* Media advisory yesterday…
Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias will testify [Tuesday morning] before the Senate Judiciary Committee about his landmark, first-in-the-nation legislation designed to prevent book bans and protect First Amendment Rights. Giannoulias initiated Bill 2789, setting a nationwide precedent in the fight to combat censorship of books and resources. The bill was signed into law on June 12, 2023, as Public Act 103-100.
Public Act 103-100 allows Giannoulias’ office to provide grant funding to libraries that adhere to the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights, which states that reading materials should not be removed or restricted because of partisan or personal disapproval. Libraries can also issue a statement prohibiting the practice of banning books or resources. Libraries that do not adhere to the law will be ineligible for state grants from Giannoulias’ office.
Giannoulias’ law banning book bans in Illinois illuminates a path for other states to follow in an effort to turn the tide on the scourge of censorship sweeping the nation. His office has launched a website – banbookbans.com – that enables visitors to share their stories and to learn how to protect their state’s Right to Read.
* From today’s hearing…
Sen. John Kennedy: So tell me what you want, who gets to decide? All I’ve heard is ‘the librarians’ and parents have nothing to do with it. And if that’s your response, what planet did you just parachute in from? Or what country, more appropriately? This is not China.
Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias: Senator, with all due respect, parents absolutely have a say. My parents were immigrants, came to this country. We never checked out books without our parents seeing what books we were reading. They encouraged us to…
Sen. Kennedy: Mr. Secretary, I understand this is good for your politics back home.
Secretary Giannoulias: It’s got nothing to do with my politics.
Sen. Kennedy: It has everything to do with your politics.
Secretary Giannoulias: I’m here to…
Sen. Kennedy: But you came here with a problem and I’m trying to understand the solution and you don’t have one, other than [cross-talk] other than to tell us that ‘We don’t agree with you. You’re on the wrong, we’ll be on the wrong side of history’
Secretary Giannoulias: We solved the problem in Illinois. We fixed it.
* Giannoulias campaign email pitch at 11:35 this morning…
I just finished testifying in front of the U.S. Senate to discuss book banning. Frankly, I can’t believe this is even a conversation we have to have.
Being chief librarian was one of the duties that drew me to the Secretary of State’s office. I believe we have an opportunity to help children get ahead, to make unprecedented gains in adult literacy and aid everyone’s search for knowledge.
Books open doors and enrich minds. The last thing we should do is ban books, to censor the very freedom expression on which our country was founded, or demonize the LGBTQ community to run up the political scoreboard.
I’m willing to fight for that point, and I hope that you will too. Will you rush a donation right now to take a stand against extreme book bans?
Good government can definitely be good politics. No shame in that. Embrace it.
* Somewhat off-topic because this isn’t about a library, but it is in Illinois…
Students in Yorkville High School’s English II Rhetorical Analysis class will not be using the book “Just Mercy” as part of their coursework after all.
The Yorkville school board has reversed its decision to allow teachers to use the book as an anchor text for the class.
Earlier this year, the parent of a student in the English II course complained about use of “Just Mercy” by Bryan Stevenson, triggering the district’s uniform grievance procedure. […]
According a statement released by [school board President Darren Crawford] as well as the meeting minutes, [board members] Knoll and Houston deemed the book “too controversial.”
The course is designed to engage students’ critical thinking skills.
About the book…
Just Mercy tells the story of Bryan Stevenson, a young lawyer who founded the Equal Justice Initiative, a legal practice dedicated to defending those most desperate and in need: the poor, the wrongly condemned, and women and children trapped in the farthest reaches of our criminal justice system.
It was also made into a movie.
- Donnie Elgin - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 12:35 pm:
“Secretary Giannoulias: It’s got nothing to do with my politics.”
I support Alexi’s legislation - but had to laugh that it is not about politics when his political staff sent out a beg letter within 24 hours.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 12:38 pm:
===within 24 hours. ===
Within like an hour.
- Banish Misfortune - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 12:46 pm:
I sorta laugh when I read about parents controlling reading and monitoring books from the library. I grew up in the 50s and at no time did my parents pay any attention at all to what I read. I know you might say that the libraries had a pretty scrubbed collection at that time and maybe so, but for sure my parents paid no attention whatsoever.
- Larry Bowa Jr. - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 12:46 pm:
“Sen. John Kennedy: So tell me what you want, who gets to decide?”
Right? It should be Moms for Liberty deciding what books go into school libraries. All the D student mouth breather parents out there definitely ought to have the heckler’s veto over our educational content.
