Should the Federal Government Subsidize Big Bird?

As Sesame Street execs blow up over the use of the famous yellow feathered guy in an Obama ad, the question still remains. Should the federal government fund PBS?


In the days following the first presidential debate, the Twitterverse and Facebook exploded with references to Big Bird after Mitt Romney said he would cut subsidies to PBS, even though he liked the character. The Obama campaign pounced on that pronouncement, claiming that Wall Street had nothing to fear from Romney, but Sesame Street better watch out.

On Tuesday, Sesame Street executives asked the Obama campaign to take down its Big Bird-related ad, according to CNN.com.

"Sesame Workshop is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization and we do not endorse candidates or participate in political campaigns," the group wrote. "We have approved no campaign ads, and as is our general practice, have requested that the ad be taken down."

The Obama campaign says it's reviewing those concerns, but in the meantime, the question remains. Should the federal government provide funding to PBS?

According to PBS, federal funding makes up about 15-percent of the system's revenues, but that percentage is much higher in underserved communities and could mean the difference in keeping educational and commercial-free programs on the air. Romney's argument is that the funding would be better used to help close the federal deficit.

How do you feel about it? Tell us in the comments.

Peter Torres October 11, 2012 at 10:39 PM
Mitt Romney should take his millions he has in other coutries and give it the federal government to help reduce the deficit.
John P. Flanagan October 13, 2012 at 01:06 PM
Of couse! As long as we're subsidizing millionaire members of Congress, why not subsidize something that's at least been positive and partly productive for the past two years.
Don Charles October 13, 2012 at 01:47 PM
Sure Peter just like the Kennedys and John Kerry did. How about Obama's Millions all his money grew since he was elected King. He was worth less than a million when he got in now he is worth several millions. Pretty good for a man who never had a job and was a self proffessed socialist.
Don Charles October 13, 2012 at 01:49 PM
Okay John believe that the democrats have more Millionaires in Congress than Republicans but everyone keeps saying that Republicans are the money people in Congress.
John P. Flanagan October 14, 2012 at 06:09 PM
Sorry you let your inferiority complex about being Republican interfere with your reading Don. I don't notice that I mentioned any Party. But, you sure got defensive really quickly. Well, when there's no rational foundation under an avowed position, I guess that's what happens. Personally, I've always leaned toward Harry Truman's opinion: "If you come out of political office richer than you went in, you're a crook." He didn't mention any Party's either.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »