpublic broadcal initiatives to enhance professional development and provide teachers the tools and training to integrate ever-changing educational media in the classroom instruction. can you provide some examples of the services that are provided to the local stations across the country and the impact they have
on student achievement because this is an area that i don't think many of us are aware of. >> thank you so much. pbs is an aggregation of content. children's content is available to teachers, homeschoolers, parents, right now it is being utilized by 1.83 million people and one third of all american teacherteachers aren't using thd every state has this available. they work with schools and supplements what teachers do. teachers are under such pressure in this new digital age, and whether it is through pbs were even ready to learn, we have programs that enable teachers to become more familiar with how to
use these objects and how to use the technology in the classroom and state-by-state each one has tailored to their state. it's one of the things we should talk more about and in fact we have so many teachers saying they are inundated with this thing, that thing. this is free and available for over a million people. we want to increase it because it has been tested and it needs to bexpanded. >> thank you and thank you mr. chairman. >> i will indulge myself if i may take my questions asked and go tnext andgo to the gentle lam california. i want to assure you this is asked in a friendly way but it's important there's a very unusual
funding stream which is very unusual but then i am often asked about why this particular agency gets this particular treatment so i would like if you could just to address that question and help inform the committee about that. >> we are very appreciative of the funding and there are two reasons. the reason the first one is important it was to provide a firewall of independence for our content providers that no matter who was in leadership, no matter what political party, that our content would be removed from that pressure, and that worked over 50 years and the other reason is in order for us to go
with a program or do the research whether it is educational, children's content or documentaries it is a longer time and we enter into contracts and have to be able to make these contracts and then stationed with the confidence that we are going to go ahead, they go out and are able to raise the money and those are the two primary reasons. >> it's important for people to understand that frankly that wall of independence is critical to the mission and maintaining the confidence that you need to maintain across the political spectrum so just want to get that on the record. we all know public broadcasters do a good job on early childhood education that you also focus on the high school dropout crisis in the country with an initiative called american graduate. can you tell us what you're
doing to address high school dropout rates and the impact the program is having? >> we are so proud of the work we've done. many of the people responsible for it are here and again, it goes back to our local caring about the community so the general managers many of them are in the communities tha comme would call dropout factories were kids at risk and after many years of watching the statistic of 1 million american boys and girls fail to graduate high school every single year, that is a shameful statistic for us as americans, and i remember we met with in this small group of general managers and i said why don't we see what we can do. and it looked like taking on world peace or poverty or
something. we have the research to show that not the founding research but many of these kids didn't even have one significant mentor or caring adults in their lives. many of them were working two jobs were taking care of younger kid, so what we wanted to do on a local and international level is no first of all who are the dropouts? are they worthless, are they completely stupid? can we get past th this stereote of who they are and once you started hearing these stories on radio, television, frontline covered it, you came away thinking mike s., my children wouldn't be able to make it if they had to deal with what these kids are dealing with and then we told the story of the teachers come average americans who just step up to the plate. some of these kids were homeless and what happened?
it is a story of our civil society and now on american graduate they use a daylong broadcast where people decide they are going to be mentors, thousands of people respond and the dropout rate was i can't really think of it and tightly it was 73% six years ago and it's the highest now at 83 but it's ever been and we played a part in that story. stations worked with 1700 business state-based on any kind of civil organization you can think of -- ..
>> there are a lot of jobs not getting filled because kids are not prepared when they graduate to fill them. so we work with america's promise alliance, all of these good organizations. what they said about the partnership with public media, we give them the megaphone. alabama, for example worked with the birmingham why. they took it be on the concept and it such a strong community program. >> now i'll go to my good friend from california. >> thank you mr. chairman. welcome. i want to begin by associating myself with the comments of the chairman and the other members of the committee about the tremendous value of the corporation for public broadcasting.
