ELCOME TO "KENTUCKY TONIGHT."

I'M RENEE SHAW.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING .

TONIGHT, A DISCUSSION ABOUT TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY, A TYPO THAT'S, GENERATING SPIRITED COMMENTARY FROM A VARIETY OF PERSPECTIVES LEGISLATORS IN 21 STATES HAVE INTRODUCED BILLS THAT WOULD RESTRICT TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY OR LIMIT HOW TEACHERS CAN DISCUSS RACISM AND SEXISM.

KENTUCKY IS ONE OF THEM.

TO DISCUSS PRE-FILED MEASURES THE KENTUCKY GENERAL ASSEMBLY, WE'RE JOINED BY STATE REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPH FISCHER, REPUBLICAN FROM FORT THOMAS AND SPONSOR OF ONE OF THE MEASURES.

STATE SENATOR GERALD NEAL, DEMOCRAT FROM LOUISVILLE.

GARY HOUCHENS, PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION AT WESTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY AND MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF SCHOLARS FOR THE BLUEGRASS INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY SOLUTIONS.

AND ANDREA ABRAMS, VICE PRESIDENT FOR DIVERSITY, INCLUSION AND EQUITY AT CENTRE .

BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THE PANEL DISCUSSION, WE WANT TO ANSWER SOME BASIC BUT COMPLEX QUESTION.

WHAT IS CRITICAL RACE THEORY A WHY IS IT SO CONTROVERSIAL?

LAST WEEK I TALKED WITH A MURRAY STATE UNIVERSITY HISTORY PROFESSOR AND AN EDUCATION FELLOW AT THE HERITAGE FOUNDATI.

FIRST, HERE'S THE TAKE OF MSU HISTORY PROFESSOR BRIAN CLARDY.

DR. BRIAN CLEARED, AN ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR HISTORY AT MURRAY STATE UNIVERSITY, THANK YOU FOR CONNECTING WITH US.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

>> AND 52U.

THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

SO I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION, IS THE DEFINITION OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY, WHAT IT IS.

IS IT AN ACADEMIC CONCEPT?

IS IT A PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPT?

IS IT AN ACTUAL THEORY?

ENLIGHTEN US.

>> I THINK IT'S ALL OF THE ABOVE.

IN THE SENSE THAT WE LOOK AT DISCIPLINES, WE LOOK AT EVENTS IN HISTORY, WE LOOK AT CONCEPTS, WE LOOK AT INSTITUTIONS, AND TRY TO DETERMINE WHAT ROLE DID RACISM, WHITE SUPREMACY AND DISCRIMINATION, IN WHAT WAYS DID THIS SHAPE THE PICTURE?

IN CHA WAYS DID THIS GIVE CONTEXT TO OUR HISTORY AND ALSO THE FUNCTIONING OR TIMES THE MALFUNCTIONING OF OUR INSTITUTIONS?

SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT'S ALL OF THE ABOVE.

>> THERE ARE SOME WHO ARE AGAINST THIS EITHER ACADEMIC CONCEPT, PHILOSOPHY, THEORY OR ALL OF THE ABOVE, BEING TAUGHT BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT IT WILL FURTHER DIVIDE THE COUNTRY THAT IS ALREADY DIVIDED ALONG SOME PRETTY STARK RACIAL AND CULTURAL DIVIDES.

YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT CONCERN, THAT THIS IS SLANTED PROPAGANDA THAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND BEING TAUGHT ALREADY IN SCHOOLS ACROSS THIS NATION.

>> WELL, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN TAUGHT BEFORE.

AND WHEN YOU UNDER WHAT'S BEEN TAUGHT BEFORE OR WHAT'S NOT BEEN TAUGHT BEFORE, THEN YOU GET AN IDEA OF WHY CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS SO IMPORTANT.

THERE WAS A STRAIN OF TEACHING WITHIN HISTORY CALLED THE LOST CAUSE, AND WE SAW IT IN DIFFERENT MOVIES LIKE GONE WITH THE WIND, WE SAW IT IN THE SCHOLARSHIP OF PEOPLE LIKE WILLIAM DUNNING AND JOHN PIKE AND SO MANY OTHER HISTORIANS THAT PAINTED A VERY ROSY SCENARIO OF HISTORY, OF SLAVERY IN PARTICULAR, SLAVERY WAS NOT IN THEIR VIEW THE CAUSE OF THE CIVIL WAR, THAT RECONSTRUCTION WAS BAD, THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PUT AN UNQUALIFIED BLACK FOLKS TO HOLD OFFICE IN THE STATE AND THAT WHITE FOLKS WERE DISENFRANCHISED.

THE CONFEDERACY WAS A GOOD THING, THAT THE OLD SOUTH WAS GLAMOROUS AND GLORIOUS AND GALLANT, AND THAT SAVES WERE VERY HAPPY BEING SLAVES UNTIL -- SLAVES WERE VERY HAPPY BEING SLAVES UNTIL THESE NORTHERN AGITATORS STARTED THE WAR.

NOW, THAT'S NOT TRUE, AND WE KNOW LOOKING BACK THAT'S NOT TRUE.

WHAT WE DO NEED TO DO IS TO GO BACK AND UNPACK THOSE THINGS, UNPLEASANT AS THEY ARE, AND TEACH THEM IN OUR SCHOOLS, THAT SLAVERY WAS A REHUMANIZING EXPERIENCE, THAT THE CONFEDERACY WAS BASED BON WHITE SUPREMACY, THAT THE CONFEDERACY WAS BASED UPON THE DISENFRANCHISEMENT OF DEPRESSING SO WAS THE POST CIVIL WAR ITSELF.

SO WE NEED TO GO BACK AND TEACH THE FACTS AND NOT THIS ROMANTICIZED AND SANITIZED VIEW OF LIFTER THAT THE DETRACTOR OF ILL CRITICAL RACE THEORY WOLVES BELIEVE.

>> THOSE WHO ARE AGAINST THE TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY IN CH12, EVEN POST SECONDARY EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS, THEY DO BELIEVE THAT ALONG WITH IT, FURTHERING DIVIDES IN THIS COUNTRY, THAT IT ALSO ESPOUSES CONCEPTS SUCH AS WHITE PRIVILEGE, WHITE GUILT, THAT IT OPPRESSES OR PROMOTES THE OPPRESSION OF ONE GROUP, ONE RACE, ONE SEX OVER ANOTHER.

>> THAT'S COMPLETELY FALSE.

TOTALLY FALSE.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE WERE TO GO BACK AND WE WERE TO LOOK AT WHY JIM CROW WAS AN INSTITUTION IN THE FIRST PLACE, IF WE GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE LEGAL AND JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS THAT MADE IT POSSIBLE, THE SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES, FERGUSON AND SO FORTH, THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN THE SOUTH THAT ALLOWED DISENFRANCHISEMENT TO HAPPEN, IT WAS DONE DELIBERATELY TO PROMOTE WHITE PRIVILEGE AND TO PROMOTE THE DISENFRANCHISEMENT AND THE MARGINALIZATION OF PEOPLE OF COLOR.

THOSE ARE FACTS.

NOW, I KNOW THAT THIS HISTORY IS UPSETTING TO SOME.

I UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE WOULD TAKE UMBRAGE TO IT.

I GET THAT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT AS A FORMER AMERICAN PRESIDENT SAID TO US, TWO FORMER PRESIDENTS, JOHN ADAMS SAID THAT THE FACTS ARE STUBBORN THINGS.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID WE CANNOT IGNORE HISTORY.

THIS IS A HISTORY THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED AND CANNOT BE SLIPPED UNDER THE RUG AND CANNOT BE GLAM RIDES NO MATTER WHAT TITLE WE GIVE TO IT.

AND IF WE CONTINUE TO IGNORE THIS HISTORY, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THAT STUDENTS OF ALL RACES ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE MISINFORMED AND IT'S ALSO GOING TO CHOKE OFF DIALOGUE.

WHAT CRITICAL RACE THEORY IN MY VIEW IS IT ALLOWS DIALOGUE, IT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO BE OPEN AND FRANK ABOUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND HOW THIS SHAPES INSTITUTIONS TODAY.

AND IF WE DON'T ADDRESS THIS RIGHT NOW AS A SOCIETY, I'M AFRAID THAT THIS DISCONNECT THAT YOU MENTION IN YOUR QUESTION IS GOING TO GET A WHOLE LOT WORSE.

>> DR. BRIAN CLARDY, ASSOCIATE PROVERBS OF HISTORY AT MURRAY STATE UNIVERSITY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

>> AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> Renee: NOW FOR A CONTRASTING VIEW ON FRIDAY I ALSO SPOKE with JONATHAN BUTCHER, THE WILL SKILLMAN FELLOW IN EDUCATION AT THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION.

MR. BUTCHER, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS AFTERNOON.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WE'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND TAKE A DEEP DIVE INTO THINGS.

I WANT TO ASK YOU WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY?

>> CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS A PHILOSOPHY OR WORLD VIEW THAT SEES EVERYTHING IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LIFE THROUGH THE LENS OF RACE, ESPECIALLY RACIAL OPPRESSION, AND IT DIVIDES THE WORLD IN BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSORS AND THOSE WHO ARE THE A PRESSED A PRESS OPPRESSED.

>> AND WHAT ARE IT THAT YOU'RE SEEING ACROSS THE NATION IN SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT STATES THAT'S GIVING YOU REASON FOR CONCERN ABOUT THE TEACHING OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY?

>> WELL, IT'S NOT ONLY A THEORY, IT'S MEANT TO BE APPLIED.

CRITICAL RACE THEORY L. THEORISTS WANT PEOPLE TO TREAT OTHERS DIFFERENTLY BASED ON THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN.

