Why does she keep doing this?
President Donald Trump is facing another challenge from within his own party as Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joins a Democratic senator in questioning his administration’s latest move involving the Smithsonian Institution.
Murkowski teamed up with Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., to seek answers about Trump’s effort to challenge what Republicans say are inaccurate or politically biased presentations of American history at the National Museum of American History.
The disagreement is becoming another flashpoint in Washington over taxpayer spending, American history and the influence of politics on publicly supported cultural institutions.
For conservatives who have complained for years about progressive ideology entering government-supported organizations, the controversy raises a straightforward question: What responsibility does Congress have when taxpayers are helping foot the bill?
Murkowski Breaks With Republicans Over Smithsonian
Murkowski and Merkley sent a joint letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum seeking more information about how the Department of the Interior intends to implement Trump’s executive order, “Restoring Trust in the Smithsonian Institution.”
The two senators hold leading positions on the Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, giving them an important role in overseeing federal spending connected to the department.
Their concerns center partly on Trump’s directive involving temporary signs or exhibits near the National Museum of American History.
The administration’s approach is designed to provide additional information when officials believe museum displays offer an inaccurate or overly partisan interpretation of America’s past.
Murkowski and Merkley, however, are questioning how those decisions will be made and how taxpayer resources could be used.
Murkowski Defends Smithsonian’s Historical Mission
The senators also offered a defense of the Smithsonian’s longstanding role in preserving American history.
They argued that for approximately 180 years, the Smithsonian has focused on research, education and historical evidence rather than partisan narratives.
Murkowski and Merkley further maintained that Americans should be willing to examine the entire national story — including extraordinary accomplishments as well as difficult chapters from the country’s past.
That argument puts Murkowski at odds with Republicans who believe portions of the Smithsonian have become increasingly influenced by progressive cultural and political viewpoints.
Conservative critics are not necessarily arguing that uncomfortable portions of American history should be ignored. Instead, many contend that taxpayer-supported institutions should provide sufficient context and avoid presenting the nation’s history primarily through a modern ideological framework.
That distinction is at the center of the current fight.
Trump Takes Action on Smithsonian Institution
Trump signed his executive order late last month as part of an effort to change how the federal government responds to disputed historical presentations at the Smithsonian.
The order directs Burgum to use existing federal authority to help restore public confidence in the institution.
One of the most notable provisions involves placing temporary exhibits or informational signs on federally controlled sidewalks, walkways or public property near the museum.
Those materials could be used to provide additional context or challenge information the Trump administration considers inaccurate.
The administration’s strategy is significant because it could allow the federal government to present an alternative historical explanation without directly rewriting a Smithsonian exhibit.
For supporters, that offers another side of the story.
For critics, it raises questions about how much influence a presidential administration should have over the presentation of American history.
Senators Demand Details About Trump’s Plan
Murkowski and Merkley want the Trump administration to explain exactly how the new policy will operate.
Among the issues they are raising is whether the federal government has previously used public property or federal funding to present information contradicting material displayed by a nearby institution.
The senators also want details about who will research and approve the information presented to visitors.
Other questions involve the expected timeline and the potential cost to taxpayers.
Those are legitimate oversight matters for Congress, but Murkowski’s decision to challenge the administration alongside a Democrat is likely to attract attention from Trump’s conservative supporters.
Murkowski has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to depart from the Republican majority on major political disputes, and the Smithsonian controversy appears to be another example.
Republicans Target Controversial Smithsonian Exhibits
The administration’s actions come after Republicans raised objections to several Smithsonian exhibits.
One example cited by conservatives involves Disney’s historic animated short “Steamboat Willie.”
A Smithsonian presentation associated the famous cartoon with elements of America’s historical blackface minstrel tradition.
Republican critics have challenged that interpretation and pointed to it as an example of what they believe is an unnecessarily ideological approach to American cultural history.
Some conservatives have used terms such as “woke” and “anti-white” when criticizing the broader direction of certain museum exhibits.
Those descriptions represent the views of the Smithsonian’s critics, while defenders of the institution argue that examining race and other controversial subjects is a necessary part of accurately documenting America’s complicated history.
The disagreement illustrates why the Smithsonian has suddenly become such an important political issue.
It is no longer simply a debate about individual museum displays. It has become a larger argument over how America describes its history to future generations.
Taxpayer Funding Becomes Major Issue
There is also a substantial financial component to the controversy.
The Smithsonian receives roughly $1 billion annually in federal taxpayer support from Congress.
That level of public funding has prompted Republican lawmakers to question whether Congress should establish stronger requirements governing how those dollars are spent.
Several conservatives on the House Appropriations Committee have expressed interest in putting additional guardrails on Smithsonian funding.
Such restrictions could potentially require changes to controversial exhibits or establish new standards for receiving federal money.
For fiscal conservatives, the issue extends beyond history and culture.
It also involves government accountability.
When an organization receives hundreds of millions of dollars from taxpayers, lawmakers have an obligation to determine whether that money is being used responsibly. The harder question is determining where financial oversight ends and political interference begins.
Should Congress Put Conditions on Smithsonian Funding?
Republicans now face a potentially consequential decision.
One option is allowing the Smithsonian to continue operating under its existing structure while lawmakers conduct traditional congressional oversight.
Another is attaching new conditions to federal appropriations in an attempt to encourage greater balance in taxpayer-supported exhibits.
Supporters of stronger congressional action could argue that taxpayers should not be required to subsidize political messaging they believe misrepresents the country.
Opponents could argue that politicians should not be determining which interpretations of history are acceptable inside museums.
Either approach carries significant implications.
If Congress begins tying Smithsonian funding to individual exhibits, future Democratic-controlled Congresses could potentially use the same authority to push cultural institutions in the opposite ideological direction.
That makes the fight about more than today’s political controversy.
It raises questions about the appropriate relationship between government, historical scholarship and taxpayer funding.
Another High-Profile Murkowski-Trump Split
The controversy also highlights Murkowski’s unusual position inside today’s Republican Party.
While Republicans broadly remain aligned with Trump, the Alaska senator has established herself as one of the GOP lawmakers most willing to publicly challenge the president.
Her partnership with Merkley on the Smithsonian issue reinforces that reputation.
For Trump supporters, her latest action may be frustrating because the administration is attempting to address concerns conservatives have raised for years about perceived political bias inside major American institutions.
For Murkowski and other critics, however, the issue is whether the executive branch should become directly involved in challenging the historical information presented by a major museum.
Smithsonian Fight Could Have Bigger Consequences
What began as a disagreement about museum exhibits could ultimately turn into a much larger battle over federal spending.
If congressional Republicans move forward with new Smithsonian funding restrictions, the institution could face pressure to reconsider how controversial subjects are presented.
The debate could also establish precedents extending beyond one museum.
Other federally supported cultural and educational institutions could eventually face similar scrutiny over how they address politically sensitive subjects.
For millions of Americans, the Smithsonian represents more than a collection of museums. It is one of the country’s most visible institutions for preserving American history, scientific achievements, military sacrifice, technological innovation and cultural change.
That is precisely why the current disagreement matters.
The fundamental question is not whether America’s mistakes should be discussed. They should.
The more difficult issue is whether federally supported institutions are presenting that history fairly, accurately and with enough context to allow Americans to reach their own conclusions.
Trump believes changes are needed. Many congressional Republicans agree.
Murkowski is once again taking a different path — and this time, she is joining a Democrat to demand answers from the Trump administration.
With approximately $1 billion in annual taxpayer support potentially becoming part of the debate, the fight over the Smithsonian may be only beginning.
