Meeting Public Comments

Andrea Welch []

Censoring books will not help improve the quality of education. Students have access to far more dangerous information online, which they are exploring independently and without context or support. Productive discourse of text with a trained professional in order to gain knowledge is a far safer option for students. If parents are concerned about texts used in schools, they should contact teachers directly.

Nathaniel Chesher []

This bill is outright censorship. Parents are always welcome to parent/censor their own children's potential learning. However, not all families are the same. Other families have a level of maturity so their children can learn from different points of view rather than be horrified that 'others' exist. The fining only exists in this bill to serve as proxy to parents too lazy to actually parent their own children.

Joan Bessman Taylor [Parent to 3 school age children, educator for 27 years]

Current law that already exists: https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/ico/chapter/728.pdfMakes it illegal to provide pornography to minorsSF2198 is redundant of the current lawBy restating existing law it makes the Code needlessly cumbersome and regressiveThe goal of this bill is unclear and can only be seen as attacking a straw man It is not the case now, nor has it ever been the case that teachers and librarians intentionally provided materials in school that meet the threshold of obscenity that is, works when taken as a whole lack any literary merit and exist with the sole goal of appealing to prurient interests. There are already laws in place that deal with providing policies for selection and the reconsideration of materials. We are guided by Iowa Code 280.12. Policies that guide decision making around retaining or removing materials are already required and get revisited through regular procedures the process of library inventory and collection audits to ensure that collections are responsive to everchanging societal expectations. Iowa code requires a properly endorsed teacher librarian in every district. They are your insurance that the materials made available in classrooms and libraries are appropriate for the identified audience and that obscenity does not find its way in.I would submit that your assumed goals for putting forward this bill protecting our young people from materials unsuitable for them could be more immediately met by ensuring that the already existent Code requiring a fully endorsed librarian in every district be upheld. If change is needed then perhaps the change should be to require a professional librarian not just in every district but in every school so that full attention can be paid to the provision of materials rather than leaving such supervision to untrained staff or worse allowing for the neglect of it altogether. Rather than creating redundant legislation please direct your efforts toward seeing that the safeguards already required by law be fully realized.

Chelsea Sims []

This bill is not only unnecessary (as there are already laws in place that prevent obscenity in schools), it is also antidemocratic. The constitution protects our intellectual freedom, and this bill attempts to limit that right. No to censorship. No to moral panic dictating our laws.

Michelle Veach []

I am writing in support of this bill. Any book that contains profanity, or sexual content should NOT be in our public schools They must NOT be assigned as required reading. I have read aloud at JSD school board meetings from required reading at Johnston High School 9/10th grade class: Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Foer includes text such as "Blow job" "dick" "Penis" "Cunt" "whore". Adults are shocked that I would SAY these words. I am shocked our kids would READ these words. Please set a moral standard in our public, tax funded schools. No profanity. No sex. If kids want to read that they can go the public library, or buy the books privately. Without penalties schools will not comply with any law you pass. Failed reconsideration processes at the school level prove this. Parents have tried to fix this on our own we need a law to enforce moral standards.

Jonathan Sims []

This law in unnecessary. Pornography laws already exist. Schools already have solid methods for selecting materials for their libraries and for people to challenge those materials without throwing people in jail. Stop trying to censor books. Stop painting educators as villains.

Jackie Biger []

Writing not in support. Teachers and Librarians are trained to professionally select materials for school and libraries that align with curriculum and needs of students. Books are crafted and created and exist in a confined space and time and story or informational need. This bill seems designed to create a space for people to try and punish teachers based upon their own individual comforts. There are already reconsideration policies in place at school districts. The internet is not nearly as controlled as a book. Erasing the informational or literary experiences for a student does not erase that student's existence and their own experiences.

Melissa Collins []

I support this bill. Movies have ratings for a reason. Schools wont show rated R movies to students at school. The same should go for the books in the library. If public libraries want to have the material, then fine, but school libraries is not the place for sexualized material.

