Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Rescission covers NPR, PBS and foreign aid
    A white man in a suit speaks at a lectern.
    Senate Majority Leader Sen. John Thune (R-SD) gives a statement after a policy luncheon with Republican senators at the U.S. Capitol on July 15, 2025 in Washington, DC.

    Topline:

    The Senate has approved the Trump administration's $9 billion rescission package aimed at clawing back money already allocated for public radio and television — a major step toward winding down nearly six decades of federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

    Why it matters: CPB stands to lose $1.1 billion dollars meant to fund it through the next two years, while the bill also cuts $7.9 billion in other programs. CPB acts as a conduit for federal money to NPR, PBS and their member stations.

    What's next: The senate's approval of the cuts tees up a final showdown in the House, which approved an earlier version last month.

    What it means for LAist: LAist is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that is also home to L.A.’s largest NPR station, which broadcasts at LAist 89.3 FM. Annually, about 4% of LAist's budget has come from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That accounts for $1.7 million in annual funding — money that pays the costs for about a dozen journalists and other expenses. LAist's coverage on the radio, on-demand and here on LAist.com is free to access for all.

    The House could vote on final passage of the Trump administration's rescission package, which claws back $9 billion in funds allocated for public media and foreign aid, as early as Thursday evening.

    The Senate approved the measure in the small hours of Thursday morning. The House approved an earlier version last month, but must vote to adopt the Senate changes.

    The Corporation for Public Broadcasting stands to lose $1.1 billion meant to fund it through the next two years, while the bill also cuts $7.9 billion in other programs. CPB acts as a conduit for federal money to NPR, PBS and their member stations

    Editor's note

    • LAist is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that is also home to L.A.’s largest NPR station, which broadcasts at LAist 89.3 FM. As an NPR member station, LAist pays NPR for on-air programming and the ability to publish NPR articles such as this one.
    • Annually, about 4% of LAist's budget has come from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That accounts for $1.7 million in annual funding — money that pays the costs for about a dozen journalists and other expenses. LAist's coverage on the radio, on-demand and here on LAist.com is free to access for all.

    In a marathon vote-a-rama session, senators introduced numerous amendments before ultimately voting 51-48 to approve the package that includes cuts to foreign food and health programs. One senator, Minnesota's Tina Smith, was not present at the vote due to hospitalization.

    The Senate vote was largely along party lines, with Democrats voting against the bill and all but two Republicans voting for it. The GOP exceptions were Maine's Susan Collins and Alaska's Lisa Murkowski. Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, who voted on Tuesday not to advance debate on the bill, prompting Vice President Vance to cast a tiebreaking vote, nonetheless approved the final measure.

    In a statement immediately after the vote, NPR CEO Katherine Maher said: "Nearly 3-in-4 Americans say they rely on their public radio stations for alerts and news for their public safety," adding, "We call on the House of Representatives to reject this elimination of public media funding, which directly harms their communities and constituents, and could very well place lives at risk."

    In a separate statement, Kate Riley, president and CEO of America's Public Television Stations, said the organization was "devastated that the Senate voted to eliminate federal funding to the local public television stations throughout this country that provide essential lifesaving public safety services, proven educational services and community connections to their communities every day for free."

    During the voting, motions by Democrats to carve out funding for NPR, PBS and their member stations from the package were largely symbolic, as Republicans had the numbers.

    In one of the late proposed amendments, Murkowski sought to restore CPB funding while barring any federal money from going to NPR. She mentioned a 7.3 magnitude earthquake that struck the Alaska Peninsula and Kodiak Island on Wednesday and an alert she'd received from public radio station KUCB in Unalaska, in the Aleutian Islands.

    "I'm looking at a text that I received from the station manager there," she said, relating how the station's three staff members broadcast emergency messages despite a tsunami warning that was later lifted. The text said the local community was instructed to listen to the local public radio station, she said.

    "I have an amendment that protects public media, their independence, their ability to provide local news, weather reports and, yes, emergency alerts," Murkowski said. "We're reminded today this stuff matters, so I would hope my colleagues would recognize what is at stake and vote for my amendment."

    But a majority voted against it.

    Earlier, Wisconsin Democrat Sen. Tammy Baldwin said that if the cuts to public broadcasting stand, "local television and radio stations will shut down — and it will be rural stations that will be the first to close."

    "These issues were not even raised as a part of our appropriation process during the past two years," Baldwin said. "So to take this extraordinary step and say that these issues are now so grave and so urgent that we have to address them like this — what are we doing here?"

    Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, speaking against the Baldwin motion, said public broadcasting "has long been overtaken by partisan activists. Plain and simple."

