So much news. What does it mean?

I really do hate to be this prescient on news like this, but in last week’s newsletter I asked you to support your local NPR/PBS station as all the signs were that Trump might target them next.

And he has.

From the New York Times (free link): White House to ask Congress to claw back funding from NPR and PBS.

From that story:

The ask would also be the latest move by the Trump administration to exert pressure on media organizations. The administration is waging a legal battle with The Associated Press over its decision to exclude the wire service from the presidential press pool, breaking decades of precedent. Mr. Trump is also personally suing CBS News and The Des Moines Register, and the Federal Communications Commission has launched investigations into Comcast, PBS and NPR.

Over the years, I’ve mentioned a number of times the dire straits that the legitimate news business is in. And it’s intensifying.

There’s another front that’s dear to my heart that’s taking some blows: our work in the watershed for clear water, access to quality drinking water, and access to the river.

I just finished writing a story on Washington’s effects on the watershed, and man, it’s sobering. (I know many of us would rather just hide under a blanket but make an exception in this case — it’s OUR watershed, after all!)

Anyway, it’s not an original observation that the Trump/Musk machine is creating chaos, and not one legitimate news source credits Musk with the savings he’s touting.

So, it got me wondering: If your diehard supporters believe there is waste in Washington, it makes good propaganda to be seen to be cutting that waste.

As I said, there’s very little legitimate confirmation of the savings figures that Musk tosses around.

In addition, are the Department of the Interior (where the National Park Service is lodged) or the Environmental Protection Agency (which is the source of several different kinds of funding for the watershed) really big-time users of federal funding?

EPA’s budget hovers around $9 billion to $10 billion. The Department of the Interior, about $18 billion.

Those figures are almost lost in the overall federal budget of $6.9 trillion. Hang on, let me do the math. Of the total federal budget, that would amount to 0.14 percent for the EPA and 0.3 percent for the Department of the Interior.

I think we’re looking at an avalanche of news about relatively small impacts in the federal budget, with an outsized impact on those areas that this admiration would like to — just me guessing here — burn to the ground.

Like NPR and PBS.

Another big impact for the watershed is the promised “dismantling” of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. That’s a promise from Kristi Noem, the secretary of Homeland Security. 

Michael Sol Warren looked deeply into one aspect of FEMA: the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program. His story, carried by NJ Spotlight News, quoted U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-6th), who called the decision to end the BRIC program “short-sighted and dangerous.”

“What’s happening here is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to put all the burden of natural disaster preparation and recovery on the state and the towns instead of the federal government,” Pallone said.

Yeah, I know. More bad news.

There are so many people in the executive branch who are looking to use this moment to grind away at the various pet peeves that many of them have been nurturing for years. All it takes to get your hands on the power to do so is to cozy up to Trump.

Sorry! This was a heavy newsletter, but I really do think knowledge is power!!

Thanks for reading.