By: Moriah Isabel Smith
Edited by: Andrew Bongiovanni
Graphic by: Arsh Naseer
The Backstory
Public libraries are bastions of democracy, serving the public good and treating society’s ills when nobody else will. Quintessentially local institutions, they are available to everyone in the community regardless of social status, creed, or political orientation. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, libraries offered public services when other doors were closed. Yes, they provide invaluable free access to information, art, and entertainment; however, they offer so much more than that. Libraries are no longer simply book repositories, but community centers, places where people from all walks of life come together. They offer help with tax filing, job searches, and unemployment claims. They are unofficial homeless shelters, providing not just a place to spend the day, but also access to free WiFi, educational programming, and all the other amenities available to the wealthiest library patrons. Recognizing the urgency of the opioid crisis in the United States, some libraries even have staff trained to administer the opioid overdose drug, Narcan. Despite how heavily communities rely on public libraries, many take them for granted, assuming they will always be there when needed. But these libraries do not exist in a vacuum––they require well maintained facilities, cutting-edge technologies, ever-developing physical and digital collections, and staffing.
Funding public services has often been a tough sell for conservative legislators; however, until just a few years ago, you would be hard-pressed to find one who said they do not support public libraries. In 2021, Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Jack Reed (D-RI), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced the Build America’s Libraries Act (BALA), which called on Congress to allocate funds to support library infrastructure. These Democratic Senators were soon joined by Representatives Andy Levin (D-MI) and Don Young (R-AK). The BALA called for funding library infrastructure to respond to issues like natural disasters, broadband capacity, environmental hazards, and accessibility barriers. While primarily a “liberal” proposal, Republican Representative Don Young’s support bridged the partisan aisle, and shed light on the fact that public libraries matter to everyone – or at least that they should. The disconnect here was that this support stopped short of funding, and the BALA did not pass.1 Legislators can get away with cutting funding, providing the bare minimum, knowing that the librarians and paraprofessionals who staff public libraries will continue to devote themselves––even for a pittance––to provide the best possible service to their communities.
Public libraries are a bulwark of a democratic society, and until recently, hardly anyone would suggest getting rid of them altogether. However, the last few years have ushered in a strange cultural landscape, and libraries are now in the political spotlight. Until recently, book bans were largely regarded as things of the past; but over the last couple of years they have gained momentum, reaching a 22-year high in 2023.2 Librarians have found themselves unwilling targets in an increasingly contentious culture war. The book-ban fervor is centered on LGBTQ+ themes and people of color (e.g., Toni Morrison’s classic, The Bluest Eye). Spearheaded by right-wing private interest groups, such as the Florida-based Moms for Liberty, book-banning and library-defunding are gaining traction as GOP-led state governments cater to these potential donor groups. In April of last year, the New Yorker published an article entitled “When the Culture Wars Come for the Public Library”:
Public libraries—once as popular with libertarian autodidacts as leftists—have become targets of the Republican Party…Local-library systems, and local librarians, are being vilified nationwide as peddlers of Marxism and child pornography. Whatever faith there was in public learning and public space is fraying. Though book bans aren’t new, current bids at censorship are often paired with cuts to library budgets.3
This New Yorker article, which focuses on a small town in Montana, is just one of many such pieces published over the last couple of years. The state of Montana is of particular note, however, as its library board voted to rescind its longstanding membership in the ALA, citing the organization’s newly appointed “Lesbian Marxist” president as the reason for this dramatic move. The culture wars have been escalating, and it is not just books that are coming under fire. Librarians themselves are being threatened, harassed, and receiving death threats. Far-right groups like the Proud Boys have shown up with guns to protest drag-queen story hours; and in the summer of 2023 and early 2024, there were rashes of bomb threats directed at public libraries.
The Resolutions
On April 25, 2023, in honor of National Library Week, Democratic U.S. Representative Jayapal brought Resolution 324 to the House of Representatives. Jayapal introduced this resolution to protect America’s libraries and librarians, after which it was immediately referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.7 Jayapal had thirty-four cosponsors, all of whom were Democrats. This very partisan agenda item saw no movement after its initial introduction.8 Resolution 324 was unlikely to get past the House – again, all of its co-sponsors were Democrats, and Republicans had a House majority. Even in the unlikely event that this bill had gone on to pass a House vote, a sizable minority in the Senate would probably have been enough to kill the bill on arrival.
After a year of stagnation, however, the bill gained new life, as it was repackaged and reintroduced using nearly identical language, this time as Senate Resolution 637. On April 11, 2024 (again, coinciding with National Library Week), Senator Hirono (D-HI) presented the bill, which was immediately referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pension. One small but potentially significant difference between Hirono’s and Jayapal’s resolutions is that Hirono has one Independent sponsor (Senator King, ME).9 This could represent a slight shift back toward bipartisan support of libraries.