THERE ARE LESSON PLANS AROUND THE COUNTRY THAT DEAL WITH WHAT IS CALLED WHITE PRIVILEGE OR THAT MAKE THE CASE THAT THERE IS A GUILT TO BE HAD BASED ON THE COLOR OF SOMEONE'S SKIN, AND I THINK THAT THE DISCRIMINATORY IDEA IS THAT THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT HELPED TO BURY MANY YEARS AGO ARE RESURFACING NOW IN A NEW FORM OF DISCRIMINATION, AND I THINK AS AMERICANS WE SHOULD REJECT ANY FORM OF PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION.

>> DO YOU BELIEVE THAT RACISM, SYSTEMIC RACISM AND WHITE SUPREMACY STILL EXISTS IN THIS NATION?

>> WELL, I THINK THAT INDIVIDUAL RACIST ACTS STILL HAPPEN, AND THAT'S A SAD FACT OF FALLEN HUMANITY.

I THINK TO SAY AMERICA IS SYSTEMICALLY RACIST REJECTS ALL OF THE SACRIFICE AND WORK AND ACCOMPLISHMENT THAT WENT INTO PASSING THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT AND THAT CAME TO SHAPE IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

I THINK THAT IT IS VERY DIFFERENT TO CONDEMN A RACIST ACT THAN TO SAY THAT THE INSTITUTIONS IN AMERICAN LIFE TODAY ARE THEMSELVES RACIST.

AND THAT'S NOT TRUE.

OUR NATION, OUR GOVERNMENT HAS REJECTED RACISM AND HAS REJECTED PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION, AND OUR STUDENTS NEED TO BE TAUGHT THAT AMERICA'S PROMISE OF FREEDOM AND OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHARE.

THIS IS THE CIVIC MISSION OF SCHOOLS, TO LET STUDENTS KNOW THAT THERE IS AN AMERICAN DREAM THAT THEY CAN ACHIEVE AND BELONGS TO THEM, AND CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS TWISTING THIS NARRATIVE AND IS MAKING THE CASE THAT THEY ARE OPPRESSED AND PERHAPS HAVE THE ONLY CHOICE TO DISRUPT THE SYSTEMS IN WHICH THEY WERE BORN IN WHICH THEIR COMMUNITIES ARE BASED AROUND.

>> SO DO YOU BELIEVE THAT CRT, IN FACT, PROMOTES HATRED TOWARD WHITE PEOPLE?

>> I THINKITES IT CERTAINLY PROMOTES DISCRIMINATION.

I THINK IT DIVIDES PEOPLE INTO TRIBES.

AND IT SAYS AS MUCH.

THE MULTI-CULTURAL TEACHINGS AND THE ETHNIC STUDY PROGRAMS IN PLACES LIKE CALIFORNIA SAY SO DIRECTLY, THAT THERE ARE SYSTEMS OF POWER, THAT YOUR RACIAL IDENTITY IS WHAT DEFINES YOU, IDEAS SUCH AS INTERSECTIONALITIY WHICH SAYS NOT ONLY YOUR RACIAL IDENTITY BUT YOUR GENDER, COUNTRY OF ORIGIN ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE LAYERED WITH OPPRESSION THAT CAN BE LAYERED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER TO CREATE THIS CONDITION IN WHICH YOU ARE OPPRESSED BY MULTIPLE PARTS OF THE WORLD AROUND YOU.

AND THAT'S THE WRONG LESSON FOR STUDENTS TO BE LEARNING.

WE NEED TO BE LEARNING THE LESSON THAT YOU CAN CREATE YOUR FUTURE, AND THAT THE RIGHTS AND THE FREEDOM THAT WE HAVE IN AMERICA ARE WORTH DEFENDING.

>> SO YOUR OPPOSITION IS NOT BASED ON THE TEACHING OF CERTAIN EVENTS AND HISTORY, WHETHER IT IS SLAVERY, MAYBE EVEN THE FIRST ARRIVAL OF THE SLAVES IN THIS COUNTRY, 1619, JIM CROW ERA, CIVIL WAR, RECONSTRUCTION, VOTING RIGHTS, CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.

YOU'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THE TEACHING OF THOSE EVENTS.

IS THAT WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING?

>> OH, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

ALL OF THOSE THINGS SHOULD BE TAUGHT.

STUDENTS KNIFED THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING OF AMERICA'S PAST.

WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT PARTS OF AMERICA'S PAST BETRAYED OUR PROMISE OF FREEDOM AND OPPORTUNITY TO EVERYONE.

BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN SAYING THAT WE ARE SYSTEMICALLY OR AS A PART OF OUR GOVERNMENT POLICY RACIST TOWARDS PEOPLE TODAY.

THAT IS THE PART THAT THE 1619 PROJECT AND ALL OF THESE LESSONS ABOUT I HAVE WHITE PRIVILEGE, THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE TEACHING.

THEY ARE TEACHING THAT THERE ARE SYSTEMS THAT MUST BE DESTROYED BECAUSE THEY ARE EMBEDDED IN SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED YEARS AGO, THE THAT THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT HELPED TO GET RID OF, AND THAT THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT DEMONSTRATED THAT CULTURE SIMPLY NOT STAND FOR IT ANYMORE.

THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT CREATED A SET OF SHARED IDEAS THAT WE HOLD TODAY THAT ARE RESTED IN THE IDEAS OF INDIVIDUAL AGENCY AGENCY, OF FAMILY, OF BEING ABLE TO CREATE A FUTURE FOR YOURSELF BASED ON YOUR OWN ACTIONS, NOT BASED ON THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN.

>> I'M SURE THAT YOU HAVE SEEN THAT OUR SENIOR SENATOR AND THE MINORITY LEADER IN THE U.S. SENATE WEEK MITCH McCONNELL, HAS SAID THAT GOVERNMENT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE ANY BUSINESS TELLING TEACHERS WHAT TO TEACH IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS WHAT CURRICULUM TO ENDORSE, AND MANY OF THOSE WHO ARE CRITICIZING LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS LIKE WHAT IS IN KENTUCKY AND THESE OTHER STATES I MENTIONED EARLIER BELIEVE THAT IT TAMPERS WITH THE BEDROCK PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY, A FREE EXCHANGES IDEAS, ACADEMIC FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT, THAT THIS IS A GOVERNMENT OVERREACH FOR THOSE WHO PROFESS TO BE FOR RECIDIVISM GOVERNMENT.

HOW IS THIS NOT AIR GOVERNMENT OVERREACH AND TAMPERING WITH THOSE BED ROM PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY?

>> WELL, I THINK FROM WASHINGTON IT CERTAINLY WOULD BE.

WASHINGTON HAS NO PLACE MEDDLING IN EITHER STATE ACADEMIC STANDARDS OR SCHOOL CURRICULUM CERTAINLY.

WHEN IT COMES TO STATE LEGISLATURE AND STATE SCHOOL BOARDS, THEY DO HAVE VAIRING LEVELS RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY OVER -- VARYING LEVELS OF RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY OVER STATE STANDARDS AS WELL AS CURRICULUM.

OVEN IDENTITY RESIDES WITH LOCAL EXPOSED WELL THE STATE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

I THINK THAT THE BEST PATH FORWARD FOR LAWMAKERS WHO ARE RIGHTFULLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE DISCRIMINATION IN CRITICAL CRITICAL RACE THEORY SHOULD BE PREPARED TO SAY THAT NO PUBLIC INSTITUTION SHOULD COMPEL A TEACHER OR STUDENT TO AFFIRM OR BELIEVE ANY IDEA THAT VIOLATES THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, INCLUDING THE IDEA THAT SOMEONE IS SUPERIOR BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE OR THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN OR THAT INDIVIDUALS DESERVE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS OR SANCTIONS BECAUSE OF THEIR ETHNICITIES OR EVEN THAT AMERICA IS SYSTEMICALLY RACIST.

THESE ARE ALL IDEAS THAT VIOLATE THESE VERY CONCEPTS IN FEDERAL LAW THAT ARE MEANT TO PROTECT FROM US RACISM AND DISCRIMINATION.

IT'S IMPORTANT FOR LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS AND THE STATE SCHOOL BOARD TO BE READY TO ADDRESS THIS, AND IF NOT FOR STATE LAWMAKERS TO VERY CAREFULLY POSITION THEMSELVES AGAINST THE IDEA OF COMPELLED SPEECH AND REST WREST THESE CONCEPTS IN WHAT IS ALREADY THERE IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.

>> THANK YOU FOR THOSE WORDS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, WHERE JONATHAN BUTCHER WITH THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION.

I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR INSIGHT TODAY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> Renee: NOW IT'S OUR STUDIO PANEL'S TURN TO WEIGH IN, AND WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU AS WELL, SO JOIN THE CONVERSATION WITH A QUOR COMMENT ON TWITTER@KYTONIGHTKET OR USE THE WEB FORM AT KET.ORG/KYTONIGHT.

OR SEND AN email MAKE SURE TO CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS YOU'RE NOT A ROBOT.

ARE YOU MAY GIVE US A CALL AT 1-800-866-0366.

WELCOME TO OUR IN-STUDIO GUESTS.

WE APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING ASSEMBLED HERE TONIGHT, AND OUR THANKS TO OUR PRE-TAPED GUESTS FOR SETTING UP A MICE PRIMER FOR OUR DISCUSSION.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER, I WANT TO GO RIGHT TO YOU.

ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WE GOT WHILE THE TAPES WERE PLAYING IS, HAVE TEACHERS ASKED FOR THE LEGISLATION THAT'S BEING PROPOSED BY YOU AND OTHERS?

THIS CAME FROM PATRICIA BROOKS IN FRANKFORT.

AND WE KNOW THAT PERHAPS THERE WAS AN IMPETUS FOR THIS BILL THAT STARTED WITH A SCHOOL IN YOUR DISTRICT WHO HAD A PROPOSAL TO INTRODUCE CRIB RACE THEORY INTO THE CURRICULUM THAT WAS NOT APPROVED BY THE SITE-BASED COUNCIL.

>> THAT WAS EXACTLY THE MOTIVATION FOR THIS BILL.

ABOUT A MONTH AGO IT WAS NOT ON MY RADAR SCREEN AT ALL, THIS ISSUE, BUT IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION BY A GROUP OF PARENTS AND JUST CITIZENS OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN MY DISTRICT THAT WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE CONTENT OF A PROPOSED CURRICULUM COURSE IN THE HIGH SCHOOL, YES.

>> AND THE SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING COUNCIL, AS I SAID, THEY DID REJECT THAT IDEA.

SO WHY IS THAT NOT ENOUGH?

WHY IS A STATE LEGISLATIVE REMEDY NEEDED?

>> WELL, THEY DID NOT REJECT IT UNTIL AFTER I HAD FILED THE BILL, SO PERHAPS THAT WAS SOME MOTIVATION FOR THEM TO DECLINE TO CARRY THE COURSE THIS FALL, AND I THINK IT DID HAVE SOME IMPACT ON THEIR DECISION.

>> AND SO YOU ARE STILL CONTINUING WITH THE BILL.

IT'S BEEN PRE-FILED, AND YOU STILL THINK THE NEED IS THERE EVEN THOUGH THE SITUATION IN YOUR DISTRICT HAS BEEN RESOLVED.

>> YES, I'M GAINING QUITE A BIT OF COMMON SUPPORT THROUGHOUT THE STATE FOR THIS BILL.

>> AND WHAT IS THAT IT THEY'RE SAYING THAT IS THE REASON WHY THEY'RE FOR IT?

>> WELL, I THINK FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT SOME OF YOUR GUESTS DISCUSSED BEFORE, BECAUSE IT BASICALLY VIOLATES THE CENTRAL TENET OF OUR DEMOCRACY, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL, AND FOR THAT REASON IT HITS THE HEART OF THE PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT ESPECIALLY THAT WE CANNOT ABANDON THAT PRINCIPLE BY TEACHING THAT ONE RACE IS INHERENTLY SUPERIOR OR INFERIOR TO ANOTHER.

>> IN THE BILL, IT'S BILL REQUEST 60 IF YOU GO ONLINE YOU CAN FIND IT, THE LEGISLATION DOESN'T MENTION CRITICAL RACE THEORY NOR DOES IT DEFINE CRITICAL RACE THEORY.

IT SIMPLY MENTIONS THESE CONCEPTS.

SO IS YOUR BILL BANNING CRITICAL RACE THEORY OR PROPOSED BAN ON CRITICAL RACE THEORY IN KENTUCKY?

>> WELL, IF CRITICAL RACE THEORY DOES NOT TEACH ANY OF THOSE PROGRESSION THAT ARE IN THE BILL, THEN NO, IT DOES NOT BAN IT.

BUT IF CRITICAL RACE THEORY INSTRUCTION INCLUDES ANY ONE OF THESE 12 PRINCIPLES, THEN IT WOULD -- THOSE PARTICULAR TEACHES WOULD BE PROHIBITED.

>> AND JUST A COUPLE OF THOSE CONCEPTS INCLUDE THAT ONE RACE IS INHERENTLY SUPERIOR TO THE OTHER, THAT AN INDIVIDUAL BY VIRTUE OF HIS OR HER RACE OR SEX IS INHERENTLY RACIST, SEXIST OR OPPRESSIVE OR THEY'RE CONSCIOUSLY OR UNCONSCIOUSLY, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.

SO THERE ARE SEVERAL THOSE THAT INDIVIDUALS' MORAL CHARACTER IS DETERMINED BY HIS OR HER RACE OR SEX.

IT GOES ON AND ON.

SENATOR REALLY NEAL, PERHAPS THERE WILL BE A SENATE BILL THAT IS FILED.

I DON'T THINK SO YET, PRE-FILED ALONG THESE LINES BUT PERHAPS IT COULD BE.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS WHEN YOU REVIEW BILL REQUEST 60 BY REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER?

>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE TO TAKE THIS BACK A LITTLE BIT.

THIS DIDN'T JUST HAPPEN IN SOMEBODY'S SCHOOL DISTRICT IN KENTUCKY.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN FRAMED BY THE AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE CHAIN EXCHANGE THAT ACTUALLY LEGISLATORS ATTEND.

THEY ACTUALLY DRAFT LEGISLATION.

NECESSITY HAND THIS OVER TO INDIVIDUALS TO FILE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THIS LEGISLATION ACROSS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT THEY'RE QUITE SIMILAR IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING, AND WHAT THEY DO IN THE CONTEXT OF ALEC IS THAT THEY PROMOTE THESE THINGS AND THEY PUSH THESE PIECES OUT.

AND REALLY IT'S NOT THE INDIVIDUAL WORDING THAT'S IN THIS LEGISLATION THAT REALLY STRIKES ME.

WHAT REALLY STRIKES ME, KEEPING IN MIND THAT THESE THINGS ARE VERY INTENTIONAL, I SEE THEM OPERATING IN THE BROADER CONTEXT, AND I SEE THEM AS A REACTION.

I SEE IT AS A REACTIONARY PIECE TO OTHER DYNAMICS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN SOCIETY, DYNAMICS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE CANNOT GRAPPLE WITH BECAUSE IT IS UNCOMFORTABLE.

CHANGE IS HERE IN VARIOUS FORMS.

BUT THE THING THAT REALLY DISTURBS ME IS THAT REALLY IT PURPORTS TO SAY THESE THINGS THAT THEY'RE SAYING DIVIDE SOCIETY, BUT IN FACT, THIS QUESTION OF RACE IN THIS CONTEXT IS A DIVIDING FORCE IN AND OF ITSELF.

SO I SEE IT AS A DOG IS WHEN EL JUST LIKE MANY OF THE DOG WHIST ELSE THAT YOU HAVE HEARD IN NOT ONLY THE PRESENT CONTEXT BUT HISTORICALLY.

A DOG WHISTLES THAT ARE USED TO ACTUALLY AIM AT SOLIDIFYING YOUR BASE, GETTING THEM FOCUSED TO RESIST CHANGE IN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER OR TO EXPRESS THEIR DISAPPROVAL OF SOMETHING OR ANOTHER, AND UNFORTUNATELY IT HAS TREMENDOUS, TREMENDOUS KIND OF DYNAMICS THAT ARE INJURIOUS TO OUR SYSTEM.

IN FACT, TO THE CORE OF OUR DEMOCRACY, IN FACT, TO THE CORE OF OUR EDUCATIONAL PROCESS WE WILL -- I MEAN, IF YOU REALLY ACCEPT THIS, IF YOU'RE URGE TALKING ABOUT DUMBING DOWN OUR KIDS THAT HAVE TO BECOME MORE PROFICIENT IN A MORE DIVERSE AND INCREASINGLY DIVERSE AND COMPETITIVE NOT ONLY UNITED STATES AMERICA BUT WORLD, SO I THINK IT'S A VERY UNWISE PIECE.

I THINK IT'S REACTIONARY IN TERMS OF ITS DYNAMICS.

AND I THINK PURE AND SIMPLE FOR SOME, NOT ALL, IT'S JUST A DOG WILL U.

LITTLE OF WHISTLE.

>> COMMISSIONER JASON GLASS WHO IS WITH THE KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, TRS WAS A I'M DR. HOUCHENS YOU SERVED ON THE BOARD OF EDUCATION I 12 YEARS, THE CURRENT COMMISSIONER JASON GLASS SUBMITTED THIS STATEMENT THAT WE'LL READ IN PART.

KENTUCKY'S PUBLIC SKILES MORAL COMMITMENT TO SERVE EVERY CHILD AND FAMILY WE ALSO RECOGNIZED THAT OUR STUDENTS COME TO US WITH A VARIETY OF PACK GROUNDS AND EXPERIENCES.

I OPPOSE EFFORTS TO LIMIT FREE SPEECH AND THE EXCHANGE OF IDEAS IN OUR CLASSROOMS.

I ALSO OPPOSED STATE LEVEL AND POLITICALLY DRIVEN EFFORTS TO MICROMANAGE OUR LOCAL CLASSROOM TEACHERS.

DISCUSSING DIFFICULT ISSUES IS HOW WE PREPARE OUR STUDENTS TO BE CITIZENS IN A DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC, AND OUR STATE HAS A LONG TRADITION OF EMPOWERING OUR LOCAL EDUCATORS TO MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS FOR THEIR STUDENTS.

I AM DISAPPOINTED TO SEE EFFORTS, HE SAYS, TO LIMIT THE FREE EXCHANGE OF IDEAS ENSHRINED IN OUR CONSTITUTION AND BIG GOVERNMENT OVERREACH INTO LOCAL CLASSROOMS EMERGE FROM OUR STATE LEGISLATORS.

SO I HAVE TO ASK YOU, PROFESSOR HOUCHENS, ABOUT THE ISSUE OF LOCAL CONTROL, AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS GETTING TO WITH MY QUOR ONE QUESTION THAT MAY NOT HAVE MADE TIME WITH MR. BUTCHER ABOUT LOCAL CONTROL THAT SOME WOULD SAY, FORGET ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE SUBJECT, BUT THE FACT THAT THESE DECISIONS SHOULD BE MADE BY SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING COUNCILS OR SCHOOL BOARDS, NOT BY STATE LEGISLATURE.