as you know, the achievement gap between low-income and minority children and their wealthier counterparts is already pronounced by the time they enter kindergarten. that is not surprising given a recent survey by the kc foundation found 54% of america's three and four -year-olds do not have the opportunity to attend preschool. for many communities, including my own the corporation for public broadcasting through pbs is a critical resource that helps keep this disparity from worsening. nielsen ratings confirmed that pbs stations reach more children ages two mac - 8 and low income households than any other children's network. the question is, could you elaborate a little bit more on the impact of eliminating the federal commitment. how a complete privatization
compromise program quality? >> thank you for the question. children's content is very expensive. if your goal is to treat the child as a consumer, then you can pay for that content surrounded by commercials. if your goal is to build a young citizen to provide a safe place where child can learn, and you are not focused on a commercial return on investment, but a return on investment for that child's entire life, we could not do it without the federal appropriation. ready to learn will go away. a commercialized ready to learn would not work. these parents can't afford to pay for the money that goes into the research, the evaluation, the boots on the ground. it's another example of
understanding at a profound level, that no matter where these kids come from, how poor their families are, every child start school not saying, i hope i drop out five or ten years from now, they are excited about school. we want them to be able to compete with their more affluent peers. this program, it's evaluated, it's measured, and that is what it does. it gets these young children ready to get to school and not feel almost intellectually intimidated, not feel like they are second-class citizens. they're in there, they know the work, they have a future. we have to continue it. the loss of the appropriation, to me on so many different levels, as an american, but just to be specific in terms of early childhood, it would be disastrous. i forgot your other question.
>> about the content. >> i have a real life example. i have a 9-year-old grandson. he has a laptop. we have loaded it with all the ready to learn stuff. but when your grandsons visit the grandparents there like, sort of not the same thing. he came over and he had something that look like grand theft auto on his laptop. it turned out it was racing cars. in order to go to the next level he needed our credit card. that's the contents. we immediately took it down and put back the other. these kids are bombarded in commercial television. i have time for one more example? cleveland, ideas string.
an incredible station. what they realize because they have business partnerships, the whole community, is a very poor area called polish town. we go to the clinic and the kids are sitting waiting, sometimes for hours to see the dr.. what's on television? the same commercial stuff, selling, selling, selling. these parents have nothing. so what idea stream is, they came in and give the clinic laptops and loaded up with all the pbs content. the have a continuous loop, now they have a relationship with those parents and those kids. there are so many stories like this that got lost when you talk about defining public broadcasting. it's about people, their lives in the family. >> was that based on the order arrival will go to my friend from wisconsin. >> it thinking mr. chairman. thank you for being here.
let me say a quick thank you for the newest muppet, julia, the muppet with autism. i've two nephews who are autistic, growing population and we so appreciate what you do and looking forward to julia a more presence in theater more often. on private content, it's not just the credit card, there may be 500 channels, but that means the kardashians, and honey boo-boo when ozzy osbourne and a lot of other shows that i don't know that i would put in the same categories pbs. want to follow with a question that was asked about the role population. my district is very rule, wisconsin is very role. 20% of people who watch pbs do not have cable or satellite. they're getting it over the air. if you could talk more about that in the impact to the rural communities. they do not have other options. i think pbs's filling in a great
-- >> more and more we need to talk about that. it's easy, if you do not live in a rural area to even imagine that you do not have every single thing at your fingertips and get with what you need. as i said before, $129 million of our preparation goes to rural stations. we also want those rural stations to 60. we're not just giving them a grants, which is very important. we give them an incentive grant. we work with them to see how they can collaborate with other stations. for example, cookeville is collaborating with the wgbh in terms of sharing their expertise or their back office expenses. ironically, this environment of so many channels so much at her fingertips through technology,
we forget that america is a very big place. there are people who do not have everything 24 hours per day. they are our kids too. i would like to say when were doing american graduates, these are our kids. they are all our kids. now, especially with the focus on the opiate crisis and the impact on rural community. there is a lot of pride in rural community. recent studies show is one of the most entrepreneurial areas because i have to think about their wherewithal. maybe it comes out of the farming, but the appropriation is so critical to summoning the stations. i tried to visit us in his possible so i can bring back something more beyond the brochure. >> we also do not have role
broadband. there is a study in wisconsin by a university of wisconsin professor and they think that if government does not connect to rural areas across the board from the state federal government. this is one of the things where they get across here. in wisconsin we did a veterans coming home project. two and talk about how were serving veterans through pbs. >> i want to thank wisconsin, really. what happened, eight years ago wisconsin public television had a lot of veterans who are living in the area from the vietnam war. they decided and acknowledge that these veterans were never welcomed home. they were vilified. and so, decades later they took on an amazing initiative. they contacted all of the
vietnam veterans they could and their families, they have this events on lambeau field, they call that landing zone, 70000 people but it did not stop there. they told the stories and research the stories with the wisconsin historical society. i met some of these people. in fact in my office along the hall we have big, blown up photos of the veterans from decades ago. now of course there quite old. so they did not want it to be just a one off. we told the story welcome them home. we started looking at the veterans coming back, these young men and women from iraq and afghanistan. we wanted to take what wisconsin didn't start with wisconsin and do a digital first initiative. we called it veterans coming home.
