Listen to the article
In a significant display of legislative compromise, Republicans in Congress have approved a spending package that includes $643 million for the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), despite President Donald Trump’s previous efforts to eliminate the agency. The funding was included in the National Security, Department of State and Related Programs Act (NSRP), which passed both chambers of Congress this week.
The USAGM funding represents a 25% reduction from previous levels, a compromise that Republican lawmakers describe as a step toward meeting the administration’s objectives while avoiding a potentially damaging fight over a must-pass spending bill. The funding supports radio, internet, television and broadcasting grants primarily focused on the Middle East.
Rep. Mark Alford (R-Mo.), who worked on the NSRP legislation, indicated that the final funding amount was determined through discussions with Kari Lake, a senior advisor for the agency who maintains close ties to President Trump. “She seemed to me like we’re on the same team on this,” Alford said, adding that he “looks forward to working with her as she tries to right this program and get it back to its original intent.”
The funding decision highlights the delicate balancing act facing congressional Republicans who hold just a two-seat majority in the House of Representatives following the retirement of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and the recent death of Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.).
Early in his second term, President Trump issued an executive order to dismantle the USAGM, which oversees Voice of America, claiming the organization demonstrated bias against Republican principles and failed to serve domestic interests. However, courts ruled the administration lacked the authority to remove congressionally approved funding, forcing the agency to remain operational.
Despite the continuation of USAGM funding, Rep. Alford views the reduced budget as progress toward the president’s goals. “I think the cuts that we’re making, which is a 25% reduction, is a significant step forward to meeting what Kari Lake wants as well. I’m hoping that we can do even more in the 2027 appropriations bill,” he said.
Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.), a member of the fiscally conservative House Freedom Caucus who voted to advance the funding bill, acknowledged his personal preference would be to eliminate the funding entirely. “I would prefer that the federal government funds zero,” Higgins stated before Wednesday’s vote. “We support the president’s executive actions and his executive orders, and we endeavor to codify them. We just don’t have extra money to spend on things.”
However, Higgins emphasized that Republicans must carefully choose their legislative battles given their razor-thin majority. “We don’t have the luxury of just casually opposing our own bills. It’s just so tight, man. So, our goal is to pass our legislation — especially when you’re faced with the alternative of a government shutdown,” he explained.
The USAGM funding decision illustrates the ongoing challenge Republicans face as they work to advance party priorities while maintaining enough unity to pass essential legislation. The current House composition leaves little room for internal dissent, forcing compromises on issues that might otherwise spark ideological battles.
When asked if Democrats had pushed for the USAGM funding inclusion, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) noted that the package resulted from bipartisan negotiations without detailing specific discussions. “How things get into these appropriations bills in this climate — all we do is advocate and leverage whatever we have. Some days you’re the bug, some days you’re the windshield,” Quigley remarked.
The NSRP bill now moves to President Trump’s desk for his signature. The administration must decide whether to accept the compromise funding for an agency he previously attempted to dissolve, or risk disrupting a broader spending package during a period of delicate congressional balance.
As Congress continues to work through remaining spending legislation in the coming weeks, similar questions about balancing party priorities against practical governance will likely persist, particularly with such narrow margins in the House.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
10 Comments
It’s good to see some bipartisan cooperation on this issue, even if the final funding amount was a compromise. Maintaining US global media capabilities is important, so I’m glad they were able to find a way forward.
Agreed, compromise is often necessary in politics. As long as the agency can still fulfill its core mission, this seems like a reasonable outcome.
This is an interesting compromise between Republicans and the administration. While the funding is reduced, it seems like they found a way to keep the agency operating, which is probably a good thing for US global media efforts.
Yes, the 25% reduction could be seen as a reasonable middle ground. It’s encouraging that they were able to work together on this despite previous tensions.
This funding decision shows the challenges of balancing budget priorities and political interests when it comes to government agencies. Hopefully they can find a way to make the most of the reduced resources.
I’m curious to see how the agency uses this funding and whether it will be able to fulfill its mission effectively with the reduced budget. Maintaining a strong global media presence is important for the US.
Agreed, the details on how the funding will be allocated and the agency’s priorities will be important to watch. Balancing cost savings with mission effectiveness will be key.
While I’m glad they were able to reach a compromise, I’m a bit skeptical of the agency’s ties to Trump’s team. Ensuring its independence and focus on facts will be crucial moving forward.
That’s a fair point. The agency will need to demonstrate its commitment to objective, unbiased reporting to maintain credibility, regardless of political connections.
The ties between the agency and Trump’s team are concerning. I hope the agency can demonstrate its independence and commitment to factual, objective reporting regardless of political connections.