>> RIGHT.

WELL, IN GENERAL I FEEL LIKE LEGISLATION ISN'T THE BEST WAY TO DECIDE WHAT GETS TAUGHT AND WHAT DOESN'T GET TAUGHT IN OUR CLASSROOMS, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION WITH THERE ARE UNDERLYING TENANTS OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY THAT WE JUST BARELY TOUCHED UPON HERE THAT ARE EXTRAORDINARILY PROBLEMATIC.

>> SUCH AS?

>> WELL, THE VERY CONCEPT THAT ESSENTIALLY ALL OF THE POWER DYNAMICS IN OUR SOCIETY, ALL OF SOCIAL PHENOMENON CAN ESSENTIALLY BE BOILED DOWN TO THESE RELATIONSHIPS OF OPPRESSION AND VICTIM HOOD, THAT A PERSON BY THE VERY COLOR OF THEIR SKIN CAN BE SORT OF REDUCED TO THEIR ROLE AS OPPRESSOR OR VICTIM THOSE ARE CONCEPTS TO THAT PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE VERY LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THEY ARE PRESENTED IN CLASSROOMS.

CRITICAL RACE THEORY EVEN GOES SO FAR AS TO SUGGEST THAT THERE REALLY IS NO SUCH THING AS OBJECTIVE TRUTH.

THERE ARE JUST SUBJECTIVE NARRATIVES.

AND SO IT REJECTS LOGIC AND REASON AND MAKING ARGUMENTATION AS ILL LEGITIMATE TOOLS OF WHITE SUPREMACY.

AND SO IN DOING SO IT JUST DISCOUNTS ALL POSSIBILITY OF ANY KIND OF MEANINGFUL DIALOGUE WITH CRITICAL RACE THEORY ITSELF.

AND SO PARENTS HAVE A VERY LEGITIMATE REASON FOR CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THIS COMES ACROSS IN THEIR SCHOOLS.

THE ISSUE WITH OUR SCHOOL-BASED DECISION MAKING COUNCILS, AND I HAVE GREAT BROKER TEACHERS AND THE PARENTS WHO SERVE ON THOSE COUNCILS, IS THAT THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY UNACCOUNTABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

OUR LOCAL BOARDS OF EDUCATION, ELECTED BY THE VOTERS, HAVE NO CONTROL WHATSOEVER UNDER KENTUCKY LAW OVER CURRICULUM INSTRUCTION.

THAT RESIDES ENTIRELY AT THE LEVEL OF SITE-BASED COUNCIL.

AND THE STRUCTURE OF THE COUNCILS ARE SUCH THAT TEACHERS ALWAYS OUTNUMBER PARENT REPRESENTATIVES.

FURTHERMORE, IF YOU ARE A CONCERNED CITIZEN OR A TAXPAYER WITHOUT A CHILD IN A PARTICULAR SCHOOL, YOU HAVE NO REPRESENTATION ON THAT SITE-BASED COUNCIL AT ALL.

AND SO WITHOUT SOME SIGNIFICANT RECONSIDERATION OF THE STRUCTURE OF SITE-BASED COUNCILS, PARENTS REALLY HAVE NO RESOURCE IN THIS SITUATION BUT LEGISLATION IF THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SOME OF THESE PROBLEMATIC CONCEPTS ARE LIMITED IN THE WAY THEY'RE PRESENTED IN THEIR CHILDREN'S CLASSROOMS.

>> AND I'LL COME SENATOR NEAL FOR A LITTLE DISCUSSION HAD TO BUT I WANT TO BRING IN DR. ABRAMS.

I THINK THIS IS YOUR FIRST SOME TIME ON THE PROGRAM SO THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TO GET TO DR. HOUCHENS' POINT THAT CRITICAL RACE THEORY IN ITSELF CAN KATE FOR A.

HE'S BRINE ABOUT THE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT GAP AND HOW CRITICAL RACE THEORY CAN EXACERBATE THAT AND NOT LEAD TO THE KIND OF PROGRESS THAT SHOULD BE HAD, AND I'LL LET HIM EXPLAIN THAT FURTHER, BUT CAN YOU SPEAK TO HIS POINT ABOUT HOW IT WILL SUPPRESS CONVERSATION, THAT CRITICAL RACE THEORY IN AND OF ITSELF SILENCES ALL OTHER PERSPECTIVES AND SAYS, THIS IS THE ONE WAY?

>> ILK CRITICAL RACE THEORY DOES NOT SAY THAT EVERYTHING IS REDUCED TO THE OPPRESSOR AND THE OPPRESSED.

IT DOES SAY THAT POWER PLAYS A ROLE IN THINGS THAT WE DO AND THE OPPRESSION PLAYS A ROLE IN THINGS THAT HAVE THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN OUR HISTORY AND IN OUR PRESENT, AND WE NEED TO INTERROGATE THOSE THINGS AND TALK ABOUT THEM.

OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVITY ISN'T IS IDEA THAT YOU CANNOT OR CAN QUESTION THINGS.

IT IS A DIFFERENT APPROACH.

IT IS SAYING THAT EVEN IF YOU'RE BEING OBJECTIVE, YOU HAVE AN AGENDA.

YOU'RE COMING FROM A PARTICULAR PERSPECTIVE.

ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.

AND BRING THAT INTO YOUR DISCUSSION, THAT YOUR POSITIONALITY, YOUR SHIRT COLORING THE WAY THAT YOU THINK ABOUT POSITION, THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'RE ASKING AND THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'RE NOT ASKING.

BUT CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS SAYING LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS, LET'S ARGUE ABOUT IT, LET'S DEBATE IT, LET'S THINK IT THROUGH, LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING, WHAT ISN'T HAPPENING, LET'S BE HONEST ABOUT THE FACT THAT THESE THINGS AREN'T JUST MAGICALLY APPEARING AND THAT RACISM DIDN'T JUST GO AWAY.

IF WE'RE SEEING THESE -- CONTINUE TO SEE THE DISPARITIES IN OUR SOCIETY AND WE CONTINUE TO SEE THINGS LIKE THE NEED FOR BLACK LIVES MATTER, THE DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF PEOPLE OF COLOR IN THE PRISON INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM, THE DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF PEOPLE OF COLOR WHO ARE POOR, IS THIS HAPPENING BECAUSE -- YOU EITHER HAVE TWO EXPLANATIONS, ONE, THESE PEOPLE DESERVE IT.

THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT THEIR CUR OR BEHAVIOR THAT IS DISPO SCOTT.

LY MAKING THEM ENDS UP IN THESE SPACES OR THERE IS SOMETHING SYSTEMLY GOING ON THAT IS PUSHING THESE SPOTTER NUMBER OF DISPROPORTIONAT NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN.

THE EITHER IT'S THEIR FAULT OR THERE'S SOMETHING SYSTEMICALLY GOING OBJECT, POWER THAT'S GOING ON AND LET'S WHAT CRITICAL RACE THEORY SAYS.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.

LET'S UNPACK IT.

LET'S ARGUE ABOUT IT.

THERE IS NO ONE ROOF FOR CRITICAL RACE THEORY.

>> DOES CRITICAL RACE THEORY ESPOUSE THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TOOTH OR INFERIOR TO ANOTHER?

>> OF COURSE NOT.

>> HOW DOES IT FRAME WHITENESS?

>> IT DOES FRAME WHITENESS IN TERMS OF POWER AND THE FACT THAT CERTAIN GROUPS ARE GIVEN POWER BASED ON THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN AND THEIR POSITION ALT WITHIN SOCIETY.

IT'S NOT SAYING EVERY WHITE PERSON IS INHERENTLY A RAISE, THEY'RE WHITE PERSON IS INMENTAL SUPERIOR OR INFERIOR.

IT IS SAYING THAT WHITE PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO POWER AND TO PRIVILEGES ON THE BASIS OF COLOR OF THEIR SKIN AS PART OF THE SYSTEM THAT OTHER GROUPS DON'T HAVE AS MUCH ACCESS TO, AND WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT.

>> AND SO WYATT WHITE PRIVILEGE IS PART OF THE POSITION.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> THIS IS WHAT THIS SIDE TAKES UMBRAGE, THAT THOSE TYPES OF TERMS AND COMMENTARY IS WHAT -- >> ABSOLUTELY, THERE ARE NUMEROUS EXAMPLES WHERE IN THESE TYPES OF SITUATIONS -- LET ME JUST QUOTE ONE FROM JOHNNY WILLIAMS FOUNTAIN IN THE HARTFORD CURRENT.

HE SAYS WHITENESS BY ITS DEFINITION AND IS A KEY ELEMENT OF WHITE SUPREMACY KILLS.

IT IS MENTAL AND PHYSICAL TERRORISM.

THIS IS WHITENESS.

TO END THE WHITE TERRORISM THAT IS DIRECTLY -- THAT IS DIRECTED AT RACIAL OPPRESS DOLLARS PEOPLE HERE AND THIS N. OTHER NATIONS IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT SELF-IDENTIFIED WHITES AND THEIR WHITENESS COLLABORATES AMONG THE RACIALLY OPPRESSED CONFRONT THEIR WHITE PROBLEM HEAD ON UNENCUMBERED BY RACIAL COMFORT.

SO THIS IS A DIRECT ATTACK ON WHITE SUPREMACY, WHITENESS IN ITSELF IS A POWER, IS AN EXAMPLE OF POWER, AND THAT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

NONE OF THIS IS TRUE.