that has now expanded. pbs is there veterans initiative and national content. we do documentaries on something called military medicine which was so fascinating because it shows the gains made on the battlefield, with the medics to and translates to civilian life. where learning so much but i'm missing the point here. the point of veterans coming home is to connect them to jobs and to not tell, sometimes we tell stories we characterize our veterans as people who are really not capable, mentally capable were able to add anything in a job, or in life. nothing could be further from the truth.
some of them to need the help that they need. so many of them, even those who need the help they are trained, they are an asset. this is not some favor were doing for them. any company would benefit from hiring a veteran. this is what's happening with veterans coming home wisconsin started it. >> will go next to my friend from massachusetts. >> thank you chairman cole and thank you for being here today and for your testimony. i want to talk a little bit about the ready to learn grant at wgbh, home of the classic arthur. they're using the grants to continue to create and develop new programming including rough rough men, the show. dustin -based program for youngest kids, 4 - 8.
also molly of denali sounds awesome. based in alaska aimed at children ages 4 - 8. there are also using these grants for parents engagement activities. one of them has been the tech it goes home which is bringing technology, developmental apps, speaking of your grandchild's ipad, to some of our most memorable families. i wonder if you can talk about, as you develop your programming across the country, what is the science behind it? what evidence-based research goes into developing these programs? >> thank you for the question and also we are very appreciative of the work that wgbh does on the station serving new england.
wgbh has been a pioneer in education. as a producing station, also in terms of pbs media. it's a focus for them. as i said before, in terms of the appropriation and forward funding, because of the children's content requires that it meets high standard, especially now as we're looking at how children learn in a digital age, everything has changed. we want to be with a child and in terms of stem subject, as kids go through high school that is where america, overall is very weak. this is a priority. the content, rough -- were left
with something that has to be engaging and entertaining. in order for the child to even learn. so through the pbs kids, 24 slash seven network we have this content that is based on years of evaluation. but, what were also doing is supplementing this content that you can get on television online with interactive games. we have the studies to show that weather system subjects, literacy, kids want to interact and participate with media. and cpb is going to be funding that next reiteration. we just launched with pbs, the 24 slash seven kids channel. now, we are adding the next level of interactive play. that is where this is going. it is research-based, that's part of our grant with ready to learn. we have to show, how do you know
and we can prove that these children, when they start and after they are evaluated, that the content makes a difference. it is so rewarding. tell you sue that if you make an investment early on you're not doing triage at age 16 or 17. austin is one of the leaders in this. john abbott is the devoted to working with school officers. the other thing gbh does is they collaborate with rural stations. they share their knowledge. that's why the system makes sense. it is big stations, small stations, public, private, it works. it's one of the things that is actually working. >> do think it is a safe assumption, i've heard some say that the private market would fill this gap if cpb did not exist or was not funded?
>> the focus of business and i have ran a company, is to make a prophet. if you do get along the way, that is fine. the focus is to make a prophet. if you are not mission focus on year focus on profits you will find ways to cut research. research is expensive. it is required. the content takes a long time to develop. they're studying children, they are investing in the long term because, look at what we did with mr. rogers neighborhood. so incredible. if you watch it now is still has great value. it doesn't speak to today's a child and things that today's children are facing. so based on research, evaluation and measurements we now have daniels neighborhood which takes mr. rogers into this child's modern environment.
