Noted

Noted

Bill Baker and Evan Leatherwood on Romney's assault on PBS; Christie Thompson on juveniles in solitary confinement

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

BEYOND BIG BIRD: PBS was one of only two programs Mitt Romney mentioned by name when he vowed to slash the federal budget during the first presidential debate. Romney has called for eliminating PBS before, describing it as a “major” potential savings. The network’s $445 million annual subsidy might seem to support this—until you realize that it represents about 1/100th of 1 percent of the federal budget. It’s also less than half of what the Senate spends to administer itself, or 17 percent more than the military spends on marching bands. For the cost of just the AIG portion of the bailout, Congress could subsidize PBS at current levels without another cent until 2416.

So why did Romney pretend Big Bird is a top obstacle to national solvency? Simple: by highlighting a small but divisive issue, he hoped to score easy political points. Taking on PBS might please radical conservatives, but tens of millions of Americans will lose out—especially poor children struggling for access to education. PBS isn’t just The NewsHour and Antiques Roadshow: 95 percent of PBS stations provide educational programming to communities across the country. Identified for years by the Roper poll as the most trusted institution in America, PBS ranked second only to the military as the “best value for the American tax dollar.” In 2011, a Hart Research/American Viewpoint poll found that 69 percent of Americans opposed cutting federal funds for PBS.

Families like Romney’s may be wealthy enough to have secure access to culture and education, but for millions of others, PBS’s small price tag provides priceless returns. The choice isn’t between Big Bird and economic ruin, but between a political debate over real issues and one that seeks to distort and divide.   BILL BAKER and EVAN LEATHERWOOD

PUNISHING KIDS: “Jordan E” was 15 when he was sent to an adult prison in Colorado. Over three years, he would spend a cumulative 365 days alone in a tiny cell, for offenses as small as not making his bed.

Jordan’s is one of 127 testimonials published by the ACLU and Human Rights Watch in a new report, “Growing Up Locked Down,” which sheds light on the use of solitary confinement on juvenile prisoners. “It’s not surprising that this practice has increased, [as] youth in adult facilities have increased,” says author Ian Kysel. Though in theory kids are sometimes segregated for their own protection, in reality it’s harshly punitive. In 2009, the Justice Department found that 62 percent of youths who committed suicide in detention had experienced some kind of enforced isolation.

Despite research showing the trauma of long-term isolation, nearly one in six youths reported being in solitary for more than two months. As one described it, “The only thing left to do is go crazy…. Sometimes I feel like, why am I even living?” To read the report, visit aclu.org.   CHRISTIE THOMPSON

In the August 7 issue, Matt Stroud and Liliana Segura reported on “The Uncertain Fate of Pennsylvania’s Juvenile Lifers.”

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x