NOT JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE WHITE -- >> WHAT I'D LIKE TO ADD TO THAT IF REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER DOESN'T MIND, THERE ARE CONTEXTS IN WHICH A PERSON'S SKIN COLOR DOES EXAMINER SUES A KIND OF PRIVILEGE, SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S AN OUTRIGHT REJECTION OF THE NOTION THAT WITHIN CERTAIN CONTEXTS WHITE PEOPLE BENEFIT FROM THE VIRTUE OF BEING WHITE, BUT THAT IS A VERY NARROW AND LIMITED WAY OF UNDERSTANDING -- I MEAN, TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT IS TRUE, THAT'S NOT ALL THAT'S TRUE ABOUT WHITE PEOPLE.

I THINK OF A POOR WHITE KID GROWING UP IN APPALACHIA, MAYBE FROM MULTI-GENERATIONAL POVERTY FAMILY DEALING WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE, AND I YOU'RE GOING TO TELL THAT WHITE KID THAT HE IS PRIVILEGED?

WELL, IN A CERTAIN CONTEXT HE MAY ACTUALLY BE PRIVILEGED, BUT IN GENERAL THAT TERM MEANS RELATIVELY NOTHING TO HIM, AND SAYS NOTHING ABOUT HIM AND HIS LIFE EXPERIENCE.

SO WE'VE ESSENTIALLY REDUCED HIM TO THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN WITH THAT CONCEPT.

SO WE CAN WELCOME THE CONCEPT OF PRIVILEGE IN OUR CONVERSATIONS.

IT'S WHEN IT BECOMES SORT OF A TOTALIZING WAY OF DESCRIBING PEOPLE AND THEIR EXPERIENCE THAT -- >> SO IS THAT WHAT CRT DOES?

>> THERE'S EXACTLY WHAT'S EMBODIED IN WHAT THE PROFESSOR SAID HERE THAT'S DEMONSTRATED BY HIS ARGUING THE, YES, THIS IS TRUE, AND, NO, THIS IS NOT TRUE, WHICH ARE THE DYNAMICS THAT NEED THE DISCUSSION IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE SOME CRITICAL THINKING ABOUT THOSE THINGS, AND PERHAPS LEAD TO SOLUTIONS, GREATER UNDERSTANDINGS OR WHATEVER, BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IS THAT PEOPLE BELIEVE A LOT OF THINGS THAT DO NOT -- ARE NOT HELD UP BY FACTS.

SOME PEOPLE BELIEVE SOME THINGS THAT YOU MAY THINK ARE NOT HELD UP BY FACTS, BUT IF MORE INFORMATION IS BROUGHT TO THE TABLE, THEN YOU SAY, OH, WELL, MAYBE THERE IS A BASIS FOR THAT, MAYBE THAT IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO FACTOR INTO WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THAT'S THE DYNAMIC THAT IS -- THAT THIS TYPE OF BIG GOVERNMENT -- I CALL IT AN EDUCATIONAL SUPPRESSION, SUPPRESSIVE TYPE ACTIVITIES, ACTUALLY COUPLES DOWN OUR CHILDREN AT ONE LEVEL, IT COUPLES DOWN OUR SOCIETY GENERALLY, AND IT'S VERY SHORT-SIGHTED BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S VERY INTERESTING THAT'S HAPPENING IN THIS COMMUNITY WE CALL THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND THAT'S THOSE DYNAMICS IS CHANGING.

IT'S CHANGING.

IT'S EVOLVING, AND THE REALITY THAT WE'RE ALL THE SITTING IN RIGHT NOW, IF WE DON'T PREPARE BY OPENLY INTERACTING, DISCUSSING THESE THINGS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HOLD WATER WITH RESPECT TO THIS BUT MOVING TOWARD EACH OTHER, WHICH IS THE ONLY WAY, IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO OVERCOME TO SEPARATION AND DIVISIONS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR SOCIETY, THEN WE ARE WORKING AGAINST THE VERY THING THAT WE'RE SAYING WE'RE PROMOTING.

IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER THERE HAS BEEN SOME CRITICISM THAT THIS IS A BACK TAKE A LOOK AT EVER DIVERSIFYING NATURE OF OUR COUNTRY, THAT DEMOGRAPHICALLY THIS COUNTRY IS ADJUSTING TO BE MORE BROWN, THAT IT IS A REACTION TO THE BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT AND SOCIAL JUSTICE MOVEMENT, AND MANY WOULD QUESTION WHY THIS NOW WHEN AMERICA HAS BEEN UNDERGOING A RACIAL RECKONING, WHY DOES THIS MAKE SENSE TO BRING TO THE TABLE?

>> WELL, LET ME SAY FIRST THAT I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE SENATOR NEAL THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS FACTS, AND THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE WITH THIS BILL.

WHAT THE 12 PRINCIPLES THAT ARE LISTED IN THAT, THE QUESTION FOR EVERYBODY TO LOOK AT WHEN THEY EXAMINE THIS BILL IS WHETHER OR NOT THESE 12 PRINCIPLES ARE, IN AN ACT, TRUE OR WHETHER THEY ARE FALSE OR WHETHER THEY ARE PROVEN OR UNPROVEN, AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS IN OUR SCHOOLS, IS WHETHER THESE ARE TRUE OR NOT, AND I DON'T BELIEVE ANY ONE OF THESE CAN BE CONSIDERED PROVEABLE OR TRUE.

>> HE'S MAKING THE ARGUMENT.

HE'S MAKING THE VERY ARGUMENT.

IF YOU ARE SAYING OR ANYONE SAYS THAT THIS IS NOT A FACT, THEN THAT SHOULD BE CHALLENGED.

THERE SHOULD BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT TO EXPLORE THAT.

AND LET ME SAY THIS TOO.

WE CAN SIT AROUND THIS TABLE AND LAW MARKS HAVE A TENDENCY TO DO THIS ALL THE TIME, YOU KNOW, WE BECOME EXPERTS IN THE FIELD AND WE BACK POLICIES AND WE TRY TO ARTICULATE THEM AND WE RELY ON THINGS THAT WE GRAB AROUND, AND THIS IS NOT TO OFFEND MY GOOD FRIEND JOE FISCHER OR ANY OTHER LEGISLATORS.

IT'S A FACT, WHAT I'M SAYING.

AND SOME PEOPLE KNOW MORE THAN OTHERS.

SOME PEOPLE HAVE MORE EXPERIENCES THAN OTHERS THAT GUIDES OR INFORMS THEIR BEHAVIOR AND THEIR DECISION MAKING.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT WE PRODUCE ALL THE KIND OF POLICIES THAT HAVE CONSEQUENCES THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE SLIGHTEST IDEA WHAT IT'S GOING TO MEAN.

WE DON'T EXAMINE THOSE.

WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH THOSE PROCESSES WHEN WE SHOULD DO MORE.

BUT WE SAY TO THE PUBLIC AND WE SAY TO EACH OTHER, LET'S GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS AND LET'S BASE THIS UPON FACT.

WE NEED THE CHALLENGE, THE DISCOURSE BETWEEN VARIOUS INDIVIDUALS AND IDEAS AND FACTS VERSUS THOSE THINGS THAT PEOPLE BELIEVE, FOR INSTANCE, NORTH TO GET TO SOME RECOGNIZABLE TRUTH, PERHAPS, THAT WE CAN COLLECTIVELY EMBRACE.

>> OF THE 12 CONCEPTS THAT YOU LAY OUT IN YOUR BILL, AND THOSE ARE LISTED, HOW IS IT PROVEN?

IS IT BASED ON WHAT A STUDENT BELIEVES?

AND HOW DO YOU MEASURE THAT?

WILL THERE BE SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS IN CLASSROOMS TO WATCH TEACHERS AS THEY ENGAGE IN HISTORY LESSONS?

HOW WILL THAT INFORMATION TOM TO THE FORE?

>> ENFORCEMENT PROVISION THAT OF BILL TALKS ABOUT ANY PARENT OR ANY CITIZEN WHO BELIEVES THAT THIS -- THESE THEORIES THAT ARE BEING TAUGHT AS FACTS TO YOUNG CHILDREN CAN FILE A COMPLAINT.

THE BURDEN OF PROOF WOULD BE ON THAT CITIZEN WHO FILES THE COMPLAINT, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WOULD DETERMINE BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE BEFORE HIM THAT, IN FACT, THAT'S TRUE.

>> AND A PRETTY STEEP CONSEQUENCE IF HIS FINDINGS SHOW THAT, IN FACT, THEY HAVE VIOLATED ANY OF THESE SCORES ALL OF THEM, I GUESS IT COULD BE ONE OR SOME OR A COMBINATION, THEN THEY COULD LOSE $5,000 A DAY THAT WOULD BE WITHHELD, CORRECT, IN THEIR FUNDING.

>> THAT IS AFTER FOR ANY DAY THEY CONTINUE TEACHING AFTER THE FINDING OCCURS, SO THERE WOULD BE NO FINE FOR ANY PREVIOUS ACTS.

>> AND SO UNTIL THEY HAVE SATISFY ORAL I SERIALLY REMEDIED THE PROBLEM, THE FINE WOULD CONTINUE UP UNTIL THAT TIME?

>> RIGHT.

>> SENATOR NEAL?

>> LOOK.

THERE'S SO MUCH TO UNPACK HERE.

THE DISREGARD -- I MUST SAY, THE DEPRECIATION OF THE VALUE OF OUR TEACHERS WHO DEVOTE THEIR LIVES TO LIBERATING THOUGHT, NOT JUST TEACHING AND HAVING PEOPLE REPEAT THINGS AND JUST STUDY THINGS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF MEMORY, BUT TO ACTUALLY CREATE A PROCESS OF CRITICAL THINKING, YOU KNOW, THAT IS THE PIECE THAT WE'VE GOT TO WATCH OUT FOR, BUT WE DePRETER NOT ON THE TEACHERS, NOT -- DEPRECIATE NOT ONLY THES TEACHERS AND THE ADMINISTRATOR BUT THE STUDENTS.

