re:  NPR fight about ideology, not thrift

Perhaps Clarence Page is correct, and for many Congressional Republicans seeking to end compulsory donation to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (also known as: "taxpayer funding") the exercise is more about "ideology" and a perceived "liberal bias" rather than a merely saving money.  Lost in the discussion, however, seems to be a simple question:  what business does the government have in TV and radio programming, and why must I (and other taxpayers) be forced by the government to contribute to it?

The question is not one of programming content, but rather one of individual liberty, property rights, and Constitutional authority.  If I want to voluntarily donate to PBS or NPR, then I have the right to do so.  Politicians in Washington, however, shouldn't use the coercive power of government to force me to contribute.  If stations "go dark" upon losing the government dole, then that's a pretty good sign that there was little demand for their services to begin with.

Sincerely,
Dave Smith
Houston, TX