logo
Lawmakers revisit bills to ensure diverse histories are taught in Maine schools

Lawmakers revisit bills to ensure diverse histories are taught in Maine schools

Yahoo23-04-2025

(Photo by Getty Images)
Lawmakers are, again, trying to ensure that the already required teachings of Wabanaki and African American studies are effectively and accurately included in Maine school curricula. Some are also seeking to add Asian history into the statewide learning results.
Sponsors described the public hearings for three of the four bills in the Education Committee on Tuesday as 'déjà vu,' as the earlier iterations nearly passed last session but died due to procedural disagreements.
Now these proposals are being weighed as the federal government has set out to eradicate diversity efforts in public schools. The concept of diversity, equity and inclusion was on some committee members' minds, with Rep. Barbara Bagshaw (R-Windham) requesting how much money Maine has used from the federal government and taxpayers for DEI.
But DEI is not what these bills are after, their sponsors explained.
'This is not diversity, equity, inclusion,' Sen. Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Portland) said plainly. 'This is a uniquely American story that's not like any other story that must be told.'
Talbot Ross, who is again proposing an African American studies advisory council to ensure the learning requirements that became law in 2021 are being met, said the issue at hand is follow through.
'We'll continue to see these bills year after year after year if you don't fund the financial and human resources to implement them,' Talbot Ross said. 'It is a waste of this Legislature's time, by the way, to continue to do our work this way.'
As the state faces a substantial budget deficit, the fiscal notes of these bills will be up for debate and sponsors acknowledged that there will be give and take. 'But I just don't want to see any of this, that's already law, stalled any further,' Talbot Ross said.
The bills' sponsors are also intent on not repeating what they view as another past inadequacy: combining legislation, as proposals to ensure effective implementation of Wabanaki and African American studies were consolidated last session.
'To merge the bills would be to undermine the logistical purpose of each bill,' said Rep. Ellie Sato (D-Gorham), sponsor of the bill to add Asian history into the statewide learning results.
'Learning about Asian American history in schools will help other Asian adoptees like me learn to accept their identity,' YuJi Smith, a tenth grader from Edgecomb, told the Education Committee.
YuJi and her mother, Kimberly Smith, testified in support of LD 957, which would require Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander history to be included in the next review of content standards and performance indicators.
The intention behind LD 957, sponsored by Sato and bipartisan cosponsors, is underscored by the 2022 Social Tracking of Asian Americans in the U.S. Index, which found that education is the highest recommended solution to combat anti-Asian racism and found significant gaps in knowledge around AANHPI history, Sato said.
Through tears, Kimberly Smith told lawmakers about how her daughter has experienced racism, increasingly so since the COVID-19 pandemic.
'We have all seen the rise of anti-Asian bullying violence and racism since COVID and my concern is with the current national politics of othering,' Smith said. 'This situation is only going to get worse.'
LD 957 is about inclusion not division, said Marpheen Chann, executive director of Khmer Maine, a community-based organization supporting Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander communities.
'It's about equipping our young people with knowledge, not ideology,' Chann said.
Grace Valenzuela, executive director of communications and family community partnerships for Portland Public Schools who came to Maine in 1986 from the Philippines, said she's seen firsthand the power of students seeing themselves reflected in curriculum.
'It affirms their place in our shared story, and it fosters empathy in their peers,' Valenzuela said.
However, should this bill pass, schools administrators and others are anticipating familiar challenges with ensuring effective implementation.
Eileen King, deputy executive director of the Maine School Management Association, raised concern about LD 957 being a mandate to require curriculum development possibly without additional resources.
'We have seen how similar efforts in the past – such as the 2001 Wabanaki Studies law – have resulted in poor implementation due to wavering state commitments,' King said, 'and our associations are concerned that this bill could be met with a similar fate, as local districts may struggle to implement it without strong funding to develop curriculum and share it with teachers and curricular leaders in every school district.'
Last year, a bill to establish a commission on Wabanaki and African American studies and a bill to pilot Wabanaki-centered curricula for Indigenous students attending public high schools both ultimately died without final action.
The bills initially passed both chambers of the Maine Legislature and were funded by the budget committee, though at lesser amounts than initially proposed, however lawmakers did not take the final approval votes necessary to pass the measures by the time the Legislature finally adjourned.
These measures, in slightly different forms, are back for consideration this session.
African American studies