THESE STUDENTS ARE NOT AS WEAK AS BABIES AS SOME OF US THINK.

THEY ARE EVOLVING.

THEY ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THAT'S GOING TO TAKE OVER THE SOCIETY.

THEY'RE THE ONES THAT WE'RE COUNTING ON TO DO GREAT THINGS INTO THE FUTURE.

WE MUST ARM THEM WITH THE ABILITY TO DISCERN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FACT AND THAT WHICH IS NOT.

AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK WE'RE DUMBING DOWN OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM.

AND NOW WE'RE CREATING WHAT THE POLICE, THE EDUCATION POLICE, I THINK ABOUT THINK ABOUT IT.

SOMEBODY COMES IN, AN ATTORNEY GENERAL COMES ANYBODY WITH HERE'S A FEW THINGS, MAKES A DISPENSING NOW YOU'VE GOT ALL THIS PRESSURE ABOUT WRONG ACTION.

IF YOU TAKE ONE MORE STEP.

IT HAS A CHILLING EFFECT ON THE FRONT END, NOT AFTER YOU GO THROUGH THESE PROCESSES.

YOU'RE GOING TO GET THAT.

AND I WANT TO TELL YOU, YOU, MY GOOD FRIEND, GETTING ALL THESE RESPONSES FROM YOUR DISTRICT.

I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU, I'VE BEEN OVERWHELMED BY RESPONSES FROM ALL KINDS OF -- OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY.

OUR BUSINESS COMMUNITY,, YOU TO THE OTHER SAYING, WHAT IN THE HECK IS THIS?

I'M HAVING PEOPLE FROM THE EDUCATION COMMUNITY, THE SAME THING.

I'M HAVING PARENT CALL ME AND SAY, WAIT A MINUTE.

THESE ARE ELECTIVE SITUATIONS.

CAN WE CHOOSE THAT OUR CHILDREN GET THE EXPERIENCE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION?

WHO ARE WE IN BIG GOVERNMENT TO TELL FOLKS AT THAT LEVEL EXACTLY WHAT IS NEEDED OR WHAT THAT PORTENDS?

I.

IT IS A MISTAKE.

I THINK IT IS A SERIOUS MISTAKE AND WE OUGHT TO BE VERY CAREFUL, AND I'M TRUST CAN THAT THE LEGISLATURE WILL NOT GO DOWN THAT PATH.

>> SO TO GET TO THE POINT ABOUT ADMINISTRATORS, THE KENTUCKY SCHOOL BOARD'S ASSOCIATION, THE KENTUCKY ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS ALSO SUBMITTED THEIR STATEMENTS ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION, AND I'LL BEGIN FIRST WITH THE KASS, THE KENTUCKY ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS.

AND THEY HAVE SAID, GOVERN STRUCTURES ALREADY EXIST AT THE LOCAL LEVEL WHICH HAVE PROVEN EFFECTIVE IN DISCUSSING CERTAIN CONCERNS REFERENCED WITHIN THE LIGHTNING OF THESE BILL DRAFTS.

FROM EXPERIENCE LOCAL DECISION MAKING IS CRITICAL TO SCHOOLS BECAUSE IT POWERS OUR PARENTS, THE COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO GUESS INVEST THEIR TIME AND RESOURCES INTO OUR STUDENTS, STAFF AND SCHOOLS.

AND FROM THE KENTUCKY SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION THIS READS IN PART, BROAD CURRICULAR MANDATES ENACTED IN STATUTE TO INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE PARTICULAR TOPICS OR COURSES AND/OR OR RORY EVER THUNDERSHOWERS COURSES OR TOPICS TO BE TAUGHT IN SPECIFIC I WAS POTENTIALLY UNDERMINE A LOCAL NEEDS OF HAD ITS STUDENTS REGARDLESS OF SUBJECT MATTER DEEMED CONTROVERSIAL OR NOT.

PARENTS AND EDUCATORS MUST WORK TOGETHER TO REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER, THIS QUESTION FROM CAROLYN DuPONT ASKS YOU, CAN YOU NAME A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE OF ANY KENTUCKY PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHER TEACHING ANY OF THE CONCEPTS IDENTIFIED IN THIS BILL AS ONE THAT IS RACE -- ONE THAT IS INHERENTLY SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER WHEN IT COMES TO RACE?

IS THAT ALREADY HAPPENING?

IT IS HAPPENING CURRENTLY, NOT A PROPOSAL AS SUCH THAT YOU DEALT WITH IN YOUR DISTRICT.

>> NO.

AS I SAID, I'M LIMITED TO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN MY DISTRICT.

I HAVE NO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF ANY OTHER DISTRICTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ENGAGED IN THIS TYPE OF TEACHING.

>> DR. ABRAMS, AS A MENTIONED AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS SHOW, THAT LEGISLATION HAS BEEN CONSIDERED INTRODUCED IN 21 STATES, FOUR STATES HAVE ALREADY SIGNED THIS INTO LAW.

WE KNOW THAT OVER THE WEEKEND FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DID SIGN OFF ON ALSO BANNING CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND NAMED IT AND SAID THAT THESE ARE THE THINGS YOU CAN TEACH.

YOU CAN TEACH SLAVERY.

YOU CAN TEACH THESE OTHER GILBERT THEY WERE VERY SPECIFIC OF.

SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THESE EFFORTS TO BAN THE TEACHING OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY, WHAT CHILL DOES IT PUT ON THE EDUCATION SYSTEM?

FROM ALSO THE PERSPECTIVE OF TEACHING FUTURE TEACHERS.

>> TEACHERS, ANY TEACHER WORTH THEIR SALT, AND I'M A COLLEGE PROFESSOR, IS NOT TRYING TO TEACH A CHILD WHAT TO THINK.

WE'RE HERE TO TEACH CHILDREN HOW TO THINK IN TERMS OF THE SKILLS YOU NEED TO CRITICALLY ANALYZE AND COME TO YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS AND WHAT THERE IS TO THINK ABOUT.

AND SO WHEN STUDENTS ARE PUSHED TO DEAL WITH DIFFICULT THINGS, WHICH THINGS MAKE THEM QUESTION WHAT THEY BELIEVED BEFORE, MAKE THEM QUESTION THINGS ABOUT THEMSELVES AND THEIR SOCIETY AND WRESTLE WITH THAT AND COME TO SOME TRUTH, THAT'S WHERE LEARNING HAPPENS.

THAT'S WHERE CURIOSITY HAPPENS.

THAT'S WHERE EMPATHY HAPPENS.

THAT'S WHERE ENLIGHTENMENT HAPPENS.

THAT WRESTLING WITH THOSE THINGS IS IMPORTANT.

AND CREATING A SITUATION IN WHICH CHILDREN ARE -- PART OF THIS BILL SAYS THEY SHOULD NEVER FEEL DISCOURT OF COMFORT OR GUILT OR ANGUISH.

NO ONE IS GOING TO LEVEE A CHILD OR ANYBODY IN COLLEGE IN A SENSE OF ANGUISH OVER WHITE GUILT.

THE POINT IS TO THINK ABOUT WHAT RACE IS, WHAT RACISM IS, HOW IT HAS AFFECTED YOU AND OTHERS, AND FOR THEM TO BE MORE EMPOWERED AND AWARE ABOUT HOW YOU CAN MAKE THINGS BETTER OR NOT BETTER IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO DO THAT, BUT AT LEAST YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE MAKING A CHOICE ABOUT.

SO THIS IDEA THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO IN AND NOT TRUST THAT TEACHERS KNOW HOW TO TEACH, THAT STUDENTS ARE SO FRAGILE THAT THEY CANNOT TAKE A LITTLE PRESSURE OR A LITTLE DISCOMFORT, THAT THE BILL THAT THE HUMAN CAPACITY TO BE ABLE TO THINK THROUGH SOMETHING AND TO COME TO YOUR OWN CONCLUSION, THAT IS THE BASIS OF WHAT EDUCATION IS ABOUT.

IT'S NOT TO CREATE THE BEST AMERICAN SYSTEM.

IT'S TO CREATE THE BEST HUMAN BEING WHO IS AWARE AND ENLIGHTENED AND HAS THE CAPACITY TO WRESTLE WITH REALLY DEEP IDEAS, AND THAT'S ALL CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS SAYING.

LET'S WRESTLE WITH THE HARDS STUFF ABOUT OUR HUSTER AND GIVE STUDENTS THE CAPACITY TO REALLY THINK CRITICALLY AND COME TO THEIR OWN DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT THOSE THINGS MEAN.

>> SO REPRESENTATIVE PHISHYER'S BILL DOES NOT ADDRESS POST SECONDARY EDUCATION, BUT ANOTHER BILL, BILL REQUEST 69 BY YOUR COLLEAGUES, REPRESENTATIVES DECKER AND LOCKETT, DO, AND I WANTED TO GET YOUR PERSPECTIVE, DR. HOUCHENS, BECAUSE WE COULD HAVE A WHOLE DISCUSSION ABOUT ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS LEGAL PRECEDENT FOR ACADEMIC FREEDOM IN K-12, AND I BELIEVE THAT MAYBE THE JURY IS STILL OUT ON THAT.

I MAN, I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME CASE LAW THAT'S GONE BACK AND FORTH ON THAT, AND IF YOU CAN ENLIGHTEN US, THAT BE WOULD BE GREAT, BUT ACADEMIC FREEDOM IS A CORNERSTONE OF POST SECONDARY EDUCATION, IS IT NOT?

