A Stitch in Haste

In breaking non-news, Congress is poised yet again to force you to buy something you don't want:

The House has overwhelmingly rejected President Bush's plan to eliminate the $420 million federal subsidy for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

The 357-72 vote last evening demonstrated the enduring political strength of public broadcasting. The outcome was never in doubt, unlike a fight two years ago when Republicans tried but failed to slash public broadcasting subsidies.

It's quite simple really: Public television might -- might -- have made sense when there were three television networks nationwide and perhaps four or five stations in any given market. It's downright silly when there are hundreds of channels in every market, a dozen or more of which do exactly what PBS does, and better. The metrics are comparable for public radio.

It is insolent paternalism to presume that people need to be forced to "buy culture" via tax-and-spend subsidies of PBS or any other manifestation of public arts funding. It is kindergarten naivete to believe that PBS is not politically biased (or at least politically susceptible). It is a disengenous bait-and-switch to insist that $420 million "isn't much."

If I were -- gasp -- a member of Congress, I would capitulate utterly on trying to fight PBS funding, simply based on opportunity costs: it's a futile gesture after two generations of propagandizing. I would, however, introduce legislation requiring PBS to rephrase its obnoxious gobbledygook mottos:

"A private corporation funded by the American people"
and
"by the annual financial support of viewers like you"
to
"A government bureaucracy funded by the American taxpayer"
and
"the annual taxes of people not watching this program"
Think my bill would pass?

Kip's Law: Every advocate of central planning always -- always -- envisions himself as the central planner.