LD 1202, sponsored by Talbot Ross, would create the African American Studies Advisory Council to serve as a resource for educators, schools and the Department of Education to ensure the implementation of the curricula in accordance with existing state law.
It also directs the Maine Department of Education to develop professional development opportunities on the subject for educators and the State Board of Education to convene a group to assess whether to include a requirement for a relevant course to be a credentialed educator in the state.
Testifying in support of the bill, Christian Cotz, acting Maine state archivist, said the teacher training is crucial.
'At the Maine State Archives, we regularly hear from Maine teachers who are seeking both resources and guidance on how to teach African American history,' Cotz said.
As she did last session during consideration of the earlier iteration of this bill, Rep. Sheila Lyman (R-Livermore Falls) said she had concerns about focusing studies on any one particular group.
'All their journeys matter,' Lyman said, listing off groups who contributed to Maine's history, such as Irish immigrants. 'Would you agree that we need to be cautionary on any judgments that we make?'
Talbot Ross described that line of questioning as conflating a number of things. Pointing to the joint session for Franco American Day on Wednesday, the senator said if Lyman's philosophy were to be followed that would mean the Legislature couldn't honor Americans of French or French-Canadian descent without also having days to honor all other ethnicities.
'This is already law,' Talbot Ross said of the required course of study. 'I'm not asking you to create a new law. I'm asking you to help me implement it.'
Lyman and Talbot Ross did align over the question of what adequate implementation looks like, which Talbot Ross said her bill seeks to answer.
The bill as currently written requires$1 million to support this work and provide grants to schools to expand or implement curricula, though Talbot Ross said she's not married to that figure.
'I remain proud of my state for taking this step forward,' Talbot Ross said. 'I hope that we can take the next step so it's not just symbolic.'
Wabanaki studies
LD 1474, sponsored by Rep. Laurie Osher (D-Orono), would permanently establish a Wabanaki studies specialist in the Maine Department of Education to ensure the standards are being met. Brianne Lolar has served in that role so far.
Like Talbot Ross, Osher emphasized that her bill is about following through on commitments the state has already made.
In order to ensure effective teaching, the bill would also direct the State Board of Education to adopt rules to require a Wabanaki studies component in the qualifications for certifying teachers.
School boards and superintendents are largely in support of the bill but object to adding the qualification for teaching certification due to existing challenges with filling the workforce, according to King with the Maine School Management Association.
School districts have failed to consistently and appropriately include Wabanaki studies in their curricula, according to a 2022 report from the Abbe Museum, ACLU of Maine, Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission and Wabanaki Alliance.
The report was not intended to be a 'gotcha' moment for these schools but a baseline to figure out how to move forward, said Maulian Bryant, executive director of the Wabanaki Alliance. Since the report, Bryant commended Lolar's work connecting Wabanaki advisors with educators and creating culturally accurate curriculum.
'By supporting LD 1474 you can ensure that the progress the Wabanaki studies specialist has made in resource development, Wabanaki knowledge being accessible and valued, and the uplifting benefits of everyone in Maine understanding more about the Indigenous stewards past and present,' Bryant said.
Wabanaki-centered curricula for Indigenous students
LD 339 would pilot a Wabanaki-centered curriculum for Wabanaki children attending public schools.
Native American students in Maine have the lowest high school graduation rate compared with other races, according to state data, and bill sponsor Rep. Michael Brennan (D-Portland) sees the bill as an initiative to address that disparity.
Brennan said he felt a strong sense of 'déjà vu' when he presented the plan on Tuesday, as it mirrors the version he put forth last year but with a different dollar amount attached. This year, Brennan is seeking $200,000 to support the development and piloting of this curricula — $100,000 for each year in the 2026-2027 biennium.
In 2019, Gov. Janet Mills repealed proficiency-based diplomas and added the ability to count equivalent standards achievement in place of course credit, which would allow for this type of build-your-own curriculum.
Calais High School near the Canadian border has made the greatest strides so far toward such offerings. Lynn Mitchell, who works for Maine Indian Education, teaches the Passamaquoddy language at Calais High School.
However, aside from Mitchell's class, Superintendent of Maine Indian Education Reza Namin said Wabanaki students attending public school are currently navigating an education system that rarely reflects their heritage and history.
'This bill represents a critical step toward addressing this long standing imbalance,' Namin said. 'A Wabanaki-centered curriculum is not merely cultural enrichment, it is an educational necessity.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Opinion - The ‘Trump did it' defense: Colleges' and companies' new excuse to roll back wokeness
Opinion - The ‘Trump did it' defense: Colleges' and companies' new excuse to roll back wokeness