SO YOUR THOUGHTS ON DOES IT GO TOO FAR WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THERE'S NOT A COMPULSORY SENSE OF EDUCATION FOR HIGHER ED AS IT IS FOR K-12 SO HOW DO YOU RECONCILE THE BILL IN THAT REGARD?

>> IN GENERAL I THINK THE COASTERS CAREFULLY DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN THE ROLE AND FACING K-12 TEACHER VERSUS A UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR, AND AS SUCH THE COURSE OF THE HAVE MATED PRETTY CLEAR THAT THERE'S NOT THE SAME LEVEL OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM FOR A K-12 TEACHER BECAUSE THEY ARE FUNCTIONING AS AN AGENT OF THE STATE AND THEY'RE FUNCTION IN LOCAL PAR ENT IS OR IN THE CASE OF THE PARENTS, AND FOR THAT REASON THERE'S FAR MORE LEGAL STRUCTURES AROUND WHAT TEACHERS CAN AND CANNOT TEACH AS OPPOSED TO UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS, AND THERE ARE I THINK A VARIETY OF REASONS WHY WE TREAT UNIVERSITIES DIFFERENTLY AND PROBABLY SHOULD TREAT THEM DIFFERENTLY.

I USE CRITICAL RACE THEORY IN MY OWN CLASSES.

I'M NOT SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF ANYBODY ELSE AT WKU BUT I HELPED TO CRAFT OUR CURRENT INVESTIGATORS OF THE SCHOOL PRINCIPAL CERTIFICATION PROGRAM AT WESTERN, AND SO I TEACH TEACHERS WHO ARE GOING TO BECOME SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, AND CONNECTED AND DIVERSITY IS A KEY THEME OF PROGRAM.

IT'S WOVEN THROUGHOUT.

EVERY ISSUE WE LOOK AT, WE LOOK AT HAD YOU ARE OUR DECISIONS AFFECTING OUR MOST VULNERABLE AND MARGINALIZED STUDENTS, AND WE USE CRITICAL THEORY AS A SOURCE FOR LOOKING AT THESE PROBLEMS OF ACHIEVEMENT GAPS AND DIFFERENCES IN STUDENT LEARNING IN OUR SCHOOLS.

WE DO IT AS -- AND WE INTRODUCE IT AS ONE VALUABLE PERSPECTIVE.

THE PROBLEM, WHETHER IT'S IN K-12 OR IN HIGHER EDUCATION, IS WHEN THE TENETS OF CRITICAL THEORY ARE NOT TREATED AS A PROSPECTIVE BUT ARE AS THE GOSPEL TRUTH, AS THE ONLY LENS THROUGH WHICH WE CAN VIEW THESE PROBLEMS, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE LEGITIMATELY CONCERNED ABOUT, WHETHER IT'S IN COLLEGE OR AT THE K-12 LEVEL.

I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT STUDENTS IN A CALIFORNIA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THIRD GRADERS, HAVING TO IDENTIFY ALL THE DIFFERENT WAYS IN WHICH THEY ARE AN OPPRESSOR OR ON PRESSED, AND SO WE'RE DOING THIS WITH EIGHT-YEAR-OLDS, AND I THINK IT'S QUITE REASONABLE FOR KENTUCKIANS TO SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, WE WANT OUR SCHOOLS TO TEACH OUR STUDENTS IS THE FULL SPECTRUM OF AMERICAN HISTORY.

WOULDN'T TO KNOW THE GOOD, THE BAD AND UGLY ABOUT OUR COUNTRY AND ALSO HOW FAR WE'VE COME AND HOW FAR WE ARE YET TO GO, BUT THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO TEACH THAT AND TO GET THAT MESSAGE ACROSS TO OUR STUDENTS ABOUT THE PEOPLE WE NEED TO BECOME COLLECTIVELY THAN ACCEPTING THE TENETS OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY.

>> SO THE 1619 PROJECT, WHICH I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE ISSUE WITH, THE BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT 1619 BEING THE TIME OF THE FIRST SLAVES WERE BROUGHT TO COLONIALIZED MESHWORK DON'T FIND FAULT WITH TALKING ABOUT THOSE DATES DATE AND THEY EVENTS.

>> NOT AT ALL.

NOR DO I FIND FUTILE WITH LINING LOOKING AT WHAT THE SELIG HAS MEANT FOR US AS AN AMERICAN PEOPLE.

I THINK WHAT PEOPLE TAKE EXCEPTION WITH IS THE IDEA THAT THAT WAS THE DEFINING MOMENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY, THAT THAT DEFINES US FAR MORE AND MORE COMPLETELY THAN THE EVENTS OF VEIN 6.

>> HAS ANYONE SAID THAT?

HAS ANYONE SAID THAT 1619 DEFINES AMERICA?

>> YES.

>> MORE DEFINITIVELY THAN ANY OTHER MOMENT?

>> WHAT YOU SUGGESTED IS THAT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE CENTER THE EXPERIENCE OF SLAVERY AND USE THAT AS ONE OF THE PROTECTTIVITIES TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS COUNTRY EVOLVED, NOT THE PERSPECTIVE OR THE MOST IMPORTANT PERSPECTIVE BUT ONE OF THE PERSPECTIVES THAT HASN'T BEEN CONSIDERED BEFORE NOW.

I WANT POINT OUT THE THAT CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS OVER 40 YEARS OLD.

EVERYBODY'S NOT TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY THE SAME WAY.

TO TREAT THIS AS IF EVERY EVER EVERY PERSON WHO IS TREATING CRITICAL RACE THEORY ARE DOING THIS OR THAT IS UNFAIR PUN DO NOT DO ANY OTHER SUBJECT TRIBE.

SOW NO HISTORIAN TEACHES -- ALL HISTORIANS DON'T TEACH HISTORY THE SAME WAY P PAUL CRITICAL RACE THEORISTS DON'T TEACH CRITICAL RACE THEORY THE SWAIM.

AND SO FRYING TO BAN AN ENTIRE WAY OF APPROACH AND THEORETICAL APPROACH THAT IS SO DEEP AND SO WELL THOUGHT OUT AND WHERE CRITICAL RACE THEORISTS DON'T AGREE WITH EACH OTHER ALL THE TIME, AND TREATING IT'S A BLANKET SAYING THAT WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT THIS AT ALL IS A VERY DISINGENUOUS AND PROBLEMATIC WAY OF FRYING TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THESE ISSUES.

>> THIS BILL DOES NOT BAN CRITICAL RACE THEORY.

IT ONLY BANS CERTAIN CONCEPTS UPON WHICH CRITICAL RACE THEORY OR ANY RACE-BASED THEORY WAS DEVELOPED.

SO WHETHER IT'S HITLER SAYING HIS RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER RACE, IT WOULD BAN THAT SORT OF TEACHING AS WELL.

SO CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS SPECIFICALLY NOT NAMED IN THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION, ONLY CERTAIN PARAMETERS OF RACE-BASED EDUCATION.

>> AND TO REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER'S POINT, SO A WEEK OR SO AGO I READ ABOUT A STORY?

SPOKANE, WASHINGTON WHERE A PAIR OF TWINS IN A CLASS, HISTORY LESSON, WHERE THEY WERE STUDYING -- THEY SAID THEY WERE STUDYING ABOUT INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS, FACTORY SYSTEMS AND TRADE UNIONS.

AND THE TWIN GIRLS ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE CLASS WERE ASKED TO PICK COTTON, TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO BE A SLAVE.

AND SO THE MOTHER HEARD ABOUT THIS.

SHE WAS VERY UPSET AND A WHOLE CONVERSATION HAS ENSUED AND THAT'S STILL YET TO THE SETTLED.

SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS HERE'S THE FLIP SIDE OF WHAT -- MAYBE THE POSITIVE SPIN TO REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER'S BILL WOULD DO.

IF THAT WERE SITUATED IN KENTUCKY AND THERE WERE A TEACHER BROUGHT OUT SOME COTTON AND SAID, NOW, I WANT YOU ALL TO PRETENDS YOU'RE HAPPY SLAVES, WOULD YOU ALSO NOT HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THAT?

AND IT SEEMS AS IF REPRESENTATIVE PHISH SER SAYING, THE BILL WOULD PROTECT AGAINST SUCH INSTANCES AS THAT OR HITLER.

>> YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SOMEONE TELLING A CHILD TO PRETEND TO PICK COTTON.

THE GAME ONE TEACHER USED HAVING CHILDREN PRETEND THEY WERE GOING THROUGH THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG AND SHOULDN'T BE DONE.

DO WE NEED A LAW BECAUSE ONE TEACHER HAS DONE THIS?

NO.

WE NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT DIFFERENT TEACHER AND COMING UP 1 A DIFFERENT PED LOGICAL APPROACH TO THINGS.

THE FACT WHAT THE TEACHER WAS TRYING TO DO WHICH WAS TO GET STUDENTS TO REALLY EM PATHETICALLY AND INTO A LIVED EXPERIENCE UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING, THAT'S A GOOD THING.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH HER INTENT.

HER METHOD WAS PROBLEMATIC, AND THIS IS GETTING AT INTENT, NOT JUST METHOD.

>> BUT MAYBE NOT THE INTENT DELIBERATELY BUT THE CHILD WAS MADE TO FEEL INTIMIDATED, HARASSED, ALL THE THINGS THAT PERHAPS REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER LAYS OUT IN HIS BILL.

AND THAT'S WHY I BRING THAT UP.

>> BUT IT'S NOT CRITICAL RACE THEORY THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

>> BUT NEITHER IS WHAT REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER NECESSARILY IS TALKING ABOUT.