    "NPR and PBS have revealed their left-wing bias time and time again," he said. "If you want to watch the left-wing propaganda, turn on MSNBC. But the taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize it."

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., noted that the U.S. is $36 trillion in debt. "What we are talking about here is 1/10 of 1% of all federal spending," he said. "But it's a step in the right direction."

    The White House sent the request to Congress in early June — the first such rescission in more than a quarter century. The House quickly passed it and is expected to approve the Senate changes before a midnight Friday deadline. That deadline marks 45 days since President Trump sent the rescission request to Congress. By law, Congress is required to either affirm the cuts or do nothing and allow the money to be restored after the deadline.

    Since the election, Trump and Republican lawmakers have stepped up attacks on NPR and PBS, with the president writing on his social media platform last week that "[a]ny Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or Endorsement."

    In March, NPR's Maher and PBS CEO and President Paula Kerger testified on Capitol Hill before the House subcommittee on government efficiency chaired by Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. The executives defended public media against charges of political bias, but Greene concluded the hearing by saying: "We believe that you all can hate us on your own dime."

    NPR, which produces news programs Morning Edition and All Things Considered, gets about 1% of its funding directly from the federal government. Its member stations, which operate over 1,300 outlets, receive about 8% to 10% of their funding from the federal government. With its nightly PBS News Hour and high-quality children's programming, such as Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood, PBS and its stations get around 15% of their revenue.

    Leaders in the public broadcasting community have warned that losing CPB funding would cripple small stations, especially in rural areas underserved by commercial media, and weaken the entire public media network.

    A Harris Poll conducted last week on behalf of NPR found that overall two-thirds (66%) of Americans support federal funding for public radio, with the same proportion agreeing that such funding is a good value for taxpayers. More than half of Republicans (58%) and more than three-quarters of Democrats (77%) said they support public radio funding. The online poll served 2,089 U.S. adults, with a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points.

    The House version of the bill included eliminating $7.9 billion in foreign aid funding, including for PEPFAR, the U.S. AIDS relief program initiated under President George W. Bush. But Collins, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, and other Republicans emphasized that cutting lifesaving foreign aid programs such as PEPFAR went too far. They decided to exclude the program from the final Senate version.

    Murkowski was among a handful of Republicans in rural states who expressed concern about losing funding for public radio stations that cater to underserved populations. Among them, South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds on Tuesday announced that he had struck a deal for the White House to divert Green New Deal money to funding 28 stations serving Native American listeners in nine states.

    But in a letter to Rounds, Native Public Media President and CEO Loris Taylor called the compromise "structurally impractical," adding that while the network appreciates the efforts to sustain tribal media, "The Green New Deal is primarily a framework for climate and economic reform, not a dedicated funding source for communications infrastructure or media services."

    More rescissions requests likely

    Ahead of Thursday's expected House vote, Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought told reporters that the administration will "likely" send another rescissions package to Capitol Hill soon.

    "There is still a great enthusiasm for these rescissions bills, because Congress wants to be a part of voting for these cuts and making them permanent," Vought said at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

    But Democrats and Republicans alike have raised concerns that rescinding additional funds appropriated by Congress will make it harder for lawmakers to pass future appropriations bills to fund the government ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline.

    "The only way we can fund the government is to get at least seven Democrats to vote with us at the end of Sept. 30, or we can go into a shutdown," Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said on the Senate floor Wednesday. "If I'm a Democrat, and you're trying to get me to vote and get to a 60-vote threshold to fund the government, and you've just betrayed a prior agreement and a prior appropriation — what are the likelihood that they're going to do that?"

    In a letter to Senate Democrats this month, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York called the rescissions package "an affront to the bipartisan appropriations process."

    "That's why a number of Senate Republicans know it is absurd for them to expect Democrats to act as business as usual and engage in a bipartisan appropriations process to fund the government, while they concurrently plot to pass a purely partisan rescissions bill to defund those same programs negotiated on a bipartisan basis behind the scenes," Schumer wrote.

    Vought, however, dismissed those concerns at the breakfast and said he was not willing to provide assurances to Democratic senators.

    "There is no voter in the country that went to the polls and said, 'I'm voting for a bipartisan appropriations process,'" Vought said. "The appropriations process has to be less bipartisan. We're $37 trillion in debt, and we produce CRs [continuing resolutions] every year, and to the extent that we don't produce CRs, it's not individual bills that get signed into law. It's omnibus bills that no one has read before."

