AR House Education Committee Keeps Revisionist History—“1619 Project”– Alive and Well in AR Public Schools?
In a voice vote on Tuesday, the Arkansas House Education Committee denied the advancement of HB1231 by Rep Mark Lowery (R-Maumelle), a bill which would prevent state funds from being used by a public school in Arkansas to teach the controversial “1619 Project” curriculum. This bill is based on the idea that Arkansas tax dollars should not be used to teach a flawed and inaccurate version of U.S. history in Arkansas public schools.
This article is meant for those interested in learning more about the “1619 Project” and how such a controversial “socialist” curriculum passed the smell test in the Arkansas House Education Committee yesterday with 17 Republicans on a 20-person committee.
How committee voting works?
With the “carefully crafted language” and excuses by politicians, the Arkansas state legislators’ “yes” or “no” votes must be understood in context. Sometimes it is not clear whether he or she is “for” or “against” the behavior addressed by the bill simply by reviewing the vote? In the case of HB1231, the reader should understand that state funds may be used to teach the “1619 Project” curriculum in Arkansas public schools unless this bill is passed by a majority of “yes” votes. A “no” or “not voting” vote is not a vote “against” 1619 Project but actually a vote in favor of the funding of the ‘1619 Project’ curriculum with state tax dollars. It would take a “yes” vote on this bill to stop tax dollars from being used in this way.
How do I find out how my state legislator voted in committee?
During a legislative committee meeting, legislators vote on bills by an oral statement of “yes” or “no.” Silence (or an absence from the meeting) is the same as “not voting” which is an effective “no” vote –since it takes affirmative votes to pass legislation. There is no official record of these oral votes in committee unless a committee member asks for a “roll call” which triggers a second officially recorded vote. That recorded vote may be viewed by the public upon request made to the correct persons. If there is no “roll call” requested by a committee member, then the determination of how the majority voted is left to the discretion of the committee chairperson. This can be disheartening to those interested in government transparency. One might ask, why would there not always be a record of all committee votes? (For more CFA articles on recording committee votes.[i])
What is “The 1619 Project”?
“The 1619 Project” has been in national news for over a year. It was developed by journalists from The New York Times Magazine. It challenges the historical fact that the United States founding is based on the ideals of the Declaration of Independence signed on July 4, 1776. Instead they allege the founding of the country springs from the point when slaves are alleged to have first arrived in Virginia in 1619.
The Heritage Foundation and other conservative national think tanks have published articles and editorials warning against the indoctrination of our youth with such socialist teachings. Heritage Senior Fellow, Mike Gonzalez, writes: “The overt political nature of the 1619 Project should alert parents, educators, members of school boards, and political leaders that a major political experiment is being practiced on the nation’s schoolchildren.” https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/1619-pulitzer-will-boost-socialist-teaching-schools
Max Eden, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, wrote in December 2019:
“To understand their country, students should read America’s Founding documents and the works of great figures like Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln, and grapple with history’s circumstantial and moral complexities—not “reframe” history to make it fit partisan purposes. They should be taught about the moral abomination of American slavery—but not that “slavery is our country’s very origin,” or that its legacy is baked into all our social institutions, allegations that cannot stand up to any fair-minded examination of American history. The themes and messages of the 1619 Project are not only historically dubious; they will also lead to deeper civic alienation. Conscientious teachers should file the 1619 curriculum where it belongs: in the waste bin. https://www.city-journal.org/1619-project
Others act to stop the use of tax dollars to teach “1619 Project” to children?
Yesterday Iowa legislators began the process of stopping such funding in their state. “During a subcommittee hearing Tuesday at the Iowa Capitol, Wheeler claimed the “1619 Project” seeks to “tear down America” and labeled it “leftist political propaganda masquerading as history” that “turns fourth-graders into activists for leftist policies.” https://www.thegazette.com/subject/news/government/iowa-republicans-advance-bill-to-ban-1619-project-in-school-curriculum-20210209 Former President Donald Trump tweeted on September 6, 2020 that the Department of Education is looking into public schools that use the 1619 Project as part of their curriculum and if so, they will not be funded. In July 2020, U.S. Senator Tom Cotton introduced a bill in Congress stating “The NYT’s 1619 Project is a racially divisive, revisionist account of history that denies the noble principles of freedom & equality on which our nation was founded. Federal funding shouldn’t help indoctrinate young Americans w/this left-wing garbage.” https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/18/house-republicans-introduce-bill-banning-federal-funds-for-teaching-america-founded-on-slavery/
What happened during the AR House Education Committee?
During the committee hearing yesterday for HB1231, both Republicans and Democrats were against this bill (favoring the use of taxpayer dollars to teach “1619 Project” in public schools.) While apparently ignoring current law, some legislators stated it was “not their job” to determine curriculum content and that this bill “might be setting a dangerous precedent.” The committee debated for two hours and heard from several students who oppose this bill and want taxpayer dollars to be used to teach “The 1619 Project.” Some legislators mentioned that the governor’s office was opposed to this bill as well.
Ultimately Rep Lowery’s HB1231 failed on a voice vote with Chairman Cozart calling the vote in favor of the “No’s” which defeated the bill. Though no official record, with only a minimal number of audible “yes” votes, inside sources report those voting “yes” were Rep. Stephen Meeks (R) and Rep. Rick Beck (R). All other 15 Republicans reportedly opposed this legislation and by voting “no” or “not voting” support the 1619 Project being taught with tax dollars in our public schools. No roll call was requested.
The House Education Committee is comprised of the following 20 members:
| Brian Evans-Vice Chair-R | Steve Hollowell-R | Stephen Meeks-R |
| Rick Beck-R | Lee Johnson-R | Reginald Murdock-D |
| Ken Bragg-R | Fredrick Love-D | Nelda Speaks-R |
| Karilyn Brown-R | Mark Lowery-R | DeAnn Vaught-R |
| Gary Deffenbaugh-R | John Maddox-R | Richard Womack-R |
| Charlene Fite-R | Gayla Hendren McKenzie-R |
Conclusion: One must ask, with 17 Republicans and three Democrats and the bill receiving only two supportive votes, where was the conservative support for this bill? And why was this a “voice vote” only? A lack of transparency on who votes which way on any given bill is wool over the eyes of the voter. Without an official record of how our legislators vote, how will we know where they stand on key issues? Or maybe that is the point. But trust us on this one—those 15 Republicans voting “no” or staying silent on this bill need to be held to their promises by the voters of Arkansas.
(Since this bill is likely to go before the Senate, we encourage you let your voice be heard to your state legislators ASAP as well as these committee members listed above and the Senate Education Committee.)
[i] Conduit for Action articles on transparency and roll call voting:
| January 9, 2021 | Legislature Restricts Access to Committee Meetings |
| May 6, 2019 | What Happens in Committee . . . Doesn’t Count? |
| January 3, 2019 | Running Away from a Vote |
| June 18, 2018 | Proposed Ethics Revisions: Improvements and Weaknesses |
[1] Conduit for Action articles on transparency and roll call voting:
| January 9, 2021 | Legislature Restricts Access to Committee Meetings |
| May 6, 2019 | What Happens in Committee . . . Doesn’t Count? |
| January 3, 2019 | Running Away from a Vote |
| June 18, 2018 | Proposed Ethics Revisions: Improvements and Weaknesses |