Sam Blatt []

This bill is unnecessary and repugnant. Intellectual freedoms are key and this will hinder that right. Jailing educators, for doing there job and providing a variety of resources is despicable.

Katherine Bryden []

Opposed to SF2198 as it is unnecessary, and frankly an insult to the training and skill set of our teachers and librarians. They are educated to select appropriate materialsfor kids at every developmental stage. They are not criminals. They protect and serve our children, and they are a bulwark against narrowminded, censorial tendencies that are ascendant in our culture right now. I want my children to maintain intellectual curiosity and not have their access to information limited by people who have an extremist religious agenda and are set on siphoning my tax dollars away from secular public education to private Christian schools.

Shawn Brauer []

As a teacher/librarian in an elementary school this bill repulses me. Why do a few people get to decide what is appropriate and what is not? All of our books are listed online so parents, community members, or whom ever else wants to see what is available they are able and welcome to. If a child checks out a book that a parent deems to be offensive then they need to have the chat with their child explaining why it is not appropriate. To fine a teacher or a librarian for having a book that one person finds unacceptable is not a way to keep Iowa in the top of education field and it is not a way to keep teachers that are highly qualified as teachers.

Denise Perez []

Writing in AGAINST this bill. Who determines what is pornographic. The Bible contains nmeros pornagraphic & violent stories. Please let ou librarians and teachers do their jobs.

Samantha Helmick []

I hold several concerns about this Senate File including:* Consequences of prosecution and some of the more vague definitions will be detrimental to schools and libraries and to the access to the wide array of information accessible to Iowa communities. We should want to champion unhindered access to data, content, information, and philosophy as much as possible to develop well rounded, critically thinking Iowans. * This government overreach conflicts with the foundational principle that congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. As a voting Republican, I am dismayed by the attempts to increase government control at the State level rather than entrusting local, smaller government (City Councils, County Commissions, and School Boards) to lead their communities forward. I no longer feel that I can vote a straight line ticket due to this and similar proposals. I am talking to my conservative communities, friends, and family members who also agree this does not represent us, our values, or our love of liberty/autonomy. * Caregivers and parents should be trusted to make decisions for their children but not for the others or their children or broader communities. My parents involved themselves in my life (particularly my education) and that is a fair standard to hold to all Iowans. Be present. Be an advocate for your children. Be a parent that teaches your children to navigate the real world and all its difficulties and beauties. Be a parent that raises strong thinkers for Iowa. * This file is a roadblock to information access and intellectual freedom. Silencing the voices, experiences, and perspectives outside of our immediate own/ the majority is a detriment to homogeny, society, and democracy. Without access to ideas outside my own, I cannot grow or adapt. I cannot build strongly principled arguments against the conversations that do not share my values if I can find them in my library. More information and transparency is required never less.

Paula Thome []

I am adamantly opposed to SF 2198. There is no common sense in this bill at all. It just leads to more threats made toward teachers which will only increase the teacher shortage even more. Schools have existing working review processes. Parents are more than welcome to come into classrooms. This bill again is a waste of time and unbelievable that it is even being debated.

Michelle Morey []

Libraries exist to serve all, not a minority of the conservativeminded. Different people have different life experiences and interestsit's as simple as that. The fact that one person may find something offensive in a book does not mean that others will. It seems that some are offended that other people and experiences exist at all. It is truly disturbing to see the disproportionate number of materials related to LGBTQ topics and people of color that these legislators would like to see erased. In Texas they have moved to ban a book on Ruby Bridges. A "sinister agenda" indeed!

Sara Anderson []

As parents, we all understand the importance to protect our children from exposure to pornography in the home and the dangers this destructive path leads to. Please protect our children no different than we do in our homes, from pornographic material while they are in school. Pornography is a major problem woven everywhere into society today and our children need leaders everywhere in the home, in schools and within legislation, to help protect them from acceptance and tolerance to pornography in certain environments or circumstances such as schools. Exposing kids to Pornography in any situation or environment is wrong period. Please protect our children.