>> THAT'S WHY I GET BACK TO THIS WHOLE THING ABOUT RACIST DIVISIVENESS THE WAY IT'S INTRODUCED IN THE BILL, ITS INAPPROPRIATE FOR NAMARA OF PROSTATE CANCER YOU CAN'T JUST PICK OUT ONE THING HERE AND DEAL WITH THE SUBJECT MATTER.

WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LEGISLATING HOW ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHAT HAPPENS IN THE CLASSROOM, WHICH I THINK IT WAS SAID EARLIER BY ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT SUBMITTED COMMENTS, IS THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE LEGISLATING WHAT HAPPENS IN A CLASSROOM DOWN TO THE CLASSROOM BECAUSE IT HAPPENS HERE, THERE OR SOMEWHERE ELSE.

THE STANDARDS THAT THEY SET ON THROSTLES THAT ARE IN PLACE HAVE PROVED TO BE EFFECTIVE.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN SOMEBODY'S NOT GOING TO VIOLATE IN IT SOME WAY, BUT THERE ARE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES ALREADY IN PLACE TO DEAL WITH THAT.

NOW WE'RE GOING TO SAY, SOMETHING MIGHT HAPPEN THAT WE DON'T LIKE BECAUSE SOMETHING SELLS OUT THERE.

SO LET'S LEGISLATES SOMETHING ELSE.

BY THE WAY, LET'S CRIMINALIZED THAT BEHAVIOR.

BY THE WAY, LET'S HEAP A CHILL EFFECT ON THIS.

AND WE ARE FURTHERING THE THINKING AND THE REACTION THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH MANY DOG WILLS THAT WE ARE BE, DURING THIS TIME THAT THIS FEEDS INTO THAT TYPE OF PARANOIA.

ASK MY GOOD FRIEND JOE PHISH TORE RETHINK THIS BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES PERHAPS UNINTENDED BY HIM WITH RESPECT TO THIS TYPE OF APPROACH TO DEALING WITH THIS SUBJECT MATTER.

AND THERE'S ANOTHER POINT.

WHEN THEY USE THIS TERM, THIS GENERALIZED TERM CALLED CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND THEN THEY GO DOWN 12 TENETS AND ALL THIS SORT OF STUFF, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS FOLKS, EVEN IN THAT PARTICULAR FRAMEWORK, TEACH IN DIFFERENT WAYS.

THEY DON'T ALL TEACH THE SAME.

ARE THEY GOING TO TEACH EVERY TENT OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THOSE ARE ACADEMIC TENETS THAT HAVE BEEN LAID OUT THAT HAVE BEEN SCHOLARS AND ET CETERA HAVE FOCUSED ON, HAVE LAID THESE OUT AS AREAS CORN SERIOUS TO EXPLORE.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BRING INTO A PARTICULAR CLASSROOM NECESSARILY.

SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO BE CAREFUL WHEN WE START LEGISLATING FROM FRANKFORT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE WHEN THERE IS NO ISSUE THAT'S TAKING PLACE IN KENTUCKY BECAUSE WE THINK THERE MIGHT BE A PROBLEM THAT MAY ARISE.

AND THERE'S ONE OTHER POINT, AND I'VE GOT TO GO BACK TO IT.

WE HAVE TO PREPARE OUR CHILDREN TO THINK CRITICALLY.

THE PROFESSOR MENTIONED THAT.

YOU KNOW, THESE CHILDREN -- AND SHE USED USED THE WORD FRAGILE.

LET ME BUT IT THIS WAY.

THEY'RE ALREADY SWIMMING IN A SEA OF INFORMATION, MUCH OF IT IS THAT IS NOT ACCURATE, MUCH IT IS THAT IS NOT ONLY -- IT'S DOES IT TOWARD THE, ET CETERA, YET HERE YOU HAVE A SITUATION, THEY CALL IT AN EDUCATIONAL FRAMEWORK HERE, OF SCHOOL PERHAPS, WHERE YOU CAN TAKE INFORMATION OF ALL KINDS AND BEGIN TO EXPLORE IT CRITICALLY, TEST IT.

IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO JUST LET THEM BE TAUGHT BY WHAT'S OUT HERE.

LOOK, THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG.

THERE'S NO PUTTING IT BACK IN.

IT'S ALREADY OUT HERE.

THEY'RE ALREADY LEARNING WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS SOCIETY.

AND A LOT OF IT IS MISINFORMATION.

A LOT OF IT IS NOT THROUGH INSTRUCTION.

A LOT OF IT IS NOT TESTED.

A LOT OF IT IS ASSUME IT BECOMES A PART OF THE CULTURE AND IT ACTUALLY HAS AN ADVERSE EFFECT IN TERMS OF HOW PEOPLE LIVE THEIR LIVES AND DEAL WITH OTHER PEOPLE.

SO WE'VE GOT TO DO A BETTER JOB OF THIS BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE I THE WAY TO DO IT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER THERE HAVE BEEN SOME WHO ASK ABOUT THE TIME OFFING OF THIS LEGISLATION, THAT YOU TAKE IT UP WHEN YOU GO BACK TO FRANKFORT IT WILL BE MIDTERM TIME 2022, THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT THEIR COULD REALLY RALLEY THE BASE.

DO YOU SEE A POLITICAL AGENDA?

DO YOU HAVE A POLITICAL AGENDA IN BRINGING THIS FORWARD AT THIS TIME?

>> NOT AT ALL.

AS I SAID, THE MOTIVATION FOR THIS BILL WAS ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL, AND THAT WAS THE MOTIVATION HERE.

IT WAS AT THE REQUEST OF SEVERAL MY CONSTITUENTS TO PUT THE -- TO DRAFT THIS, TO RESEARCH WHAT OTHER STATES WERE DOING, AND TO FILE IT IN TIME FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF OUR LOCAL SCHOOL-BASED -- >> HOW CLOSELY DOES THIS RESEMBLE SOME OF THE LEGISLATION THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PASSED IN IDAHO, IOWA AND THAT WAS NISH WAITED BY THE AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL?

>> I CAN HONESTLY SAVE SAY I HAVE NOT READ WHAT ALEC HAS MODELED LEGISLATION ABOUT THIS.

THIS IS BASED UPON MOSTLY THE TENNESSEE MODEL THAT PASSED JUST AFTER I FILED THIS BILL.

I READ ONE OF THEIR DRAFTS, AND FILED THIS BILL.

>> AND THIS MILNEICS THAT.

>> IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO MUCH OF THE LEGISLATION THAT'S FLOATING AROUND IN 20 STATES IN TERMS OF FILINGS RIGHT NOW, FOUR OF WHICH HAS BEEN ADOPTED AT LEAST AS OF JUNE 10th ACROSS THE STATE.

IT LOOKS LIKE A WHOLE ORGANIZED TYPE PIECE.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT JOE FISCHER IS PART OF SOME ORGANIZED TEAM, BUT HE IS FEEDING INTO THIS PROCESS THAT IS A VERY DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE CERTAIN TYPES OF TENETS OF HOW WE RELATE TEACH OTHER AND PARTICULARLY THE ISSUE OF RACE, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH FRONTALLY AND HONESTLY, AND WE SHOULD HAVE THIS EXCHANGE.

>> YOU BOTH SAY, BOTH SIDES SAY IF WE DON'T TEACH IT, IT FURTHER DIVIDES THE NATION.

IF WE DO TEACH IT, IT FURTHER DIVIDES THE NATION.

>> WE'RE ALREADY DIVIDED.

WE'RE ALREADY DIVIDED.

THE QUESTION IS WILL WE FACE THE REALITIES AND DISCERN THE FACTS AND CRITICALLY EXAMINE THEM IN A WAY THAT WE CAN COME OUT WITH A BETTER OUTCOME AS OPPOSED TO JUST LETTING IT FLOW THROUGH, DUMB DOWN THE SITUATION, IGNORE IT, AND THEN HAVE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE SUFFERING WITH RIGHT NOW.

>> THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO CONFRONT THE CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE AS A PEOPLE.

IT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT, AND IT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO BRING UP OUR CHILDREN TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE CONVERSATIONS TO MAKE AMERICA A BETTER COUNTRY, AND WILL WE PASS DOWN TO THEM THE FULL PICTURE OF WHO WE ARE AS A PEOPLE, THE GOOD AND THE BAD IN WAYS THAT HELP US SEE WHAT UNITES US AND BRINGS TOGETHER AND MAKES US AMERICANS FIRST.

THAT'S THE SPIRIT OF CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

IN SO MANY WAYS CREDIBLY RACE THEORY UP ENDS THE CIVIL RIGHTS GOING BACK TO FIRST AMERICAN PRINCIPLES AND CALLING TO US LIVE UP TO THEM IN A BETTER WAY.

>> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU BUT I'VE PARTICIPATED IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT AND I KNOW WHAT THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT IS ABOUT, AND I THINK THAT WHAT IT WAS AND IS IS VERY EXEMPLARY, BUT I MUST SAY THAT THE SOCIETY HAS NOT MOVED FAR ENOUGH ALONG IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE.

WE HAVE TO DO BETTER IN THAT REGARD.

>> WE'LL BE TRACKING THIS BILL.

WE'RE NOT EVEN HOW MUCH MONTHS AWAY FROM THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION BUT WE'LL BE FOLLOWING THIS, AND I THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT TO DISCUSS IT.

A LOT OF PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT CRITICAL RACE THEORY BUT "KENTUCKY TONIGHT" WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IT.

AND THANK YOU FOR BEING A PART OF THAT CONVERSATION AND JOINING US.

WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT MONDAY NIGHT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE RIGHT HERE ON "KENTUCKY TONIGHT."

WE'LL SEE YOU THEN.