the private sector has not done this. in fact, youtube said, and this is all in the open and is perfectly legitimate, because that their mission to return money to their shareholders, however. the focus with our children's content is to bring the parents in. to sell to the parents and then keep the kids on a trajectory. that is great, that is great. but what is evening greater -- >> thank you. >> when my friend talks about business republican jeans start showing up. >> thank you. it is good to see you. thank you for your passion and doing your job. it is clear that is not just a
job for you, this really is about public service. thank you very much. i can't help but remember our beloved glenn ifill today. she was the face of news hour on pbs. she brought the news in a very professional, factual, and unbiased fashion. as an african-american woman, i just have to say that she was a role model, she really demonstrated pbs's commitment to diversity and excellence. what were talking about today is unfortunately privatizing a public broadcasting company or corporation. i cannot help but think of glenn and all the other phenomenal individuals who work for pbs who have broken through really could relate to the entire country. so, this is something i'm
shocked by. i guess i shouldn't be because fundamental to our democracy as a free media. this is another move by the trump administration to shut down the free media. that is my personal opinion. i just have to prefaces, and this by saying, i cannot help but think of steve bannon's comments about deconstruction the administrative state. here's a good example of what that means. so, i am just quite frankly very shocked, but not surprised. the fact that pbs's free and accessible to 95% of the united states population is quite remarkable. if it were privatized that would not be the case. on task you what would happen come i want to take you into my own district. i'm very proud of what they're doing. let me just quote you a couple of statistics, serves more than
775,000 individuals on their website, 4 million views per day. the station receives about 4 million annually from the federal government. they leverage those dollars, now this is private-sector money, they leverage those dollars to invest in programs like the san francisco homers project, the california town collaborative and innovation lab. all of these are vital for my constituents, to the entire bay area and the people who work at the station. if the federal government were not involved in public broadcasting and if it was strictly privatized, what impact would it have on these programs that are necessary, especially with the huge budget cuts now taking place across the board. >> you are right. thank you for the question. there is no way in the study
show as dedicated as supporters are, and they are, this is speaks to the connection that public radio stations have with their community as they serve their community. they cannot make up the federal appropriation. you would then see the deconstruction of the quality of contents, the mission would be watered down. i be particularly concerned about early childhood education but also about journalism. it reminds me talking about gwen who is a very good friends. she and judy were such incredible partners. julie woodruff calls news hour news without the noise. they're actually enjoying an increase in viewers. as his mpr in terms of listeners. what we do in terms of looking
at and informs america, more and more, despite her because of a myriad of different choices is a code of editorial integrity to stay focused on our mission. every meeting our mission? that is the heart and soul public media. also, we have to prove to all of you and to the congress and the american people that we are stewarding this money in ways that are of benefit to them. i used to say this was at a cost of a dollar 35 for taxpayer, the equivalent of a cup of coffee. but it's like a cup of coffee and rolled station. nevermind, i have to work on that a little bit. i want you to know that we had a
commitment to diversity and innovation and telling america story, wonderful story through the voices of filmmakers and perspectives. and that is who we are. >> thank you. i want to pick up on one of her points. she makes it very well. you have made this a number of times as well. honestly, the more rule and the poor your community is, the more important role this mechanism place. i think sometimes there's an attitude that subscale, how many people watch this or that. but in my state we have 2 million viewers in a week in the state of about three and half million people. there are parts that literally nobody else reaches. if you wanted to look at the best quality on national journalism.
to be fair there's lots of on public affairs. but if you get at any particular state, usually the best broadcasting on what's happening with your state capital is almost always public television. usually the most informed her into. certainly the case in my state. how many first you need to watch. you really do need to know is happening with the state budget. again, we think of this as traditional media. i want you to focus on and give the committee some idea of the explosion of platforms and technologies. what you're doing at pbs to broaden your traditional reach and get a new markets?
>> one of the things we don't want to do is just chase new shiny objects. we want a combination, people are accessing media in many different ways. we want our contact on mobile and on platforms. we also realize that broadcast is essential. what were doing and especially to connect were starting with preschool and they're already on platforms, different kind of platform with their ipads, is ensuring that our content is available in different forms. my best example is frontline. what they have done is take their same high quality editorial standards. it is sort of a tease and away. you really don't have a lot of time but you're interested in what frontline is looking at you can get this on your iphone and
look at it. but you can also go back and get the longer form. were looking at ways to get our content. it's not really so much about the technology. it's ensuring we have high quality content. whether it's on a cell phone or ipad. pbs's looking at this especially in the children's area and through longform documentaries are still something you want to watch. you wanted accessible. a lot of people are streamed but you want that. were trying to serve the american people and where they want to access or participate with media. along with this goes transparency. because of our content and technology you can find out where did that fact and information come from.
i just think what were doing in a responsible way is helping the strength or civil society and i hope spark curiosity. >> only have about a minute love. i want to go back and hit it again. talk about the leveraging the fact that the public conversed. >> in terms of what stations deal with the federal appropriation. >> corporate support you name it. they get a base grant from cpb. then they get another grant that is the nonfederal funding that they race. when they do that, that ensures, they are already in the community. when you go into the community and raising money and listening
to people and people tell you we like this are we need something else, they leverage this money, are averages six times the original investment of the federal appropriations. that's a lot. for rules stations they get much larger percentage. we work with them and minority stations. you say how do you then know if they're not raising and an enormous amount of nonfederal funds from the community, what are they leveraging? there leveraging volunteer time. i would like to think that the american people volunteerism is our dna. that is a critical part of the leveraging. his volunteer type, people can
support financial resources, but in the cases where they don't have the donor base, they have the support of the community. >> it also turns into content as well. as imaging, wisconsin and oklahoma, the incredible series of oklahoman space. we've had more astronauts than any other state. five usually given house small the status. nobody nationally is good to focus on that. but i guarantee the sparks troops and wipes a lot of ambitions. that's replicated time and time again. no commercial, and frankly no national one would focus in on the small of an area. you replicate some of the great seatwork that you do.
you see these amazing local productions. i remember watching in nebraska television special on a trial of standing bear. a very important figure of native american history. the first person declared human being that was native american by a court. it was produced in nebraska about an important figure in history. again, it probably would not of been covered by anybody else. we'll move on to a third round. >> i'm happy to indulge you because in fact, you hit on something that what the impact in terms of american communities that this would have. no one knows better than the chairman about this. it really is the digital divide is very profound. these communities.
the tribal radio is often the only source of information. it is also a place where one can immerse themselves in the culture and their traditions. i think something he said earlier, there is a quote from president bush. it was, the soft bigotry of low expectations. that is a profound statement. i think that is so pervasive today. it's happening through our institutions, governments, and the results of the is an angry nation. a nation that is feeling that
there is no respect for who they are in their dignity and their worth is being challenged in our society today. that leads to all kinds of disruption in terms of what your goal is in enriching sis civil society are helping create a more civil society which is what i leave the corporation is all about. i have a strange question given the atmosphere and that i want to make it, it's about the american graduate program about jobs in the digital economy. we have all heard today the value of life-saving public services, early childhood education, but you have
requested again a seventh and eighth consecutive years of funding. adjusting for inflation, corporations budget has been reduced by 10% since 2010. i would like to know what the corporation in public media would do if even in this austere budget environment, what would you do if the appropriation were double? >> thank you for that question. what would i do? okay, one of the things so start doing is expand american graduate. i would ensure that we could really increase the number of kids were just struggling and really give them the training they need to go to get a good job.
the other thing i would do is i would have a 24 slash seven history channel. not the history channel we have now which is referred to as a hitler channel, that's all they talk about. but a place where you could get local history, it would be accessible just the way we have our pbs kids channel. whenever you wanted to access it. it would also be online as well. we have to start telling the story of our history so these kids coming up understand what they're connected to. and why it matters. i think it was -- the democracy so fragile. we have to know how we got here and the struggles that took to get here and what does it take to keep it strong and vibrant. i would increase ready to learn, we know it works. we don't have to prove it anymore. we need to reach more kids. were reaching millions of kids
now but there are even more. i think we have to continue our veterans initiative. unfortunately as we have more young men and women coming back and they have paid their dues to our society. we need to make sure that they're not just waiting for they deserve. the not looking for a handout. i actually had a list, i don't know in this -- then, we would also continue what were doing with minority and diverse filmmakers. we want more voices. we know this excessive story corporate wise story core successful? it was stories from men and women who were in the civil rights movement, but also in world war ii. for the first time they're talking to friends are talking to a relative.
then goes into the library of congress. as the people listen to the stories there's a connected to humanity. the stories are different, but at the end of the day they are the same. i would do more of that. i'm would invest more into covering international journalism. right now npr has 17 boroughs. more than any other commercial media organization. last year, unfortunately, david, very talented video journalist and his fellow journalists were killed while covering the story. we, cpb has provided a scholarship to encourage new journalists. we need to know about our world. when a more journals, not fewer. be children, history, were
working with candace and she wrote these amazing biographies of garfield and the young winston churchill right after the war. i may digress. and also teddy roosevelt. she talked about what public media means to you, person, to her at different stages in your life. and how the stories of these great men and women, is to know is that the event to their character and what we can learn. i like to have a leadership channel sore young people can just understand what does courage mean, what is commitment mean, what does perseverance mean, what is grit? we see it in some of these potential dropouts. and they have nothing, they go on. the we see others fall by the wayside. be happy to put this in an organized way to make a real presentation. >> now will go to my friend from
maryland. >> thank you very much. i apologize for getting here late. this is a busy time in washington. a little controversial as you might imagine. i'll be very brief. in a time of shrinking resources, the question, and the question should really be raised in every part of the government, is what this organization that we find, any organization weathers the department of defense or department of the navy where i was. is it fulfilling a roll that needs to be fulfilled? has the role changed over the years? can it be supplanted by outside resources so that -- i do question, and i think you have to develop a rationale and i think that is what you're trying to say today. the average u.s. consumer goods hundred and 89 channels. when cpb was formed i was ten years old. you had channel 911 in new york.
