Original article can be found here.
(The Center Square) – Allegations of political activism at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History was the topic of debate Tuesday at the U.S. House Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency.
The hearing followed a July 4, 2026, report released by the White House Domestic Policy Council, which alleged that exhibits at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History reflect a far-left ideological bias.
The report, released under President Donald Trump’s executive order on restoring what the administration called “truth and sanity” to American history, criticized several Smithsonian exhibits and recommended reforms to ensure federally funded museums present a more patriotic interpretation of the nation’s history.
Committee Chairman Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., stated in his opening remark that the museum was established to celebrate the nation’s history and values.
“The Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of American History was opened in 1964 to instill in Americans and foreign visitors alike an appreciation of this nation’s distinctive heritage and celebrate its singular story as a beacon of freedom and opportunity,” Burchett said.
Witness Dr. Matthew Spalding, professor and dean of the Van Andel Graduate School of Government, Hillsdale College Washington, D.C. Campus, argued that patriotism requires a balance of both appreciation of the nation’s achievements and acknowledgment of its failures.
“A healthy attachment to this country is neither blind to its flaws nor fanatical to believing America is the source of all good,” Spalding said.
Spalding said each and every generation has a duty to equip themselves with the knowledge of American history and the ideals upon which it rests, giving them a greater respect for the liberties and love of country.
“That patriotism must be strong enough and unsentimental enough to coexist with criticism, dissent, disappointment, and opposition,” Spalding said.
Burchett and U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., displayed photographs they said showed drag performances, sexually explicit images and sexual devices featured in museum exhibits, arguing the displays were inappropriate for a federally funded museum and unnecessary for accurately representing American history.
U.S. Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Va., argued that the museum presents a complete account of American history by acknowledging both the nation’s founding ideals and its shortcomings.
“It recognizes slavery alongside liberty. It discusses immigration alongside citizenship. It recognizes the struggle for civil rights alongside our founding ideals, and yes, the flaws of our founders,” Walkinshaw said.
Walkinshaw also criticized what he described as the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape the presentation of American history, pointing to the removal of historical content from federal websites and exhibits.
“They erased Jackie Robinson,” Walkinshaw said. “They erased the Tuskegee Airmen. They erased the Navajo Code Talkers, and now they want to take their big orange eraser to a proud American institution, the Smithsonian.”
Yale University historian David Blight echoed this concern, warning that allowing politics to shape historical interpretation could distort the nation’s understanding of its past.
“If we’re not careful, we will end up with what the great writer Toni Morrison called ‘statist history’ and it will create what she called ‘sanctioned ignorance’,” Blight said. “That’s what’s at risk.”
Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., argued that the Smithsonian should remain independent of political influence.
“The Smithsonian Institution does not belong to the president,” Stansbury said. “It does not belong to a political party. It belongs to the American people.”
The hearing concluded with no official resolution or agreement, with the two parties remaining divided and any revisions or changes still uncertain.
Original article
Comments