Appropriators Hate Civics Education… and Federal Money Therefor!

Be still my beating heart: some South Dakota legislators actually want to turn down federal money!

Yesterday’s Joint Appropriations meeting included a passel of “letters of intent,” wherein the appropriators explains to state agencies how it intends them to spend the money they’ve been given. “While the guidance does not have the direct force of statutory law,” the letters of intent state, “it rests solidly on a long-standing tradition of Legislative-Executive relationships in South Dakota and it will be used by the Joint Appropriations Committee as one basis for the fiscal oversight of your agency and its continued funding.”

In what feels like a remarkable departure from tradition, one draft letter of intent tells the Department of Education not to seek federal money to support civics education. Evidently we’re now afraid the money coming from Uncle Sam (and Uncle Joe!) will preach communism and critical race theory:

The intent of JCA is that no applications whatsoever for federal grants in American history or civics education ought to be made until such time as the South Dakota Legislature has disposed of legislative proposals pertaining to these topics during its 2022 Legislative session. In order to help clarify the concerns behind this intent, this letter will itemize several specific grant types within this broader category.

The JCA anticipates that legislation barring certain practices often collectively referred to as “action civics” or “project-based civics” from South Dakota’s education system. The anticipated legislation would also bar from South Dakota’s education system training in, or curricula infused with, certain concepts often characterized individually or collectively as “Critical Race Theory.” It is the intent of JCA that applications for grants that would violate any of the prohibitions contained in this anticipated legislation should be eschewed until the South Dakota Legislature has had an opportunity to consider and dispose of legislative proposals pertaining to such topics during its 2022 session.

The JCA also notes that on April 19, 2021 the Biden administration issued a proposed rule that itemized priorities for grants in “American History and Civics Education.” It is the intent of the JCA that no grants whose priorities will be governed by the current version, or any future or finalized version, of this proposed rule shall be applied for until the South Dakota Legislature has had an opportunity to consider and dispose of legislative proposals pertaining to education in American history and civics during its 2022 session.

The JCA further notes that two bills currently pending in Congress, the Civics Secures Democracy Act and the Civics Learning Act, would fund numerous grants in American history and civics. It is the intent of the JCA that no grants funded under the Civics Secures Democracy Act or the Civics Learning Act, should they become law, shall be applied for until the South Dakota Legislature has had an opportunity to consider and dispose of legislative proposals pertaining to education in American history and civics during its 2022 session.

Please note that the specific examples cited above are offered in order to clarify, illuminate, and explicate the JCA’s intent. That intent reaches beyond those specific examples and includes an intent to bar any applications whatsoever by the South Dakota Department of Education, or any other agency or division of government in South Dakota, for federal grants in the areas of education in American history or civics.

Note as well that, in view of the complex and sensitive issues at play in current controversies and pending legislative proposals regarding the teaching of American history and civics, it is the intention of the JCA that, even after proposed legislation on these topics is acted upon in the 2022 South Dakota legislative session, the Department of Education should continue to consult with JCA before it applies for any federal grants in the areas of American history or civics education in the years ahead [Joint Appropriations Committee, draft letter of intent to Department of Education, May 2021].

Oh, for George’s sake (and Thomas’s, and James’s, and Alexander’s, and Ben’s…).

In her own half-hearted, slow-moving, and low-funded push for more civics education, Governor Kristi Noem has called for educators to give students more first-hand experience in civic engagement. One would think that helping students learn civics through action, through projects in their community, would be exactly what the Governor and every responsible educator and patriot would want:

Project-based civics of the sort mandated by the bill is most effective when it prioritizes youth voice and agency. One approach to project-based civics is Action Civics, which involves concrete action in the community and engaging with government officials to pursue actual solutions.

When taught well, Action Civics can result in extraordinary outcomes for our students and our communities. It can also help address disparities across income and race that have historically denied underserved students access to high-quality civic education.

Across the Commonwealth, we’re seeing prime examples of what committed educators and students can achieve through the kind of civic education mandated by the proposed legislation. In Lowell, the school district has partnered with Generation Citizen to adopt its curriculum and make Action Civics a graduation requirement for all students in high school.

Students in Lowell are identifying issues that affect their community and spearheading initiatives to bring about lasting change. Last year, they partnered with city officials to institute a successful gun buy-back program, set up a community food bank at the high school, and studied ways to combat the opioid epidemic in their city.

In taking tangible, informed civic action, these young people grow as leaders, refine key skills such as deliberation and collaboration, build coalitions with diverse stakeholders, acquire first-hand knowledge of the political process, and—most importantly—develop a profound sense that their words and deeds matter, and can make a difference.

Take it from former student Carla Duran Capellan: “As a high school senior, I didn’t believe that I could make a change in my community or in this country. That quickly changed. After three months of hard work, learning how to do research, how to advocate for change, and how to contact and convince people in power, I learned that everything is possible when you know how to advocate” [Alan Solomont and Arielle Jennings, “Training Citizens, One Student at a Time,” Commonwealth, 2018.03.03].