    Disclosure: This story was written and reported by NPR Correspondent Scott Neuman, Congressional Correspondent Deirdre Walsh and NPR Washington Desk Producer Lexie Schapitl. It was edited by Managing Editor Gerry Holmes. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

  • Council OKs new housing in some low-density zones
    A for-sale sign hangs outside a $1.6 million house on L.A.’s Westside.
    A for-sale sign hangs outside a $1.6 million house on L.A.’s Westside.

    Topline:

    The Los Angeles City Council decided Tuesday to put off the full effects of a major new state housing law by allowing low-rise apartment buildings in some neighborhoods where such housing has long been banned.

    The details: All council members voted in favor of those plans except for Traci Park, who was absent from the meeting. California’s Senate Bill 79 is set to take effect July 1.

    What is SB 79? The law overrides local limits on housing development by allowing apartment buildings between five and nine stories tall near train stations and rapid bus stops. However, cities are allowed to postpone those changes until 2030 by developing their own incremental plans for more housing. L.A. elected leaders have chosen to delay. They’re doing so through the city’s new Low-Rise Ordinance, which aims to allow buildings up to four stories tall in 57 neighborhoods near transit lines.

    Why it matters: L.A. lawmakers have tried many approaches to bring down L.A.’s high rents. But they have consistently voted to stop apartment developers from encroaching on the nearly three-quarters of city residential land reserved for single-family homes. Pushed by state lawmakers, city leaders are now having to accept some changes in single-family neighborhoods located near public transit lines.

    Read more... to learn whether new apartment buildings could be allowed in your neighborhood.

    The Los Angeles City Council decided Tuesday to put off the full effects of a major new state housing law by allowing low-rise apartment buildings in some neighborhoods where such housing has long been banned.

    All council members voted in favor of those plans except for Traci Park, who was absent from the meeting.

    California’s Senate Bill 79 is set to take effect July 1. The law overrides local limits on housing development by allowing apartment buildings between five and nine stories tall near train stations and rapid bus stops.

    However, cities are allowed to postpone those changes until 2030 by developing their own incremental plans for more housing. L.A. elected leaders have chosen to delay. They’re doing so through the city’s new Low-Rise Ordinance, which aims to allow buildings up to four stories tall in 57 neighborhoods near transit lines.

    Why it matters

    L.A. lawmakers have tried many approaches to bring down L.A.’s high rents. But they have consistently voted to stop apartment developers from encroaching on the nearly three-quarters of city residential land reserved for single-family homes.

    Pushed by state lawmakers, city leaders are now having to accept some changes in single-family neighborhoods located near public transit lines.

    The reaction

    Some local officials and homeowners have expressed frustration over new state limits on their ability to stop development in low-density zones. But advocates for more development said the council’s decision will help address high rents by allowing more housing in areas that have long been off-limits to new apartments.

    “The City Council voted to open up high-resource single-family neighborhoods near transit stations,” said Scott Epstein, policy director with Abundant Housing L.A. “This reform is long overdue and will help build a future where Angelenos of all incomes can find homes in the neighborhoods of their choice.”

    Where will the projects be allowed?

    Officials with the city’s planning department said residents can see whether Low-Rise Ordinance projects will be allowed in their neighborhood by clicking on this interactive map and making two selections from the “layer list” menu: “Opportunity Station Sites Eligible for Low Rise” and “Sites Eligible for Low Rise Outside of Opportunity Station.”

    The map shows that some of the areas eligible for new apartment buildings under this plan include Westside neighborhoods within a half-mile of the E Line’s Westwood/Rancho Park station, pockets of the San Fernando Valley near G Line stops, and parts of Eagle Rock along Colorado Boulevard’s planned North Hollywood to Pasadena rapid bus line.

    Is this a done deal?

    Both plans — the decision to delay full SB 79 implementation, and the new Low-Rise Ordinance — now go to Mayor Karen Bass for final approval. Council members are also considering some tweaks they say would help Low-Rise Ordinance projects get built.

    Those changes would include letting developers build denser projects if they reserve more units for low-income renters, as well as rules that would let developers build ground-level parking instead of costlier underground parking. The council’s planning committee voted Tuesday to forward those suggestions to the full City Council for further debate.

  • Sponsored message
  • A new system for illegal firework use
    A small drone is set on a table in the foreground in front of a row of nameplates and people talking amongst themselves out of focus in the background.
    A drone is on display at a Los Angeles Police Commission meeting earlier this year. You might spot one overhead this Fourth of July.

    Topline:

    SoCal is adopting a new form of surveillance to monitor illegal firework use: drones.

    Why now: The devices are now an easier way to patrol local neighborhoods after a call to the police department has been made, allowing officers to determine if someone should be sent to the scene or a citation should be given.

    Read on… for more information about this system.

