Arkansas prison bill advances amid tribal land dispute
Why it matters: The contentious 3,000-bed project's location is opposed by many area residents, who were surprised by Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders' October announcement that the state had purchased land for the project.
Many lawmakers and public safety officials note the need for more state prison capacity as inmates wait in local jails, creating overcrowding at the county level.
State of play: Members of the Chickamauga tribe are buried on the land, Chief Jimmie Kersh told the Democrat-Gazette on Wednesday.
"These are the graves of our people. … The sacredness of this area is amazing," he said.
The 815-acre site was formerly the Toby Breeden Ranch and was purchased by the state for $2.95 million.
A state Department of Corrections spokesperson told the paper there's been no evidence of a burial site.
A state site assessment doesn't mention burial sites, artifacts or archaeological features, and a Sanders spokesperson called the tribe's claim "absurd."
The latest: Thursday's appropriations bill is the second attempt to earmark money for the project. The budget committee voted down a $330 million proposal in late February due to a lack of a firm estimate on the project's construction costs.
The following week, the state's contracted construction management firm provided a letter estimating the cost at $825 million.
In response, Sen. Jonathan Dismang (R-Little Rock) filed SB354, seeking appropriations "not to exceed" $750 million, which takes into account $75 million already set aside.
What they're saying:"While we aren't privy to the tribe's internal affairs, we think this is yet another example of the importance of doing due diligence prior to spending taxpayers' money purchasing property for a theoretical prison," Adam Watson, executive director of Gravel & Grit, an advocacy group that opposes the project.
"Projects of this nature demand local input and cooperation, to understand and avoid cultural and other issues," Watson told Axios, adding that the appropriations recommendation is "shortsighted."
The other side:"This is a strong step forward toward the Governor's goal of building a safer, stronger Arkansas, and the Governor encourages all members of the General Assembly to support our county judges, sheriffs, and law enforcement and finally address Arkansas' chronic prison bed shortage," a Sanders spokesperson said to Axios about the appropriations bill.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
a few seconds ago
- Axios
6 states lead U.S. with most unauthorized immigrants: Pew
California and Texas are among the six states where the majority of the nation's record 14 million unauthorized immigrants live, though more are moving to other states, a new Pew study finds. The big picture: The states have consistently had the most unauthorized immigrants since at least 1980, but they are no longer the only draw as unauthorized immigrants have moved to other states amid economic transformation and new networks. Why it matters: The report highlights the historic rise in unauthorized immigrants during President Biden's first two years in office, fueling the backlash that helped Donald Trump's return to the White House as Latinos in South Texas began moving to the GOP. Polls showed that Latinos who said they support building a border wall and deporting all undocumented immigrants jumped by at least 10 points since 2021, after the significant increase in unauthorized immigrants began. By the numbers: California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey and Illinois were home to nearly 8 million unauthorized immigrants in 2023, according to Pew Research Center estimates released Thursday. That's 56% of the total unauthorized immigrant population in the U.S, compared to 80% in 1990. The latest tally found that California led the nation with 2.3 million unauthorized immigrants, followed by Texas with 2.1 million — only a 200,000-person difference. That's a dramatic shift from 2017, when California had 1.2 million more. State of play: The U.S. unauthorized immigrant population is far less concentrated than in the past, growing in 32 states from 2021 to 2023, Pew found. The population shifts happened as worker shortages and growth continue in industries like construction, agriculture and oil and gas. Zoom in: Florida saw around 700,000 unauthorized immigrants during that two-year span, followed by Texas, with 450,000 more. Unauthorized immigrant populations grew by 75,000 or more in eight states — New Jersey, Illinois, Georgia, North Carolina, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Ohio. An Axios analysis found that Florida had the highest percentage of unauthorized immigrants among its total population, with 7.1%. Nevada was second with 6.9%, followed by Texas (6.7%) and New Jersey (6.5%). Zoom out: The number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. rose to a record 14 million in 2023, sparked by migration from countries other than Mexico, the Pew analysis said. The increase was also driven by two consecutive years of record growth, according to the report. Economic and political upheaval in Africa, Asia, and Latin America — and the perception that President Biden's lifting of immigration barriers would make it easy to enter the U.S. — helped drive unprecedented migration, analysts say.
Axios
15 minutes ago
- Axios
Transgender District launches emergency fund amid cuts
San Francisco's historic Transgender District is fighting for its place in the city with a new fund aimed at countering cuts that have forced it to scale back services. Why it matters: The district was founded in 2017 — the first of its kind in the world — and works to support trans and nonbinary people, a mission its leaders say has gained renewed urgency amid an influx of LGBTQ+ people from red states. State of play: The district had some grants rescinded earlier this year while philanthropic support dropped locally and nationwide, according to co-executive director Breonna McCree. "We need support in real time to continue the vital work that we were doing," McCree told Axios. The latest: The Transgender District is launching a multi-year emergency fund in a bid to secure long-term survival. The Riot Fund, unveiled ahead of the district's annual Riot Party, aims to raise $100,000 over the next three years to help buffer budget shortfalls. At the Riot Party, which honors the legacy of one of the first documented LGBTQ+ uprisings in U.S. history, attendees will be asked to contribute what they can. It's part of a broader effort to diversify the district's funding sources, co-executive director Carlo Gómez Arteaga told Axios. Friction point: Most of the district's funding thus far has relied on government sources — primarily at the local level. Mayor Daniel Lurie's budget restructuring, however, led to cuts that forced the district to scale back services. Zoom in: The district has had to pause its flagship entrepreneurship accelerator and was unable to renew its rent stabilization program, which aims to address the economic disparities that contribute to higher risks of housing insecurity for trans and nonbinary people. Other impacted programs include its social justice fellowship and wellness and safety initiatives like Name & Gender Marker Change Clinics, which help people update legal documents to reflect the name and gender aligned with their identity. What they're saying:"Our community is very nuanced, and we need different pathways for entry to support," Gómez Arteaga said. "The more pathways to entry to support, the greater likelihood that person will get the support systems that they need." Young trans children should grow up knowing "they can be more than just activists, that they can follow their dreams and not have to fight for their lives all the time," he added. Between the lines: With escalating anti-trans legislation across the U.S., San Francisco has seen a "great migration" of trans and nonbinary people fleeing red states, McCree noted. Many are often unable to contend with the Bay Area's high costs of living right off the bat. That's increased the urgency of bolstering the social services infrastructure, local LGBTQ+ advocates have told Axios. What's next: The Riot Party takes place 4–9pm Saturday at 981 Mission St. It's co-produced with the all-Black drag show Reparations and will feature a lineup of performers that includes Nicki Jizz, Naomi Smalls, Redbone and more.