- vern - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 12:58 pm:
The word “political” has such broad and diverse definitions that it’s almost useless. Both Kennedy and Alexi were taking liberties with language. The difference is that Kennedy wanted to derail the discussion in favor of a circular semantic argument, and Alexi said what he needed to say to avoid that.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:04 pm:
===my parents paid no attention whatsoever===
Then that’s on them.
- Steve Rogers - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:05 pm:
=So tell me what you want, who gets to decide? All I’ve heard is ‘the librarians’ and parents have nothing to do with it.=
But isn’t that what Sen. Kennedy and the other Repubs want? They want to decide what cannot go into libraries and take away parents and librarians authority.
We all know if I read a book about a hungry caterpillar, then I’ll want to transition into a caterpillar, right? /s
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:14 pm:
=All the D student mouth breather parents out there definitely ought to have the heckler’s veto over our educational content.=
You win today. That is priceless, my problem now is not blurting that out during a school board meeting.
=This is not China.=
But that is the style of government the gop wants to emulate, and where their party leader has all of his kitsch manufactured.
- Gravitas - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:14 pm:
Some of the offending books are graphic, lewd, and raw. Not appropriate for minor children.
- Jerry - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:15 pm:
I remember when Conservatives wanted to get the guv’mint out of your life.
Now they’re going to tell you what books you can read, when you can have children, and who you can marry.
- Nathan H - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:16 pm:
In the Chicago area, most libraries are a part of the SWAN system so they can share books amongst them. They have an app through which you can manage your account, as well as the accounts of your children. I can see everything they check out. Parental supervision isn’t hard, you just have to make a choice to do it.
- duck duck goose - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:16 pm:
This whole issue is mind-numbingly dumb. The book bans are silly, and everyone involved with them looks like a knuckle-dragging rube.
But the statute also goes too far. What’s the point of democratically electing library boards if those boards are not allowed to make the fundamental decisions for their libraries? The state statute is poorly done and will likely have scads of unintended consequences.
“It’s got nothing to do with my politics.” That might be a skosh perjurious.
John Kennedy seems like a doofus. I don’t think he realized that accusing someone of acting politically to make you look bad says something about your own political motivations. We mighty not be sending our best people to Washington.
- DuPage Saint - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:19 pm:
why on earth would you allow a controversial book to be read in a course on critical thinking? the horror of it
and to censorship I am also old and i remember going to the Elmhurst library to check out The Untouchables by Elliot Ness the librarian called my mom before they would let me check it out.
- Jocko - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:27 pm:
==All I’ve heard is ‘the librarians’ and parents have nothing to do with it.==
Senator Kennedy need not worry, given his state is near the top of the list for illiteracy.
- Pundent - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:28 pm:
=Some of the offending books are graphic, lewd, and raw. Not appropriate for minor children.=
So parent your kid and I’ll do the same with mine. Problem solved.
- Dave Dahl - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:35 pm:
In 1975 my folks would not let me see “Jaws,” but they let me read the book.
- Jocko - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:35 pm:
==Some of the offending books are graphic, lewd, and raw.==
I can describe a female body part by typing ‘8008′ on my calculator. Should we ban them?
- Donnie Elgin - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:35 pm:
Public Act 103-100
Many libraries have a formal “reconsideration of materials” procedure in their materials selection policy. Essentially it puts forth a formal process for concerned citizens to request that a particular book be moved say from the kids to the teen sections, or perhaps removed altogether. This is a process that is recommended by the American Library Association. My understanding is that the Illinois State Library that Alexi is in charge of will offer guidance as to whether these “reconsideration” procedures will be allowed. Library percapita grants money is on the line so it will be important.
https://www.ala.org/tools/challengesupport/selectionpolicytoolkit/formalreconsideration
- Banish Misfortune - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:51 pm:
“Then that’s on them”
Nah, 10 kids. I think they figured the nuns would keep us in line.
- DuPage - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:53 pm:
@- Banish Misfortune - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 12:46 pm:
===I sorta laugh when I read about parents controlling reading and monitoring books from the library. I grew up in the 50s and at no time did my parents pay any attention at all to what I read. I know you might say that the libraries had a pretty scrubbed collection at that time and maybe so, but for sure my parents paid no attention whatsoever.===
Back then, libraries screened out pornographic materials, and books advocating overthrowing the government or other acts of violence. Some books were only checked out to adult cardholders or were only allowed to be read in the adult section of the library. Some books were listed but the location was “see librarian”. (That prevented the books from being stolen.) Back then, your parents did not need to worry as much about what you were obtaining at the library.