    There’s a new tool to fight illegal fireworks this Fourth of July: drones.

    “A drone’s real-time aerial view can help officers assess situations faster, improve safety, support faster response times and ensure the right resources are sent where they’re needed most,” the Anaheim Police Department stated in an Instagram post.

    Anaheim's department is the latest law enforcement agency using the technology to quickly identify illegal fireworks use. The Downey City Council is expected to vote Tuesday night on potential new fines and new rules that would allow local law enforcement to use drones to patrol neighborhoods for illegal fireworks usage.

    How it works

    Here's how the tech is put to use: Seconds after authorities receive a call reporting illegal fireworks activity, drones can take to the air, hovering above neighborhoods and businesses to find a specific location and an offender. The surveillance devices are equipped with night vision and zoom lenses that allow first responders to record high definition videos right from their Real Time Crime Center at the station.

    Then, officers can determine whether to send out a patrol car or issue a citation for the incident.

    Why it matters

    The city’s drone usage comes as law enforcement agencies across Southern California brace for the annual flood of complaints about illegal firework use at this time of the year. Drones make the most effective use of time and resources, experts say.

    “We'll typically see about 2,000 calls and about 300 related to fireworks,” Anaheim’s chief communications officer Mike Lyster explained about the Fourth of July. “It really is a better use of resources on what is always a very, very busy holiday for us.”

    Drones allow officials to collect enough evidence to issue these citations. In Anaheim, the punishment starts at $1,000 and climbs to $3,000 by the third offense. But authorities say the goal is to curb illegal fireworks use altogether due to the risk of injury and wildfires.

    Lyster hopes that people will think twice about using illegal fireworks this holiday — not just because of the fines — but because of its negative impact on local communities.

    “The Palisades fire was ultimately started by illegal fireworks, and sadly, not in our city, but in our neighboring city, a young Anaheim girl died in an illegal fireworks incident last year,” Lyster said.

    Where are drones already in use?

    More cities are testing this method in order to crack down on illegal firework use. Sacramento, San Bernardino and Riverside are just a few of the other areas that have adopted this technology in recent years.

    How do I know what's legal?

    If you have any questions about what is legal or not in your community, a quick Google search can help.

    Each county goes by different regulations for the types of fireworks you can use — if at all.

    For example, parts of Anaheim allow “safe and sane” fireworks to be used only on the Fourth of July between 10 a.m and 10 p.m. This includes non-explosive, non-aerial devices like fountains, sparklers and smoke balls. State-approved fireworks will have a State Fire Marshal seal.

    LAist staffer Anjanette Gile also contributed to this report.

  • Meet LAist, local news at coffee shops
    Two people wearing LAist t-shirts and merch stand in front of a restaurant behind a table with merch and a table cloth that reads "LAist. 89.3 FM. LAist.com" and a spinning wheel.
    The LAist community engagement team spoke with Altadena residents outside Fair Oaks Burger in Altadena on January 17.

    Topline:

    Your neighborhood has a reporter. Have you met them yet? On Saturday, coffee shops across L.A. are turning into places where you can tell a journalist exactly what’s been bugging you about your block…while drink amazing coffee.

    More details: From Boyle Heights to Silver Lake to Inglewood to Long Beach, local reporters will be set up at neighborhood coffee shops from from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. — to hear what’s on your mind. Got a tip about a pothole that’s been eating tires for years? A landlord the city keeps ignoring? A community hero nobody’s written about? We want to hear it all!

    Connect with us: LAist has been meeting community members in person through LAist Listens tabling events by popping up at local businesses.

    Read on ... for more on where LAist and other local news outlets will be across L.A.

    The story first appeared on The LA Local.

    Your neighborhood has a reporter. Have you met them yet?

    On Saturday, coffee shops across L.A. are turning into places where you can tell a journalist exactly what’s been bugging you about your block … while drinking amazing coffee.

    From Boyle Heights to Silver Lake to Inglewood to Long Beach, local reporters will be set up at neighborhood coffee shops from from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. — to hear what’s on your mind. Got a tip about a pothole that’s been eating tires for years? A landlord the city keeps ignoring? A community hero nobody’s written about? We want to hear it all!

    It’s part of Local News Day LA, a pop-up series organized by The LA Local that connects you with your local reporter and give you a chance to become the source instead of just the reader.

    LAist has been meeting community members in person through LAist Listens tabling events by popping up at local businesses.

