Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Museum Authorization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rules Committee reports museum bill amid heated dispute over site, content and presidential authority
Summary
Members clashed over an amended version of HR1329 that supporters say clarifies mission and opponents say inserts an ideological 'poison pill', omits the Latino museum and grants the president broad authority over site and design; the committee reported a closed rule sending the measure to the floor.
The Rules Committee’s second panel discussion focused on HR1329, the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum Act, and quickly turned into a protracted debate over the text that majority staff substituted onto the manager’s amendment.
Chairman Stile (House Administration) told the committee the bill designates a location on the National Mall for the museum and allows the president a 180‑day window to change the site if necessary; he described the language as placing "guardrails" around the project and said the revised text does not alter the Smithsonian’s curatorial process. Stile said the managers’ amendment emphasizes preserving, researching and presenting the "history, achievements and lived experiences of biological women in the United States."
Ranking Member Morelli and other Democrats said the majority’s substitute departs from a years‑long bipartisan process. Morelli said the revised bill omits the companion National Museum of the American Latino, grants the president "unprecedented unilateral authority" to pick a site, places control over design and construction with politically appointed boards and inserts a provision they described as an ideological "poison pill" that would dictate what the museum may present.
Several members, including Rep. Fishbach and Rep. Langworthy, argued the amended language ensures balance or a "range" of viewpoints and protects recognition of conservative women who have been overlooked. Democrats including Rep. McGovern and Rep. Scanlon argued removing references to diversity and giving executive branch committees increased control turns a bipartisan project into a partisan one.
Committee members repeatedly pointed to the political optics: opponents produced a letter signed by 146 members urging the House not to bring the amended text to the floor; supporters said the bill could be taken up under suspension but the manager’s amendment reflects adjustments recommended during the drafting process. Chairman Stile insisted the bill does not itself appropriate funds and that any future spending would go through appropriations.
After extended debate the Rules Committee adopted a closed rule that will bring HR1329 (as amended in House Administration) to the floor under the terms the Rules Committee reported. Members on both sides said they remain committed to building a women’s history museum but sharply disagreed about whether the current text preserves the bipartisan agreement that previously carried broad support.
The outcome preserves the manager’s language for floor consideration and sets the stage for additional floor amendments and public scrutiny of what the museum will include and who will decide the content and siting.