we had five channels. now, you have 189 channels. so the marketplace is different. so at the outset, that has to be addressed. another's content that needs to be delivered. the question is who can it be delivered, to be delivered by one of the other hundred and 89 channels. should public funding continue at the level it had. but most particularly, when i'm concerned, i understand that is journalists you want to and you have to have independence. but, when you produce shows, almost a one third of a million dollar investment, baby mama -- $50000, that pays for the healthcare for ten individuals on the affordable care act. it begs the question that, is
there sensitivity, i have to respond to people in my district to say, given what the show is about, my district doesn't care whether cpb per bruc produces t. in fact they would resent if i was publicly funded not. similarly with other shows, i haven't seen it, should probably see it but i'm not sure i want to watch something that says someone should not get married. it's better to stay a single mother of two children instead of getting married. it begs the question, there are a lot of wonderful things you can do, i understand the first amendment rights. this public funding, just question whether somebody is
wondering what the effect of that is going to be and when is the breaking point going to be when people like me, for my district say you know what, we can't find it anymore. i can explain to my district why cpb invested $302,000 in the show. you give me the explanation of how i go to my constituents and say, that was a good investment of their tax dollars. i'm a highly republican conservative district. >> maryland public television is really an entity that focuses on the environment. a lot of their local content on the chesapeake bay, on education, and earlier we talked about the proliferation of all of these channels. there will probably be more channels. so much of this is behind a pay wall. i've subscriptions to amazon and netflix, i've a very high capable.
i'm aware of what is out there. in terms of public media and the documentaries we do, the work of doctor henry gates, in the aggregate it brings people together. we're just talking about the historian candace mullarkey we have done two of her books. one of president garfield and the other on teddy roosevelt. if you look at the wealth of the contents, it is by far so impactful. now, somebody might watch for example, half the sky. that was done by independent lens. the ma object to certain thingst was the bottom line? it was really instrumental in raising people's awareness about the scores of trafficking.
it had an impact. in this country think of something that is international in right ear the united states. so, i would say maybe we don't get it right 100% of the time, but i'm willing to bet that we get it right 90%. whether we talked for children's education, documentary, news information. in terms of journalism we have a high editorial code focused on transparency and integrity. doing this is sometimes? of course. we are not perfect. nothing man does is perfect. the reason i think and i know we deserve the appropriation, and winston churchill said deserve victory, is because we prove we make a difference in the lives of americans. not just the 1% but the majority of americans who cannot afford to have a cable bill.
i do not know if i can convince you, but we are mission focused, my goal is to stick to that mission. for $1.35, i realize it is a lot of money when you are looking at an entire budget. you all have to have job and especially now. what are the needs of our country. at some point where you have to say were gonna lose if we know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. >> mcpherson i cannot agree more that telling the story of our history, how we are connected to each other and the value of each segment of our society, and what they have contributed is critical in bringing together as a country and as americans.
so i want to thank you of your role as president of cpd. ensuring that public media reflects diversity and inclusivity in this content and outreach is important to meeting that goal. for example, latina public broadcasting under the national minority consortium produces media that betrays the richness of the hispanic. that's also true for other groups. vision media, they highlight the native americans, the center for asian american and pacific islanders. how cpb equipped to the national minority consortium to represent the constituencies in a way that might be neglected by the commercial media?
>> right now we know that commercial media has to focus on the bottom line. i was in business, that's what they have to do. they have to have a return on investment. our mission is a return on investment that a is in terms of education and knowledge. we just had come if i can veer off, i met with a four-star retired general stanley mcchrystal. he was talking to us about what his sports public media and he said a country cannot be strong unless were smart. we want a strong defense and a strong defense militarily. i have a grandson going through special forces. but we also want to make sure that we have that civil society knowledge infrastructure that
are citizens are aware and strong. we need to tell the stories of all americans. americans need to see themselves as part of the solution to the challenges we have. we have a new generation coming up. we want them to be connected to these solutions. that's why over a period of 50 years we haven't embraced a status quo are we would not be here today. we are valuable and viable and depended upon by a majority of americans. when i say that, americans of all backgrounds, economic, race and we are very proud we have our diversity and innovation fund and we interpret diversity background, geographic, so many things that can divide us today. by becoming america's storyteller we you unite people.
