In 1818, the state of Connecticut ended its public funding of churches. To Lyman Beecher (the great preacher and abolitionist) it was a dark, odious, and injurious day for the ministry.

In time, however, Beecher realized his error. The abnegation of state-supported religion was “the best thing that ever happened to the state of Connecticut,” he wrote. “It cut the churches loose from dependence on state support. It threw them wholly on their own resources and on God.”

Far from withering, religion in Connecticut flourished. Two centuries on, anxieties over the defunding of institutions of civil society were stoked anew as Congress in July withdrew $1.1 billion in federal subsidies from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the nonprofit which funds such outlets as NPR and PBS.  

Shortly after the elimination of subsidies, CPB announced it would begin the process of shuttering its operations. The Sturm und Drang that ensued was positively Beecher-esque. But one hopes that, upon reflection, the self-appointed defenders of publicly funded media will come to see — as Beecher saw — the severing of civil society’s dependence on the state (that is, the taxpayer) as a boon. 

The presumption that the withdrawal of subsidies from institutions of civil society will devastate those institutions is not uncommon. A sort of crude logic validates this theory: If an organization loses federal funding, it will have no money, and it will go under. However, the notion that only federal dollars can maintain an organization from which the American people benefit should not be taken uncritically. 

When human beings feel a need for something — be it a good, a service, or some social good — they usually do what they can to fulfil it. Man is an industrious creature, apt at problem-solving. Trouble arises when the government determines that it must interfere in the sphere of civil society, crowding out privately organized and privately funded institutions. The offerings of state-funded enterprises often provide only an ersatz product or service in the place of that which civil society, if left alone, would have provided. 

The beneficiaries of the CPB have not proven themselves anywise preferable to privately funded media. NPR, for one, has wandered far off into the underbrush of ideologically titillating activism, eschewing fair journalism and estranging much of its audience. Luxuriating in the embrace of federal subsidies, CPB-funded enterprises have not performed better categorically than free media — from traditional newspapers to podcasts to Substack newsletters to YouTube programming to independent social media–based reporters to any of the outlets in the panoply of new media organizations that has appeared in recent years. In an unparalleled age of information, Americans need not rely exclusively on the legacy mendicants heretofore funded the CPB. If Americans wish to fund the old guard, they will; if not, they will direct their spending to outlets that offer more satisfactory products. 

Sure enough, it seems that many Americans do, in fact, wish PBS and NPR to carry on. When the federal government doesn’t, the American people will. 

Once it became clear CPB’s public funding would likely vanish, private donors began to increase their donations. “Over the last three months … roughly 120,000 new donors have contributed an estimated $20 million in annual value,” The New York Times reports. “Overall, donations committed to public media for the year are about $70 million higher than last year.” Many Americans value the products of PBS, NPR, and NPR’s member stations and, consequently, have recognized that the retreat of the federal government requires them to advance to fill the gap and hold the line. The need for private action was felt, and the citizenry responded. 

NPR’s fleet of member stations may find it more difficult than their flagship to attract new funding. Even in the status quo ante, NPR (and PBS) got only a little of their funding from federal subsidies, whereas the member stations depended far more heavily on federal largesse. Some may fail without that largesse; others will undoubtably manage to endure.  

A media enterprise (any enterprise, really) should survive or fail as it fulfills or fails to fulfill the desires of those it seeks to serve. As Lyman Beecher discovered, so long as a defunded enterprise or industry provides something of value to its customers or community, it will likely become in its newfound state of financial independence stronger and otherwise better off. 

The virtue of free association and free markets is the ability of individuals, families, and communities to determine what they want or need and then to do what must be done, and spend the money that must be spent, to get it. Subsidization mucks up the feedback mechanism native to this process, propping up useless ventures and crowding out better ones. The American way is not to consume passively whatever products and services the lawmakers and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., think the American people should want. 

The defunding of CPB in a small way returns the country to its ideal: free citizens, associating and doing business freely with one another. 

David B. McGarry is the research director at the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.