Yahoo

time15 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Opinion - The ‘Trump did it' defense: Colleges' and companies' new excuse to roll back wokeness

'Trump made me do it.' Across the country, this is a virtual mantra being mouthed everywhere from businesses to higher education. Corporations are eliminating woke programs. Why? Trump did it. Universities are eliminating DEI offices and cracking down on campus extremism. Trump did it. Democratic politicians are abandoning far-left policies. Trump did it. For those who lack both courage or conviction, the claim of coercion is often the next best thing. The 'TDI defense' is born. Of course, they did not invent Trump, but they needed him. For years, schools like Harvard and Columbia ignored warnings about the rising antisemitism on campuses. They refused to punish students engaged in criminal conduct, including occupying and trashing buildings. These administrators did not want to risk being tagged by the far-left mob for taking meaningful action. Then the election occurred, and suddenly they were able to blame Trump for doing what they should have been doing all along. Administrators are now cracking down on extreme elements on campuses. At the same time, hundreds of schools are closing DEI offices around the country. Again, most are not challenging the Trump administration's orders on DEI or seeking to adopt more limited responses. They are all in with the move, while professing that they have little choice. In other words, schools are increasingly turning to TDI to end DEI. The legal landscape has changed with an administration committed to opposing many DEI programs as discriminatory and unlawful. However, it is the speed and general lack of resistance that is so notable. In most cases, the Trump administration did not have to ask twice. Trump seemed to 'have them at hello,' as if they were longing for a reason to reverse these trends. Many will continue to fight this fight surreptitiously. For example, shortly before the Trump election, the University of North Carolina System Board of Governors voted to ban DEI and focus on 'institutional neutrality.' Yet, even Administrators emboldened by the TDI defense are finding resistance in their ranks. For example, UNC Asheville Dean of Students Megan Pugh was caught on videotape, saying that eliminating these offices means nothing: 'I mean we probably still do anyway… but you gotta keep it quiet.' She added, 'I love breaking rules.' The Board, perhaps not feeling the same thrill, reportedly responded by firing her. The same pattern is playing out in businesses. Over the last few weeks, companies ranging from Amazon to IBM have removed references to DEI programs or policies. Bank of America explained, 'We evaluate and adjust our programs in light of new laws, court decisions, and, more recently, executive orders from the new administration.' Once established, these DEI offices tended to expand as an irresistible force within their institutions and companies. Full-time diversity experts demanded additional hirings and policies on hiring, promotion, and public campaigns. Since these experts were tasked with finding areas for 'reform,' their proposals were treated as extensions of that mandate. To oppose the reforms was to oppose the cause. While some executives and administrators supported such efforts, others simply lacked the courage to oppose them. No one wanted to be accused of being opposed to 'equity' or being racist, sexist, or homophobic. The results were continually expanding programs impacting every level of businesses and institutions. Then Trump showed up. Suddenly, these executives and administrators had an excuse to reverse this trend. They could also rely on court decisions that have undermined longstanding claims of advocates that favoring certain groups at the expense of others was entirely lawful. This week, the Supreme Court added to these cases with its unanimous ruling in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, to remove impediments to lawsuits by members of majority groups who are discriminated against. For many years, lower courts have required members of majority groups (white, male, or heterosexual) to shoulder an added burden before they could establish claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In a decision written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court rejected that additional burden and ordered that everyone must be treated similarly under the law. Many commentators noted that the ruling further undermined the rationales for disparate treatment based on race or other criteria within DEI. In other words, more of these programs are likely to be the subject of federal investigations and lawsuits. Of course, if these executives and administrators were truly committed to the programs in principle, they could resolve to fight in the courts. The alternative is just to blame Trump and restore prior policies that enforce federal standards against all discriminatory or preferred treatment given to employees based on race, sex, religion, or other classifications. Former Vice President Hubert Humphrey once observed that 'to err is human. To blame someone else is politics.' That is evident among politicians. For years, many moderate Democrats voted to support far-left agendas during the Biden administration, lacking the courage or principles to oppose the radical wing of the Democratic Party. Now, some are coming forward to say that the party has 'lost touch with voters.' Rather than admit that their years of supporting these policies were wrong, they blame Trump and argue that the party must move toward the center to survive. The calculus is simple: You never act on principle when you can blame a villain instead. It is not a profile of courage but one of simple convenience. No need for admissions or responsibility — just TDI and done. Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of 'The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Biden should've been given multiple cognitive tests while in the White House, Obama's doctor says
Biden should've been given multiple cognitive tests while in the White House, Obama's doctor says