that's our goal, it's not something that happens immediately. especially now i think we have a very divided america. economically, politically, it's not good for the country. and that's not a political statement by the way. >> it's an accurate statement. >> now to miss least. >> thank you. i just want to mention a couple things. with regard to baby mama and cumo, what my constituents may like that. my constituents may not like a lot of programming that your constituents like. the point is, in america i thought we had a free press and i thought the first amendment ruled, i thought it was okay to disagree or agree, yes we have a duty as taxpayers to participate
in our first amendment rights. we don't all have to agree or disagree and everything. that is the beauty of pbs and npr. my constituents may like some of the programming, they may not like some of the programming. another constituents may like something different. this is a democracy. in a democracy we have to commit our resources to continue this democracy. certainly at a very defining moment that is fragile right now. this going out of pbs and npr goes in the face of our democratic principles. research showed 73% of the voters across the political spectrum oppose eliminating funding for public television. that 70% of voters who voted for
president trump. now, if pbs were privatized, no federal funding, what would happen to pps? i know how the private sector works. you have to be able to leverage resources. if you can't come to the table with public funding then the private sector walks away and says you can't leverage what were going to invest. how would you survive with no public funding, or would you? >> we wouldn't. it would not be america's public mission focused media. there are not be checks and balances of stewardship. pbs, i'll go back again to what i said earlier, when this was created 50 years ago, and it's always brilliant. with all the checks and balance, we don't just give out grants
were stations then have to respond to report, we have an office of inspector general who does audits of the stations. we have to report back to congress. i like to think of it as a circle because every step along the way we have to prove were still a benefit to the american people in specific ways. it runs the gamut from preschool to lifelong learning. maybe i have to come up with a better way of defining the benefits received on the benefits that are also leveraged in the community. >> but if it were privatized where would the accountability be. where would the free press operate. >> privatizing this is almost an oxymoron. if we want to have a vibrant public media service me give you
an example. guess i haven't been using this, i apologize. so about six months ago we frequently have international visitors and we had a delegation from ukraine. these are the most incredible people and they said, we want what you have. we won an independent public media service for the ukrainian people. there inundated by russia today. total propaganda. how can we help you. >> well what we want is contents like ice on the prize. we want ken burns. we want to short people and to translate it into what a democracy looks like. we want the civil rights history. so some of the people who went to ukraine are here today.
and they said town and spent two days helping them figure out how they would put this together under great political challenges. the fact we wound up giving them some content. but we are viewed by the rest of the world who pays their citizens pay far more, think norway is the highest with $135 per person, the partnership we have is not a handout. as a partnership. this is what we say. as the entrepreneurial spirit of america. it's what makes capitalism great. it is working and it is said meyer. in either glitches along the way? of course. we have no batsmen, npr has one and we hear from people when they don't like something. but stations do not get ignored.
i just think that the idea that the market place is going to take care public media really means it is the elimination. >> a public media would be no more. it would be private corporate media. that's really too bad. >> want to make a point that the first amendment is not dead on this committee. we have fair, full and vigorous debate. >> i really don't have more questions, but we still have time, i know my ranking member wants to make time. but i want to make sure someone wants to make that point. family go to the ranking member. >> thank you very much mr. sharon. this has been one of the most enlightening hearings that we
have had. it is not just you because we have not had a lot of hearings overall and it is too bad it has taken ten years for you to be back here. as the chairman said will not go down that road again. >> i want to pursue with you the american graduate program they had mentioned. i've been taken with that and i understood what you are doing in terms of the dropout rate. now don't know if you've had the opportunity to see what the market foundation, the report they just issued at that many months ago. it's about jobs in the digital age. they thousand terms of research that 70%, and this goes to value
an equal dignity for all americans including 70% without a college degree in the united states who are eager to demonstrate the skills i haven't to learn new skills. there's a program that's been developed in colorado called skillful. in any case, i make the point that we are a nation today has a population of nationwide and so there economic successes attached to this. further, the senator for budget and policy priorities says poverty reduction programs help adults lacking college degrees the most. nearly nine in ten working age adults lifted above the poverty line black a college degree. focused on the college degree
courses are opportunities for individuals who make up the segments of our country. we can talk about this off-line or so forth. i believe, don't know if you think there is a role for public broadcasting to do what you were doing with dealing with high school dropouts, connecting them looking at how we can either provide connections with regard with employment, training et cetera through your medium. . .