    See below for the full list of participating media outlets and coffee shops — The LA Local and our media partners hope you’ll join us:

    A graphic showing location, media partner, and coffee list and a list underneath each section. LAist will be at Cafe Calle in South Central.
    LAist will be joining The LA Local and other local media partners for Local News Day LA on June 27.
    (
    The LA Local
    )

    Where to find a journalist

    1. The LA Local – Koreatown, Pico Union, Westlake will be hosted by Open Market
    2. The LA Local – Inglewood and South LA will be hosted by Asteroid Vinyl Cafe
    3. Boyle Heights Beat will be hosted by Picaresca Cafe
    4. CalMatters will be hosted by Yia Caffe 
    5. Calo News will be hosted by Cruzita’s Deli and Cafe
    6. The Eastsider will be hosted by Rosebud Coffee (Highland Park location)
    7. LAist will be hosted by Cafe Calle
    8. Los Angeles Radio Collective will be hosted by Spoke Bicycle Cafe
    9. LA Sentinel will be hosted by Patria Coffee
    10. LA Taco will be hosted by Cafecito Organico (Silverlake location)
    11. LA Public Press will be hosted by Holy Grounds Coffee & Tea
    12. Long Beach Post will be hosted by Wrigley Coffee
    13. Q Voice News will be hosted by Hot Java
    14. USC Annenberg Media will be hosted by South LA Cafe (Western location)

    Come enjoy a cup of coffee (or tea) with us while supplies last. 

  • 17 states and trade group sue CA over strict law
    Rows of shampoo bottles on a store shelf.
    Bottles of Pantene conditioner are displayed at a Costco in San Diego.

    Topline:

    A coalition of 17 states and a trade association representing U.S. wholesalers and distributors have sued California to block the enforcement of a stringent recycling law that aims to reduce plastic packaging waste.

    The backstory: The lawsuit, filed yesterday in federal court, argues that California’s recently finalized regulations that will gradually require companies to scale back single-use plastics and ensure all packaging is recycling or compostable should be struck down.

    Why now: The plaintiffs called the regulations “onerous mandates” that will cause steep price increases in everyday necessities that will be passed on, at least in part, to consumers.

    What California officials say: Melanie Turner, a spokesperson for CalRecycle, said in an emailed statement that the agency does not comment on pending litigation and that it remained focused on implementing the law.

    A coalition of 17 states and a trade association representing U.S. wholesalers and distributors have sued California to block the enforcement of a stringent recycling law that aims to reduce plastic packaging waste.

    The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court, argues that California’s recently finalized regulations that will gradually require companies to scale back single-use plastics and ensure all packaging is recycling or compostable should be struck down. The plaintiffs called the regulations “onerous mandates” that will cause steep price increases in everyday necessities that will be passed on, at least in part, to consumers.

    “Once again, California is trying to enact a policy that negatively impacts the rest of the country. If California goes unchecked, consumers will be forced to pay more for basic necessities,” Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, who led the coalition, said in a news release.

    The law, called the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, was enacted in 2022.

    “Virtually every product packaged or shipped in plastic containers, as well as a significant number of other types of packaging materials that merely incorporate plastics, fall into the Act’s remarkable sweep,” the lawsuit said.

    The National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, which represents companies that import and distribute goods in California, also joined the lawsuit.

    “California is not entitled to pronounce nationwide policies,” Eric Hoplin, the trade association’s president and CEO, said in a statement. “Because the Act extends California’s regulatory reach far beyond its borders and brings within its sweep conduct wholly unconnected to California, the Act violates principles of federalism, the horizontal separation of powers, and due process.”

    The lawsuit argues the law violates both the U.S. and California constitutions. It asks the court to declare California’s law invalid and unenforceable, and halt its implementation.

    The lawsuit names as defendants Zoe Heller, director of California’s recycling agency known as CalRecycle, and the Circular Action Alliance, a nonprofit involved with implementing the law.

    Melanie Turner, a spokesperson for CalRecycle, said in an emailed statement that the agency does not comment on pending litigation and that it remained focused on implementing the law.

    The alliance said in a statement that it was aware of the lawsuit and closely monitoring developments while at the same time working to implement the law’s “ambitious goals.”

    In a May news release announcing regulations under the law, state officials said the changes would fight plastics pollution while protecting the interests of taxpayers and local governments.

    “California is shifting the responsibility of managing single-use plastic and packaging onto the producers. New packaging reforms lower waste costs for communities and decrease garbage and pollution across the state,” Environmental Protection Secretary Yana Garcia said in a statement. “This approach pushes producers to innovate and design packaging that truly supports a circular economy.”

    Joining Nebraska in the lawsuit were 16 other states with Republican attorneys general: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.Environmental groups also have sued over the law. A coalition that included the Natural Resources Defense Council recently filed a complaint over what it said in a news release were “weakened” final regulations for the “landmark” law.