New York Post

timean hour ago

  • New York Post

Biden should've been given multiple cognitive tests while in the White House, Obama's doctor says

WASHINGTON — Joe Biden's doctor should've made him undergo multiple neurocognitive tests during his presidency, former President Barack Obama's physician told The Post. Jeffrey Kuhlman, who served as Obama's doctor from 2009 to 2013, highlighted in a phone interview Saturday how Biden — and all politicians over the age of 70 — should be submitted to 'a few hours' of annual mental exams and release those results to the public. 'My position is that a 78-year-old candidate, Trump at the time, an 82-year-old president [Biden] would both benefit from neurocognitive testing,' said Kuhlman, who published a book 'Transforming Presidential Healthcare,' recommending that in November 2024. Advertisement 'Any politician over the age of 70 has normal age-related cognitive decline,' Kuhlman said, pointing out that he's been making the recommendation for nearly a year — and did so in a New York Times op-ed on the day Biden bowed out of the 2024 race. 'If you look at his three physicals that were released as president, Dr. [Kevin] O'Connor wrote five to six pages, single-spaced. He referenced 10 to 20 specialist physicians.' 5 Joe Biden's doctor should've made him undergo multiple neurocognitive tests during his presidency, former President Barack Obama's physician told The Post. Getty Images Advertisement But the tests did not include any neurocognitive work, nor did Biden submit to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, as Trump did in his first term, a two-minute screening comprising around 30 questions to test for signs of dementia, according to Obama's ex-physician. 'I have no doubt that President Trump aced it,' he said of the test, but said the current White House, in the interest of full transparency, should also release CT scans that were taken after the assassination attempt against the Republican candidate in Butler, Pa., last July. Kuhlman added the Montreal Cognitive Assessment isn't adequate to determine more serious mental slippage, one of the three main areas that medical professionals should be considering when evaluating the president, along with cancer and cardiovascular issues. Memory, reasoning, speed of processing and spacial visualization all begin to decline around the age of 60, he also said. Advertisement 5 Kevin O'Connor served as Biden's doctor during his vice presidency, overlapping with Kuhlman in the White House medical unit. David Lienemann/The White House O'Connor served as Biden's doctor during his vice presidency, overlapping with Kuhlman in the White House medical unit. Kuhlman said he 'respects' O'Connor's 'medical judgment,' but also told The Washington Post: 'Sometimes those closest to the tree miss the forest.' In apparently his only media interview during Biden's term, O'Connor insisted to The Post in July 2024 that the president's cognitive health was 'excellent' — days after being forced out of a re-election bid and replaced by Vice President Kamala Harris due to a dismal debate performance June 27. Advertisement 5 Kuhlman said he 'respects' O'Connor's 'medical judgment,' but also told The Washington Post: 'Sometimes those closest to the tree miss the forest.' Getty Images In a break from his predecessors, Biden's doctor never answered questions from the press in the White House briefing room but submitted annual physical reports that noted some physical ailments without addressing the president's mental acuity, other than to say he was 'fit for duty.' 