Presumably, given the current political climate, Representative Jayapal and Senator Hirono know that passing such bills is extremely unlikely. These resolutions might be, for all intents and purposes, symbolic ones. Attempts to protect libraries on the federal level are unlikely to go very far, considering that the library culture war is playing itself out on local and state levels. The American Library Association was listed as an official supporter of Jayapal’s bill, which by itself should serve to ensure that states like Montana and Texas (which have recently parted ways with the ALA) will do everything in their power to maintain their right to control libraries as they see fit.10
The Garbage Can
One could say that Jayapal’s and Hirono’s resolutions were a long time coming. One could also say that they amount to symbolic gestures––manifestations of a host of partisan battles coming to fruition in a moment in time, encapsulated by the neat packaging of congressional resolution. This confluence of disparate issues speaks to the garbage can model, as per Cohen et al. (1972) in which “[a] variety of diverse interests, objectives and ideas all got dumped into a single decision, and what emerged came from the interaction of those ill-assorted objects.”11 Interestingly, libraries themselves can be likened to garbage cans, as they serve as a catch-all for society’s ills, in the myriad services they offer.
The texts of the resolutions themselves enumerate several unexpected societal issues that librarians face head-on, such as the opioid epidemic, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the housing crisis. After laying out the critical roles that libraries and librarians play in the integrity and functioning of our democracy, the resolutions go on to outline the defunding threats that these institutions and their stewards are facing. They then connect this to the culture war over book bans and library funding, proclaiming that librarians must be allowed to make decisions about library collections without fear of being censored or punished for performing their essential role of providing information access to the public. Finally, the resolutions call for the protection of libraries and librarians in the wake of “deplorable incidents” targeting library staff throughout the country.12 This call to protect libraries and librarians ensures funding and the right to organize and unionize, but it is not limited to protecting librarians and their civil rights. The resolutions also point to a need to protect “critical infrastructure,” and the essential right of Americans to freely access information, both of which rely on the work of librarians.13
The Streams
H.Res.324 and S.Res.637 relate to larger issues and partisan ideas about how to deal with those issues (e.g., unions, the unhoused, freedom of speech, social services, underserved communities). When viewed through Kingdon’s framework, the proposed bills manifest as the confluence of various and varied streams, wrapped up in neat little packages, the specific size and shape of which could have turned out a number of different ways. They just happened to be most conveniently dressed up in the trappings of library-specific language. H.Res.324 and S.Res.637 are solutions borne of “different streams of thinking, interests, and participants,” which come together to create a solution that depends less on an individual agenda and more on “timing and chance––what was in the can when the decision was made.”14
The policy stream refers to the experts’ continuous discourse around policy options and involves the exploration of different policy possibilities. This stream includes what Kingdon refers to as “policy entrepreneurs,” who are always tweaking talking points and preparing their elevator pitches for a chance to get an item on the agenda.15 Representative Jayapal and Senator Hirono are just such policy entrepreneurs, using the protection of libraries and library workers as a specific vehicle for advancing more general policy agendas around partisan issues. The recent spotlight on libraries and librarians has raised their political profile, as illustrated by the rapid proliferation of journalism devoted to the subject over the last couple of years. The public discourse and media attention indicate that the issue has entered the political stream, meaning legislators have identified a problem, and a policy solution is on the horizon. The book bans, the defunding, the bomb threats, the armed protests at drag-queen story hours––all have drawn attention to a problem that has been deemed by the three streams to be resolvable. This is how an agenda is chosen: a problem is identified as such, a potential policy solution is selected, and a politician decides to champion this policy solution.16
The Opposition
Perhaps Congress is not the right venue for a battle that is largely being fought on the state level. It is on the local and state levels where special interest groups like the Moms for Liberty are getting things done. These groups initially set their sights on controlling what librarians add to their collections. When these efforts are unsuccessful, they employ the scorched-earth technique of defunding libraries altogether.17 In 2023, the Republican-controlled Missouri House voted to remove libraries from the state’s annual budget, a previously unheard-of action that was met with vocal disapproval from librarians and residents for whom library services are essential to their wellbeing.”18 Although library censorship efforts are primarily being undertaken in red states, even blue states are not immune. In Rhode Island, for example, a small group of legislators (led by a Republican, but also including seven Democrats) is attempting to criminalize the inclusion of children’s and young adult books like “Gender Queer” in library collections, with librarians facing up to two years in prison for providing access to these “obscene” materials.19