- Banish Misfortune - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:54 pm:
Okay more seriously, I think that they figured there was nothing in our public library that they were not comfortable in our reading.
- OneMan - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 1:58 pm:
Both of my kids had to read Nickel and Dimed in HS, wonder if that would get past a concerned parent today.
- Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 2:15 pm:
I had the run of the library when I was a kid. Mom read 4-8 novels a week. My siblings and I went with mom (and were later sent by her) to exchange the read novels for a new batch. We then went and picked out what we wanted. Mom certainly monitored what we read, but I don’t ever recall her saying “no.”
Banning books shuts off parents rights.
- Joe Schmoe - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 2:30 pm:
No matter what side of the issue you are on, I think Alexi got a bit roughed up on his first trip to Capitol Hill.
- Frida's boss - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 2:36 pm:
Alexi’s goal since day one is to run for higher office. I thought only every single person in Illinois knew that Alexi didn’t care about SOS except as a stepping stone to the next office. Pretty humorous Kennedy heard about it all the way in DC.
- Annonin' - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 2:41 pm:
THe wing whack jobs on right wing radio are running clips of Sen. Goober (R-LA} readin’ from a book and saying the word “dildo” That should solve the problem.
- Jerry - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 2:46 pm:
=Some of the offending books are graphic, lewd, and raw. Not appropriate for minor children.=
Like The Bible?
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 2:52 pm:
We have a broken immigration system and this is what the Senate Judiciary Committee is spending time on?
Yes, they can do more than one thing at a time, but real people will be living in tents in Chicago this winter and the federal government is AWOL.
Solve problems. Don’t invent problems. The censorship debate is one of the biggest examples of manufactured outrage and distraction politics of our era.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 3:07 pm:
=== The course is designed to engage students’ critical thinking skills. ===
My idea of critical thinking differs from the MAGA GOP intent to be critical of thinking.
P.S. JS Mill, I feel your pain in trying to restrain yourself from using such an appropriate line.
- zatoichi - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 4:12 pm:
As a kid I worked through all the history, science, and political books in the youth section of the local library. Moved to the adult section somewhere about mid grade school. Dad’s response was ‘just keep reading’. No idea how books were selected for the library. My first visit to a large bookstore (Kroch & Brentano) opened a huge new selection of books that never appeared in the library. When I asked why, Dad said the library only had so much room and money. He would ask what I was reading, but never said do not read that. My book addiction has never ended. Banning books makes little sense and stops nothing even though libraries do have to make choices. There are always options.
- Gravitas - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 4:22 pm:
@Jerry:
No, some of the objectionable books contained descriptions that one would not find in the Bible.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 4:26 pm:
===Some of the offending books are graphic, lewd, and raw. Not appropriate for minor children.
This is why Jennifer and I were involved in what our kids were reading. It was a challenge and we worked with their teachers to find appropriate content because they were strong readers who outstripped the appropriateness of the content in elementary school.
By high school, they could and did check out adult books (same as I did starting in sixth grade actually as I was bored with the reading that was ‘grade level.’
Should I not have read Winds of War or War and Remembrance? The scene where the old writer is gassed was pretty difficult material and many kids my age at the time might not have handled it, but I did. So should busy bodies have limited my access given my mother approved?
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 4:30 pm:
===You win today. That is priceless, my problem now is not blurting that out during a school board meeting.
LOL. I probably would and that’s why you are much better in that job than I am.
I’ll add, I read quite a few books in the in between phase for my kids–mostly middle school–to ensure they were appropriate for my daughters and I don’t think I said no to any books. I might have delayed one, but the point to me was would it be too much for them, but then when it was appropriate and they read it, we could discuss it.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 4:32 pm:
===books advocating overthrowing the government or other acts of violence.
Congrats, you would have banned the Declaration of Independence.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Sep 12, 23 @ 4:52 pm:
===The course is designed to engage students’ critical thinking skills.
It’s also designed to be college level material. If you want college level credit, you use college level material.
Of course, who ever heard of wrongful convictions in Illinois /s
- The Other Rich Hill - Wednesday, Sep 13, 23 @ 3:55 am:
“Sen. John Kennedy: So tell me what you want, who gets to decide?”
Apparently, one Yorkville parent gets to decide for the entire school district — ie, the entire taxing body whose money is supposed to go toward teaching students critical thinking skills by introducing them to topics they may not have thought of before.
Our students should be learning about these books precisely because they’re controversial. AND, they should be learning why 1 person may think any given book is controversial.
But what do I know. I grew up in the American educational system.