PBS: Subsidy wise investment

As a citizen of the state of Idaho - and full cognizant of the hatchet job just thrust upon public education in the state of Idaho - I am moved to wonder why it is that every elected representative in the United States professes to l-o-o-o-o-v-e children, is (or certainly should be) aware that nationwide, public education is in distress, professes an interest in improving the future of the next generation - and yet Congress, under the guise of budget-cutting, plans to axe PBS. Note Well: I do understand fully that the U.S. must reduce its spending, balance the budget and reduce the national debt as soon as possible.

As I understand it, ALL of PBS costs the U.S. Treasury the "staggering" sum of one whole dollar per citizen per YEAR! (Approximately $300 million.) America's children will lose ALL of the splendid children's educational programs broadcast daily by PBS. Surely Congress must be aware of the paucity of children's educational material presented by commercial broadcasting! And surely Congress must be aware of the importance of early, early education to our beloved children, all of whom are the hope of our future.

Now let's examine Congress' subsidies: Here I'll mention just one: BIG OIL. In our present recession, with a huge percentage of our population jobless, at the present price of gasoline, Americans are already heavily subsidizing BIG OIL every time they need to buy gas. Every year for the last four or five years anyhow, ExxonMobil has reported annual profits of $40 billion or so. I'm sure the other oil companies are doing equally well, percentage wise.

Tell me: Why is Congress subsidizing Big Oil at all, presently to the tune of $1.3 billion annually, and then taking away PBS from the citizens of this country?

ANNETTE R. BIGNALL

Coeur d'Alene