'The president doesn't need a cognitive test,' claimed White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in a February 2024 briefing following what would be Biden's final physical as commander-in-chief. 'He passes a cognitive test every day.' White House visitor logs show the oldest-ever president did submit to evaluation from an expert in Parkinson's disease and 20-year veteran of Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Dr. Kevin Cannard, but O'Connor said the January 2024 meeting was part of Biden's annual physical. 'If somebody turns up a report that Kevin Cannard said he has Parkinson's,' said Kuhlman, 'then that's a completely different story, but we have 14 years of Kevin Cannard evaluating him and that's who I would trust.' 5 O'Connor said that was part of his annual physical and ruled out a Parkinson's diagnosis, though other doctors expressed skepticism. American Osteopathic Association O'Connor said that was part of his annual physical and ruled out a Parkinson's diagnosis, though other doctors expressed skepticism. 'I could've diagnosed him from across the Mall,' neurologist Dr. Tom Pitts told NBC in July 2024, pointing to Biden's 'rigidity,' 'shuffling gait' and 'slow movement.' Advertisement Special Counsel Robert Hur, who determined that Biden 'willfully' hoarded classified documents after leaving the Obama White House, chose not to bring charges months earlier that year in February, in part because a jury would view the president as a 'sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory.' The Republican-led House Oversight Committee subpoenaed O'Connor on Thursday to appear for questioning about the former president's mental abilities on June 27. 5 The Republican-led House Oversight Committee subpoenaed O'Connor on Thursday to appear for questioning about the former president's mental abilities on June 27. AP Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) in a cover letter accompanying the subpoena suggested the doctor's past 'financial relationship with the Biden family' may have 'contributed to an effort to hide former President Biden's fitness to serve from the American people.' Advertisement Jean-Pierre, who left the Democratic Party and is publishing a tell-all book about the 'broken' Biden administration, is also expected to be hauled in for testimony. Days before a book was set to be published alleging a vast cover-up of his decline during his last two years in the White House, Biden announced that he had been diagnosed with prostate cancer that had spread to his bones. The book, 'Original Sin,' notes that O'Connor was reluctant to administer a cognitive test, according to co-authors Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson. Advertisement Kuhlman said O'Connor had conducted tests for that kind of cancer between 2009 and 2014 when they served together in the White House, but it may not have been 'worth doing in the next 10 years' based on the findings of that final exam, known as a PSA, in the vice presidency. 'I hope that Kevin O'Connor had that conversation every year with his patient, Joe Biden, and documented that in the medical record,' he said. 'If he did the PSA and chose not to release it, I don't agree with that.'