importantly, have the opportunity to understand how they are going to make a living and work and get trained. it is basic stuff to show up in the workforce what is appropriate, so we are doing this. that is the next iteration if we can find the wherewithal. they have inspired a love of foundations to give directly to the local foundations because they believe in this and they know that it is essential helping people that are bright.
but i know job-training has had a bad reputation in the past. but this involves digital knowledge and a lot of different things. so yes i should say my short answer on that is yes, that's where we see it going >> we worked with 17 organizations and let's declare victory that is only the beginning of the story. we have been bound by getting a four-year educatio education any view that we have enough history majors and english majors are a very long time coming and what we do not have been any case what i'm saying is the opportunity to connect with the
kind of skills that allow people to develop or realize their own dreams and aspirations i think is critical and if i can, you can do it on your own but i am going to speak at the foundation because i would love for the two of you to sit down and think about the scope of your medium and its ability to change, to help change people's lives. what you have done in early childhood education and what you are doing with veterans and so forth, i think there is an enormous role to engage in this effort in a very highly
professional and competent way. a group in their state virginia is one of them they are coming to look at this next iteration and what we can do in a measurable way -- >> i can't thank you enough for your testimony today. i'm going to go to mr. harris for the last question. >> i am sorry my colleague from california isn't here. we are not talking about a free press. we are talking about a
government fund a press. you can look at russian tv and government funds. i'm not going to make a comparison. what we are talking about today is government funding and i applaud the gentle lady from connecticut talking about the need to advance education, but i gave you a couple examples. let me read from the description of the program access this document's marriage equality from the perspective of the african-americans to support and those who are against marriage equality.
i know a lot of people that don't like the term marriage equality because they don't think that anything is equal to marriage, but this public broadcasting station chose a politically charged term, and then compared those that are for it to those that are against marriage equality. i don't have to see it to know. i just read the description. this is an agenda. i beg you if you come from government funding, you must remove as many vestiges of the political agenda as you can because i don't want an ad run against me saying that i voted for funding a film that inspires a girl to claim her place as leader. i can see the ad.
that is from the description of the station. i beg you please remove the agenda from education. and i don't care it can be in the agenda from either end of the spectrum. this has to be mutual content so when someone uses the term marriage a quality community leave behind extremely sensitive and that fight was within one percentage on the ballot. people who claim to be free press with no ax to grind use the words of one side or the other to decide. that's all i can say. if you come from public funding and claim free press, it is government funded press, and my citizens will present some of the agenda that's been there.
i will yield to you for response and then yield back my time. >> i take your point. we are tasked with two things. one, to provide a firewall of independence for content provider and ensure balance and objectivity and these are sometimes clashing objectives. i think overall, we have done pretty well. that's what i would like to do is come and sit down with you if you will allow me to talk about your very good point. when i came here, i had been a cochair of the national committee, and i had a very hard time. i was asking my hearing how could you possibly borrow from
public broadcasting if you can for the party and i said i'm also an american first, and that is what i tried to do for a living is right down the middle. for the most part, this great tea, we have done that. we care about the mission and we care about all of you. we care about our stewardship. it means everything to me. i have our cfo who has made sure we have clean audits. i appreciate your question and i just don't want to give you a shallow response. >> that is a good note and on in many ways. but, at one point in the testimony when you were not sure anare not sureand you pulled ity said you can hear her okay and i said she's from new york, you can always hear her.
but i want to thank my friend for her testimony. i think you've been forthright and certainly have been helpful to this committee. we do have tough decisions ahead of us. we will have tough choices to make i have no doubt that they've made your case very well and i think you do your job very well and having known you before you were in the job, i was confident with tame all the lions left and right and you would face what is a high-profile and demanding position more than most you're under scrutiny and the group the lead is under scrutiny. it is appropriate and questions
from all sides are appropriate and i appreciate particularly you're making the case about the importance of a firewall and the funding issue to try to maintain the independence. president ford recommended a five-year advance because there's always been fear about this and while there are legitimate concerns expressed from the left and right about this or that if you look over the 50 year history, it is a pretty impressive record enriching the content of the public dialogue opening the doors to the communities that don't often have these opportunities and living in what is a comparatively modest budget which you continue to multiply many times over which says something about the work you do with the czechs large and small
and corporations that are notoriously shy and any sort of being pulled into politics left and right are willing to do that. it is a test to me that you've done your mission congress asked you to do over the decades very well so it is a personal pleasure to have you here and i think the members of the committee and we stand adjourned. >> thank you very much. [inaudible conversations]