Axios
30 minutes ago
- Axios
What historians say is at risk if Trump expands his culture war beyond Smithsonian
Politics & Policy A White House official told Axios that President Trump intends to expand his review of American museums for "woke" ideology beyond the Smithsonian Institution. Why it matters: The size and scope of Trump's inquiries represents an unprecedented level of museum oversight in the nearly 250 years of American democracy, historians say. It also represents an escalation of the president's attack on cultural institutions. Here's what historians and curators fear could happen if Trump reframes museums through his perspective. What exactly does the president have in mind? Trump said that the "Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL" on Truth Social earlier this week. He then directed his attorneys to conduct a comprehensive review of the museum system, similar to the process officials have conducted at colleges and universities. What they're saying:"President Trump will explore all options and avenues to get the Woke out of the Smithsonian and hold them accountable," a White House official told Axios. "He will start with the Smithsonian and then go from there," they continued. Reality check: The Smithsonian is not a federal agency under control of the president, according to the institution. It's an independent institution, governed by a Board of Regents, which is composed of seventeen members, including the Vice President. Trump has no authority over private museums. Yes, but: The president could freeze the federal funding that some private museums receive, the way he has for schools that don't align with his anti-diversity views on education. What does Trump's perception of American history look like? Trump claims that there has been a "widespread effort to rewrite our Nation's history" over the past decade. He insists that these efforts "undermine" America's achievements by casting its founding principles as "inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed." Historians say the administration's singular, sanitized approach to the past, focusing solely on America's positive moments misses out on the nuance of American history and excludes the lived experiences of Black, Indigenous, Latino, and LGBTQ+ people. Friction point:"That is anti-democratic," Beth English, executive director of the Organization of American Historians told Axios, referring to the administration's push to stifle and sanitize information, debate and historical facts. "It's not education, right?" English questioned. "It begins to kind of veer into the space of indoctrination, selecting, sort of a selective memory of what is and isn't going to be part of our national story." Why is Trump's push to install political appointees to review museums problematic? Curators said distilling history into accurate, engaging examples that the public can understand requires a level of expertise that an untrained political appointee likely lacks. The majority of curators at national museums have PhDs, or have been trained in museum studies through rigorous degree programs and research. "It's not like people are creating exhibitions to tell a story, to win a political agenda," Omar Eaton-Martinez, former board president of the Association of African American Museums said. "People are actually curating exhibitions based on scholarship that is supported by evidence," he continued. Don't museums reframe and reevaluate history all the time? Historians say museums expanding their collections isn't evidence of nefarious behavior, but rather, it's simply how the static nature of history grows. Zoom out: Collections have increasingly included the perspectives of sociologists, psychologists and other social scientists over the past few decades, in addition to more thorough reviews of census records, genealogy, oral histories, archeology, objects, and images. "We're constantly building on prior scholarship to help ask more nuanced questions about a topic," Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association said. "We're always peeling back the layers of the onion, so to speak." Black, Indigenous and Latin scholars have been digging into their respective histories for centuries, and those experiences have been recognized and incorporated into museums in recent decades. That includes history that was once ignored, such as the burning of records in thriving Black neighborhoods such as the massacres in Tulsa, Oklahoma or Rosewood, Florida; the forced removal of Indigenous nations from one part of America to another during the " trail of tears"; and urban renewal projects to upgrade cities that ultimately gentrify communities of color. What funding and programs has Trump already taken aim at? The Trump administration has taken aggressive action to reduce the staffing and funding available for the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS,) the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts. Stunning stat: IMLS's acting director testified in court that the administration cancelled roughly 92% of the agency's Grants to States. Only 100 grants remain out of the original 1,200 managed by the institute prior to Trump's executive order. The president also attempted to fire Kim Sajet, the director of the Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery, earlier this year due to her support of diversity initiatives, despite not having the authority to do so. The Smithsonian has legal authority over personnel decisions, but Sajet eventually decided to step down in the weeks following Trump's announcement. What other times has an American museum pivoted after political influence? An exorbitant amount of debate goes into exhibit decision-making, so museums have already determined the best way to display potential controversies. When museums modify exhibits, it's typically due to public pressure, and has never been under significant force from the president. Case in point: The Smithsonian's 90s exhibit on Enola Gay, the B-29 bomber that dropped the atomic bomb, sparked opposition from veterans and members of Congress on how to interpret the bomb's dropping and America's role in World War II. The bottom line:"These kinds of controversies exist frequently, and that's a good thing, because public debate about the nation's past is healthy," James Grossman, former executive director of the American Historical Association told Axios. "But the President of the United States has no business telling museums what to exhibit, telling teachers what to teach, and has no business telling Americans what to think," Grossman continued.
