You’ll recall that there were Black Republicans in Congress who wasted little time slamming Florida’s new history standards that suggested U.S. slavery helped Black people develop useful skills. Though they knew it would upset Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a fellow Republican who’s running for president, those Black Republicans correctly made the accurate teaching of history a higher priority than repeating GOP talking points.
Latino Republicans who should be eager to get to the opening of the National Museum of the American Latino chose a DeSantis-like “anti-woke” strategy that has put that museum’s construction in peril.
Their example of doing the right thing makes it all the more glaring that around that same time, Latino Republicans who should be eager to get to the opening of the National Museum of the American Latino chose a DeSantis-style “anti-woke” strategy that has only served to put that museum’s construction in peril.
The decision from the Congressional Hispanic Conference co-chairs, Reps. Mario Díaz-Balart, R-Fla., and Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, to place so-called anti-woke politics over the bigger picture could lead to a cultural tragedy: the abrupt pause in plans for a museum dedicated to the Latino experience that has been in the works for decades.
The irony is that The New York Times just reported on polls that found that Republican voters and particularly Republican voters in Iowa appear to be tiring of their politicians’ talking about “wokeness.”
That there isn’t already a national Latino museum is a travesty. But Congress finally gave its unanimous approval for such a museum in 2020, and in 2022, the Smithsonian Institution named Jorge Zamanillo its founding director. A location must be designated by Dec. 27, 2024, but in a committee vote along party lines last month, Republicans cut funding for the museum.
At that House Appropriations Committee hearing, the views of a 2022 opinion piece from three prominent Latino conservatives who called on Latino Republicans in Congress to not support any additional funding for the national museum played a role in ending the funding push. According to that argument, “¡Presente! A Latino History of the United States,” an exhibit the Smithsonian has called a precursor to the museum, is “profoundly disconnected from the actual Latino experience and cultures in the United States.”
According to the essay’s three conservative authors, the exhibit “elevates only leftist ideologues, celebrates transexual activists, denigrates Christianity, denounces capitalism, condemns the West, portrays the United States as iniquitous and oppressive and badly distorts history. It advances the classic oppressor-oppressed agenda of textbook Marxism.”
The essay says the Smithsonian excluded “leftwing and Marxist dictators” but included “Rightwing autocrats.” The authors couldn’t understand why “leftist guerrilla and terroristic movements” didn’t get the same “terror” label as the Nicaraguan Contras of the 1980s.
Diaz-Balart and Gonzales say the exhibit “has an overarching theme that Hispanics are deserters, traitors, and victims of oppression in the U.S.”
Democrats voted to keep the funding flowing to the museum project, but the Republicans outvoted them.
In a statement after the hearing, Diaz-Balart and Gonzales said the exhibit “has an overarching theme that Hispanics are deserters, traitors, and victims of oppression in the U.S.” They note they had a meeting with the Smithsonian and said, “procedural changes in the review of content and leadership have been made.” Those changes, they say, will allow “funding to go further.”
But museum supporters worry that halting funding will make it impossible to meet the 2024 deadline to designate a site. The plan was for the museum to open in the 2030s, but Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said during a committee hearing last month that “Defunding the museum now may mean that it may be delayed 10 more years.”