Right-wing special interest groups are making inroads into local and state politics, convincing communities to vote to defund their local libraries if they refuse to remove books with LGBTQ+ or racial justice themes, but communities and pro-library groups are fighting back. A public library in Virginia is facing closure in the wake of a far-right defunding campaign based, yet again, on the inclusion of books with LGBTQ+ themes. Catalyzed by this threat, a local activist group has organized around a commitment to keeping the library open, standing by the LGBTQ+ community in the face of religious influence over library collections.20 As a result of their efforts, the library has been funded through 2025.21
On his New York Times podcast, Ezra Klein points out that state politics are difficult for voters to stay informed about, and easily influenced by special interest groups. He says that state politics are harder to follow than federal politics because a lot of information is being channeled through local networks. It is more difficult for a single group to have a national political effect than a local effect, as federal politics involve a lot of players, money, and voters. States are good targets for interest groups because they receive less media coverage. State legislators also need special-interest money desperately, as fundraising is not as easy for them as for federal legislators. Finally, since state legislators do not have the policy staffing, bill-writing resources, or ways of getting informed about key issues, they welcome special interest groups that essentially function as “informational arms” for them.“22
To save their local libraries, supporters might do best to meet the book-banners and library de-funders where they operate––on the local and state political stages. The very fabric of our democracy might depend on such engagement, as the threads start to fray at the edges in communities, towns, and states. Everyone is the same at the public library; when you walk in, you categorically belong––no more and no less than your neighbor. This democratic ideal of public libraries is a more fully realized form of the democratic ideal of the United States. The library system of intellectual freedom and equal opportunity represents the American democratic ethos and reflects the dual values of individual autonomy and collective responsibility. Invest in public libraries and invest in all Americans.
Works Cited
[1] H.R.1581 – 117th Congress (2021-2022). Library of Congress. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1581.
[2] American Library Association. “Book Ban Data.” Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.ala.org/bbooks/book-ban-data.
[3] Kim, E. Tammy. 2023. “When the Culture Wars Come for the Public Library.” The New Yorker, April 20. http://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/when-the-culture-wars-come-for-the-public-library.
[4] Yurcaba, Jo. 2023. “Montana State Library Withdraws from National Library Group over
President’s ‘Marxist Lesbian’ Comment.” NBCNews.com, July 13. http://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/montana-state-library-withdraws-national-library-
group-presidents-marx-rcna94130.
[5] Murray, Conor. 2023. “Drag Story Hours Spark Angry Anti-LGBTQ Rallies-Latest in NYC Included Proud Boys.” Forbes, March 23. http://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/03/21/drag-story-hours-spark-angry-anti-lgbtq-rallies-latest-in-nyc-included-proud-boys/.
[6] Jensen, Kelly. 2024. “Another Round of Public Library Bomb Threats.” Book Riot, January 11. https://bookriot.com/minnesota-library-bomb-threats/.
[7] Jeske, Sam. 2023. “Jayapal Introduces Resolution Recognizing Library Workers.” Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, November 1. https://jayapal.house.gov/2023/04/25/jayapal-introduces-resolution-recognizing-library-workers/.
[8] H.Res.324 – 118th Congress (2023-2024). Library of Congress. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/324.
[9] S.Res.637 – 118th Congress (2023-2024). Library of Congress. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-resolution/637.
[10] Jeske. 2023.“Jayapal Introduces Resolution Recognizing Library Workers.”
[11] Greer, Scott. 2015. “John W. Kingdon, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies.” New York, Oxford University Press, 4.
[12] S.Res.637 – 118th Congress (2023-2024).
[13] Ibid.
[14] Greer. 2015. “John W. Kingdon, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies.” 4.
[15] Ibid., 4.
[16] Ibid., 6.
[17] Cineas, Fabiola. 2023. “The Rising Republican Movement to Defund Public Libraries.” Vox, May 5. http://www.vox.com/politics/2023/5/5/23711417/republicans-want-to-defund-public-libraries-book-ban.
[18] Hays, Gabrielle. 2023. “Missouri House Republicans Want to Defund Libraries. Here’s Why.” PBS, April 13. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/librarians-say-a-missouri-house-proposal-to-eliminate-library-funding-would-have-devastating-ripple-effects.
[19] Russo, Amy. 2023. “Lawmakers Are Bringing the Book Ban Wars to Rhode Island. Here’s How.” The Providence Journal, May 11. https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/local/2023/05/11/banned-books-in-ri-could-expand-under-proposed-bill-aimed-at-school-libraries/70196159007/.
[20] Salam, Erum. 2023. “Virginia Library at Risk after Rightwing Push to Defund It over LGBTQ+ Books.” The Guardian, September 2. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/02/virginia-public-library-defund-republican-lgbtq-books.
[21] “Save Samuels.” Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.savesamuels.org/.
[22] Klein, E. (Host). “There’s Been a Massive Change in Where American Policy Gets Made.” Ezra Klein Podcast (podcast), December 6, 2022. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/06/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-jacob-grumbach.html.