But propose active, practical learning like that, and conservatives turn “action civics” and “project-based civics” into code words to mong their fear that leftists will co-opt the schools and turn children into thoughtful little patriots who appreciate the value of community and government.

“Critical race theory” is another code phrase adopted by conservatives to avoid having conversations about the apartheid they are imposing to cling to their white privilege. Like Kristi Noem, our Appropriators in this letter of intent project the divisiveness sown by their party’s racist insurrectionist base onto fair-minded educators who are just trying to teach basic historical fact—that racism has shaped a lot of what this country is—and guide students toward forming a more perfect Union.

Conservatives find critical race theory and anti-racism in President Biden’s proposed “American History and Civics Education” priorities and go ape-bleep (I gratefully steal the term from the estimable Nina Totenberg). All the President’s Department of Education proposes is that teachers help make this country less racist and less stupid. Here are the criteria for projects in the areas of “incorporat[ing] racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse perspectives into teaching and learning“:

(a) Take into account systemic marginalization, biases, inequities, and discriminatory policy and practice in American history;

(b) Incorporate racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse perspectives and perspectives on the experience of individuals with disabilities;

(c) Encourage students to critically analyze the diverse perspectives of historical and contemporary media and its impacts;

(d) Support the creation of learning environments that validate and reflect the diversity, identities, and experiences of all students; and

(e) Contribute to inclusive, supportive, and identity-safe learning environments [Federal Register, Proposed Rules, Vol. 86, No. 73, Monday, April 19, 2021, p. 20349].

The President’s civics proposal also prioritizes “promoting information literacy skills,” which evidently drives fear into the hearts of our conservative Appropriators, because heavens forfend that we teach kids to recognize total malarkey on the Internet; GOP apartheid depends on being able to lie unabashedly in the media and not face consequences. The info-literacy portion of the proposal offers these criteria:

(a) Evaluating sources and evidence using standards of proof;

(b) Understanding their own biases when reviewing information, as well as uncovering and recognizing bias in primary and secondary sources;

(c) Synthesizing information into cogent communications; and

(d) Understanding how inaccurate information may be used to manipulate individuals, and developing strategies to recognize accurate and inaccurate information [Federal Register, 2021.04.19, p. 20350].

Yeah, South Dakota will have none of that cultural conscientiousness or information literacy in its classrooms! Begone, filthy federal money trying to change us for the better!

The Civics Secures Democracy Act is just a bill, not a law; it hasn’t even had a hearing yet, so there’s no money for South Dakota’s DOE to apply for yet. But it has the co-sponsorship of Republican Senator John Cornyn from Texas, who along with prime sponsor Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware says we shouldn’t be afraid of serious and instructive discussions of our checkered history:

CORNYN: Ours is a government of the people, by the people or for the people, as Lincoln said. But we can’t govern ourselves if we don’t have knowledge of our foundational principles or our history.

COONS: If we don’t train young people in civics and how to participate, then we can’t be that surprised when our political discourse breaks down.

…INSKEEP: You know, I’m glad you mentioned those disagreements because if you start talking about history, Senator Cornyn mentioned Texas’ independence from Mexico. That’s a story about which you can have many different perspectives. You could have more perspectives about the Confederacy and the Civil War. Under this proposal, what is the government supposed to do when somebody asks for a grant to study the Confederacy in a certain way, say?

CORNYN: Well, I think, you know, part of living in a free society and part of critical thinking is to have those conversations. We’re not perfect, and certainly our history reflects that. And there’s a lot in our history to be ashamed of, but hopefully to learn from, too.

…CORNYN: You know, this idea that we’re going to live our lives without finding somebody or something we disagree with is just a fantasy. And we need to disabuse young people at an early point in their lives that they’re going to encounter people different from themselves, with different experiences and different points of view, but that’s what it means to grow up and to mature and become more wise and to learn to live together and to try to build consensus, rather than just have separate lanes so that we all sort of operate or travel in [Steve Inskeep, “Civics Secures Democracy Act Proposes Grants to Support Civics Education,” NPR: Weekend Edition, 20210.04.14].

Our Appropriators evidently think that taking federal money from a bill with bipartisan support to promote more discussion and critical thinking will be bad for South Dakota.

The Civics Learning Act has all Democrats behind it. It proposes a measly $30M to support classroom civics projects that may include…

(A) hands-on civic engagement activities for teachers and students;

(B) activities about the history and principles of the Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights;

(C) before-school, during-school, after-school, and extracurricular activities;

(D) activities that include service learning and community service projects that are linked to school curriculum;

(E) activities that encourage and support student participation in school governance; and

(F) online and video game based learning [H.R. 400, 117th Congress, as drafted and introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, 2021.01.21].

To oppose such activities in the classroom, our Appropriators must either read words into these bills that aren’t there or fear or hate effective, hands-on, reality-based civics education.

But you have your orders, Department of Education: don’t go looking for any federal money to support civics education, not until our lunkhead legislators have a chance to paraphrase their right-wing newsletters into campaign speeches on the House and Senate floor in 2022 instead of solving real problems and fostering engaged, informed citizenship.