The bill, passed 228-192 along mainly partisan lines, would bar federal funding of NPR and prohibit local public stations from using federal money to pay NPR dues and buy its programs. The prospects of support in the Democratic-controlled Senate are slim. Seven Republicans broke ranks to vote against the bill.

“It is time for American citizens to stop funding an organization that can stand on its own feet,” said Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., the sponsor. He said it was not a question of content—which many conservatives say has a liberal bias—but whether taxpayer dollars should go to nonessential services. “As a country we no longer have this luxury.”

Other Republicans also denied that the measure was a vendetta against NPR, although the organization left itself open to conservative attacks last week when an executive, talking to conservative activists posing as members of a fake Muslim group, was caught on camera deriding the tea party movement and saying the NPR would be better off without federal funding. Both the executive and the president of NPR resigned after the incident.

“Nobody’s on a rampage,” said Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., who also asked “why should we allow taxpayer dollars to be used to advocate one ideology?”

Democrats retorted that the legislation would do nothing to reduce the deficit and would be a blow to local public stations that rely on the national programs that include “Morning Edition” and “Wait, Wait… Don’t Tell Me” to attract listeners. “This bill would pull the plug,” said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass. “It would snuff out stations from coast to coast, many in rural areas where the public radio station is the primary source of news and information.”

Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., displayed a blow-up photo of the two brothers who host the car advice show “Car Talk” with the caption, referring to their nicknames, reading “Save Click and Clack.”

The White House said it “strongly opposed” the bill and voiced similar objections, saying “undercutting funding for these radio stations, notably ones in rural areas where such outlets are already scarce, would result in communities losing valuable programming, and some stations could be forced to shut down altogether.”

The move to curtail federal subsidies for NPR follows a House vote last month, as part of the GOP plan to cut federal spending for the remainder of this budget year, to take back some $86 million budgeted for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the parent organization of NPR. That proposal, which also faces opposition in the Senate, does not provide for $430 million in future spending for CPB.

Thursday’s bill would ban federal funding of NPR, which was about $5 million in fiscal year 2010. It would bar public radio stations from using their federal grant money to pay dues to NPR. That total was about $2.8 million in fiscal 2010.

It also would bar public radio stations from using federal funds to buy NPR programs. NPR received $56 million in programming fees last year, its largest single source of revenue. Stations could still use federal money to produce their own programs.

In fiscal years 2009 and 2010 the CPB distributed federal grant money to more than 600 public radio stations, which used that money to buy programs and pay dues to NPR.

NPR says that of its $145.5 million in budgeted revenues in the fiscal year ending last September, only 1. 9 percent came from station dues. The biggest chunk, $63 million or 43 percent, came from station program fees. Another $36 million, or 24.7 percent, was derived from corporate sponsorships. About 3 percent came from grants from federally funded agencies such as the CPB and the National Endowment for the Arts.

____

The bill is H.R. 1076.

Online:

Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov

Two years ago IJ teamed up with three Philadelphia tour guides to file a major First Amendment lawsuit seeking to vindicate the freedom to speak in Philadelphia.

Ann Boulais, Mike Tait and Josh Silver sued because officials passed a law making it illegal for anyone like them to give a tour of much of the city’s downtown area without first passing a test and obtaining a government license—that is, getting the government’s permission to speak.

The case immediately sparked nationwide interest.  Robert McNamara, the First Amendment expert who filed the case, appeared on shows like All Things Considered and Marketplace to point out that the Constitution protects our right to communicate for a living, whether we are speaking out as bloggers, journalists, stand-up comedians or tour guides.

The Wall Street Journal ran a front-page feature:

Feeling tyrannized, Ms. [Ann] Boulais and two fellow guides summoned the constitution’s protections by suing the city in Philadelphia Federal court. The history test, they claimed, breached the Bill of Rights — a set of rules, as any good guide should know, that took effect while Congress sat here at 6th and Chestnut streets, on Dec. 15, 1791.

Of course, the guides are quick to point out that officials are violating fundamental American liberties in the very place those liberties were first enshrined in our Constitution.

In 2009, a year after the suit was filed, the city asked a federal judge to dismiss the case.  Their reason?  They had not allocated money in their 2009 budget to enforce the law right away.

Robert McNamara, who also authored a study examining the state of entrepreneurship in Philadelphia, doesn’t find the city’s explanation compelling.  He took the case to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals this week to clarify that Philadelphia’s budget priorities cannot trump the Constitution.  As he says in the above video:

Philadelphia’s tour guides have the right to speak freely without having to worry whether the city is going to start enforcing its licensing requirement in six weeks, six months or a year.   The Institute for Justice is determined to vindicate the First Amendment rights of ordinary Philadelphians to talk to each other about their city and its history.  And to make clear to city officials, in court, that they do not have the power to fine people for unauthorized talking.

Unfortunately, Philadelphia is not alone in its crackdown on tour guides.  Robert filed a similar suit in Washington DC a few months ago.  In the nation’s capital, talking about the Bill of Rights can land you in jail for 90 days.

Robert pointed out in the Washington Post that these tour guide licensing schemes are part of a larger, national problem:

In the past 50 years, there has been an explosion of laws that require people to get a license before they join the workforce. In the 1950s, only about one out of every 20 Americans needed a license to pursue the occupation of their choice. Today, that number is one out of every three.

Thankfully, the U.S. Constitution says that Americans have a right to earn an honest living free from unreasonable regulations.  And protecting this right to economic liberty is one of the founding principles of the Institute for Justice.

Click here for more on the lawsuit. The Institute for Justice is also online at facebook, You Tube and twitter.

Conservative Blogger Faces Criticism Over Protege, by DAVID FOLKENFLIK

The conservative online news entrepreneur Andrew Breitbart is, for the moment, doing little to dispel stereotypes about bloggers. During a recent visit to his home on the west side of Los Angeles, Breitbart, 41, is working from his own basement. Barefoot. At the beck and call of his own kids.

But that basement is light and airy, with a decent view of the city. A young assistant works there with Breitbart to help funnel wire service stories to Breitbart.com, his main news aggregation site. And his reach, thanks to a brawling rhetorical style and a protege who taped the undercover ACORN videos last year, is only expanding.

Over the past year, Breitbart has hired editors to run a new network of conservative blogs called BigGovernment.com, BigHollywood.com and BigJournalism.com. No matter the focus, the media are a prime target throughout.

“They want to control the narrative,” Breitbart says. “I’m saying, ‘No more!’ The new media has freed it up. I’m sorry, mainstream media. It’s over. Your ability to control the narrative is over.”

New Fodder

He can talk that way for hours — and finds fresh grist all over. The media have devoted intense coverage to the late-January arrest of James O’Keefe, the 25-year-old videographer and conservative provocateur. He was charged with trying to get into Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu’s federal office in New Orleans under false pretenses to commit a felony. And O’Keefe is also under contract to write for BigGovernment.com.

Read the full transcript at NPR.com.