ICE Won't Rule Out Retaliating Against Immigrants Who Testify in Free Speech Case
ICE Won't Rule Out Retaliating Against Immigrants Who Testify in Free Speech Case

The Intercept

timean hour ago

  • The Intercept

ICE Won't Rule Out Retaliating Against Immigrants Who Testify in Free Speech Case

Support Us © THE INTERCEPT ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Plainclothes officers with Immigration and Customs Enforcement wait in a hallway outside of a courtroom at New York-Federal Plaza Immigration Court inside the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building in New York City on June 6, 2025. Photo: Charly Triballeau/AFP via Getty Images In March, a group of scholars filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration to block the government from detaining and deporting students and professors for speaking out about Palestine. Now, as the case heads to trial in Massachusetts federal court in July, those professors and students worry they may be targeted by immigration officials for speaking out in the courtroom on the witness stand. But the Trump administration is refusing to reassure them they won't be subject to retaliation. As attorneys for the scholars prepared to file a motion to protect their witnesses — many of whom are in the country under green cards or visas — from being detained or deported for testifying during trial, government attorneys refused to agree to such safeguards, according to recent legal filings in the case. In their refusal, government attorneys said that their clients, which include the Department of Homeland Security as well as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 'did not want to be bound by an agreement preventing them from taking action against individuals whose identities they did not know yet,' the filings said. When the scholars' attorneys clarified that the motion would only protect witnesses from being targeted for participating in the case, attorneys for DHS and ICE doubled down in their opposition to the protection and challenged them to instead have the judge decide whether to grant the order. 'Defendants' counsel reiterated that the agencies were 'not comfortable' with such a proposal,' the scholars' attorneys said in the filing, 'and advised us to 'go ahead and ask the judge to rule on it.'' Read our complete coverage The original complaint — lodged by the American Association of University Professors; its chapters at Harvard, Rutgers, and New York University; and the Middle East Studies Association — was filed days after immigration agents abducted Columbia University graduate and Palestinian organizer Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident who had recently obtained a green card. Among its defendants is Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has led the hunt for pro-Palestinian activists, including a campaign to scour social media for potential targets. The suit called such policies 'unconstitutional' and argues that the repression has 'created a climate of repression and fear on university campuses.' Since President Donald Trump's return to the White House in January, the administration has weaponized the United States' robust deportation apparatus to crack down on pro-Palestinian students and professors. The Trump administration has also punished universities for failing to address alleged antisemitism on campuses in its push to silence pro-Palestinian speech. The administration has canceled the visas of thousands of students and has cut federal funding from universities. Aside from Khalil, immigration agents have also abducted other students and scholars including Georgetown University scholar Badar Khan Suri, Tufts University graduate student Rümeysa Öztürk, and fellow Columbia student protest leader Mohsen Mahdawi. While Suri, Öztürk, and Mahdawi have since been released, Khalil remains detained in a private immigration jail in Louisiana. The March complaint and supporting legal filings highlight more than a dozen students and professors, most of whom are green-card holders, who said Khalil's disappearance and the Trump administration's policy of targeting pro-Palestinian protesters has prevented them from attending actions, posting on social media, and continuing their research and writing on Israel and Palestine. One scholar said they had their scholarship on the topic removed from online and had turned down speaking opportunities 'due to fears that they will be targeted for deportation based on that writing and advocacy.' The motion filed on Wednesday by free-speech attorneys requests a protective order from the court, preventing possible government retaliation. In addition to the threats of deportation, many told attorneys they worried testifying would impact their future applications to become naturalized citizens. 'Noncitizen witnesses contacted by counsel have expressed concern that, if they testify at trial or are otherwise identified in connection with this case, Defendants will retaliate against them by arresting, detaining, or deporting them, denying them reentry into the United States, revoking their visas, adjusting their legal permanent resident status, or denying their pending or future naturalization applications,' the motion read. Aside from cases involving pro-Palestine protesters, ICE agents have shown in recent months they are primed for such courthouse arrests. Some agents have camped outside of courthouses across the U.S. to immediately detain people after judges dismiss their immigration cases, often denying their right to appeal their cases. Others have been detained and jailed in courthouse holding rooms after routine ICE check-ins and asylum hearings. The government is expected to file a response to the motion on Monday, after which the judge in the case, William Young, will rule on whether or not to grant the order protecting witnesses. Join The Conversation

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store