Raskin Proposes Smithsonian Exhibit to Archive Trump-Era Propaganda Amid Funding Threats

Key points

• Rep. Jamie Raskin introduced the 'Preserving and Remembering the History of Trump and other Tyrants Act,' directing the Smithsonian to collect and preserve artifacts related to the rise of governmental propaganda during the Trump presidencies.
• The legislation specifically targets the preservation of banners bearing President Trump’s face displayed outside federal agencies and warning signs placed outside the National Museum of American History by the Department of the Interior.
• The bill also mandates the National Park Service to remove any signage erected near the National Museum of American History without congressional consent, aiming to counter what Raskin describes as an assault on American history.
• The proposal includes collecting media still images, videos, and personal narratives from citizens who resisted authoritarianism, creating a permanent exhibition at the National Museum of American History.
• Raskin framed the legislation as a countermeasure to Trump’s efforts to censor and 'whitewash' history, arguing that preserving these artifacts is essential to preventing future authoritarianism.

Background

This legislative proposal follows a series of recent conflicts between the Trump administration and the Smithsonian. In September 2026, the Department of the Interior outlined plans to install 12 temporary warning signs outside the National Museum of American History, citing Trump’s March 2025 executive order 'Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.' Additionally, the administration has faced legal hurdles regarding other DC projects, including a proposed triumphal arch, with recent Supreme Court rulings complicating preservation lawsuits.

How outlets are covering it

The Atlantic reports that the White House is using a 'quiet' funding tactic, with the Office of Management and Budget conditioning nearly $190 million in Smithsonian funding on compliance with Trump’s executive order accusing the museum of spreading 'divisive narratives.' In contrast, ArtDependence highlights Raskin’s proactive legislative response, framing the administration’s actions as 'propaganda' and 'authoritarian narcissism.' While The Atlantic emphasizes the legal and budgetary pressure being applied to the Smithsonian, ArtDependence focuses on the symbolic and historical preservation aspect of Raskin’s bill, portraying the administration’s moves as an attempt to control the national narrative through censorship.

Why it matters

This conflict highlights a deepening struggle over the control of historical narrative and cultural institutions in the United States. The use of budget mechanisms to influence museum content and the legislative push to preserve controversial artifacts as historical evidence reflect a broader tension between executive power and institutional autonomy. The outcome could set precedents for how future administrations interact with federal museums and the preservation of political history.

What to watch

The legislation will now move through the congressional process, where it may face opposition from the Trump administration and its allies. The Smithsonian may face continued pressure from the White House regarding the conditioned funding, potentially leading to legal challenges or further political disputes. The National Park Service’s response to the mandate to remove unauthorized signage will also be a key development to watch.