logo
Arkansas House will consider proposal to remove and replace entire State Library Board

Arkansas House will consider proposal to remove and replace entire State Library Board

Yahoo14-04-2025
Kristin Stuart (left) expresses opposition to Senate Bill 640, co-sponsored by Rep. Howard Beaty (right), R-Crossett, before the House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs on Monday, April 14, 2025. The bill would reconstitute the Arkansas State Library Board. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate)
An Arkansas House committee approved a proposal Monday to remove all seven members of the State Library Board and allow Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders to replace them later this year.
Senate Bill 640 passed the Senate Thursday with support from 27 Republicans. Sen. Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, and Rep. Howard Beaty, R-Crossett, filed the bill late Wednesday night, less than two hours after Senate Bill 536 hit a dead end with a week left in the legislative session.
Beaty was among a bipartisan group of members of the House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs to vote against SB 536. The bill would have abolished both the Arkansas State Library and its board and transferred their powers and responsibilities to the state Department of Education.
Beaty told the same committee Monday that the current board should be replaced because of its 'dysfunction' and 'infighting.'
Arkansas Senate approves State Library Board overhaul after dissolution bill fails
'There were legitimate concerns that were raised, and those haven't been addressed,' he said. '[It shows] the lack of consideration of what we need in this state and what our constituents are telling us.'
Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Jonesboro, filed SB 536 last month in response to the State Library Board's failure to pass two measures he requested as conditions for him to drop his promise to abolish the board.
Sullivan has targeted the State Library for its affiliation with the American Library Association, which he claims is a leftist political organization, and for the board's refusal to adopt policies directing public libraries to keep certain materials out of the hands of minors.
The board rejected both efforts with a 4-3 vote in March. The latter would have created nonbinding policies to protect children from 'sexually explicit' content in libraries and detached the State Library from the ALA.
The three board members who supported Sullivan's requests were all Sanders appointees: former Republican state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, who moved to approve the requests; Shari Bales of Hot Springs, whom the Senate confirmed alongside Rapert; and Sydney McKenzie of Rogers, who joined the board in January and is married to GOP Rep. Brit McKenzie.
Rapert has been the board's most outspoken advocate for keeping 'sexually explicit' content out of children's reach and has called for the board's abolition due to the majority's consistent refusal to back his efforts.
SB 640 would require the seven new members to draw lots determining how their terms will be staggered, ending between one and seven years from when the bill becomes law. Subsequent appointees would serve seven-year terms, the current length of time board members serve.
Those terms end in October every year, and Rep. Julie Mayberry reminded the committee that Sanders will be able to appoint a new board member in just a few months.
The Republican lawmaker from Hensley said she would not support SB 640 because she personally knows and respects a State Library Board member.
'I know her work and her dedication to students, to families across the state is exemplary,' Mayberry said. 'There's no reason to eliminate every single position on this board.'
Lupe Peña de Martinez of Mabelvale is a former principal at a public school in East End, which is in Mayberry's House district, and her term on the State Library Board is currently set to expire in 2028.
At the March board meeting in which Sullivan's two requested motions failed, Peña de Martinez made a successful motion to create nonbinding policies aimed at protecting children in libraries while honoring the First Amendment and library material selection standards. All three Sanders appointees voted against the motion.
Nothing in SB 640 would prevent current State Library Board members from being reappointed, said Rep. David Ray, R-Maumelle. He and other Republicans expressed support for the bill as an alternative to SB 536, particularly since SB 640 does not involve the Department of Education in the State Library's responsibilities. Lawmakers and members of the public both included this as a reason to oppose SB 536.
Mayberry joined the committee's three Democrats in voting against SB 640.
House Minority Leader Andrew Collins, D-Little Rock, challenged Beaty's assertion about State Library Board 'dysfunction.'
'They are continuing to have meetings [and] they are continuing to make decisions, even if they're not the decisions that some people would like,' Collins said. 'It's a functional board. It's just a board that some people disagree with.'
Collins said he did not believe the Legislature should set a precedent of reconstituting state boards if some lawmakers are frustrated with them. Beaty said he disagreed and was 'not concerned in the slightest' about setting such a precedent.
Kristin Stuart of Little Rock, the only audience member to speak against SB 640, agreed with Collins that the proposal is a 'power grab.' She said reconstituting the board would 'disrupt its mission' of supporting Arkansas libraries and preserving people's access to information and learning.
'[SB 640 is] opening the door for political appointees who may not have the experience, objectivity or commitment to intellectual freedom that the board requires,' Stuart said.
The State Library Board is scheduled to meet the second Friday in May and in August. If SB 640 passes the House this week and if Sanders signs it, it will go into effect Aug. 1, and it gives Sanders 30 days to replace the board.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Who really suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
Who really suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome?

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

Who really suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome?

Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Two decades on, Krauthammer's coinage has been appropriated, rebranded, and defined down — way down. 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' is now flung at anyone who objects to President Trump's conduct or opposes his policies. The term is no longer reserved for over-the-top expressions of revulsion — like actor Robert De Niro using a televised appearance at the Tony Awards to Advertisement No — today 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' is used as an all-purpose put-down to deride any Trump critics, including those who stick to serious, fact-based analysis. I've lost count of all the times I've been Advertisement A woman seen at the Iowa State Fairgrounds on July 3, when President Trump was speaking there. Scott Olson/Getty The word 'syndrome' notwithstanding, this is merely political trash talk, popularized by Trump and his allies as a way to wave off criticism without having to engage it. Instead of refuting arguments or defending policy, the magic letters 'TDS' turn disagreement into proof of mental defect. Yet if 'derangement' means the loss of proportion and judgment Krauthammer was getting at, then the most severe cases aren't among Trump's critics. They're in the ranks of his most ardent loyalists. The real Trump Derangement Syndrome shows up in three telltale symptoms. First is the cult-like worship that treats Trump as infallible — his acolytes profess adoration not only for what he does, but for whatever could flow from him. Emblematic of that mindset are the Advertisement Second is the abandonment of principles that once seemed non-negotiable. Conservatives and Republicans who used to champion free trade A man with a MAGA tattoo on his stomach attended a rally at Macomb Community College in Warren, Mich., to mark President Trump's 100th day in office on April 29. EMILY ELCONIN/NYT Third is the unsettling delight so many supporters take in Trump's most outrageous behavior — a kind of giddy worship that equates offensiveness with authenticity. Such brazenness has been a hallmark of his political career — from mocking John McCain's Vietnam War heroism to charging undocumented immigrants with ' Advertisement Meanwhile, they reflexively use 'TDS!' as a go-to put-down for anything from mild disagreement to serious moral critique, framing opposition not as argument but as pathology — an easy, cheap discredit. Yes, plenty of Trump-haters go overboard — but in MAGA circles, the 'TDS' tag is sprayed far wider, hitting thoughtful critics just as readily as the genuinely unhinged. What is truly alarming is how some have sought to legalize that insult by casting dissent as disease. In Minnesota this spring, five Republican senators proposed a bill that would Krauthammer's original point in 2003 was that derangement is the breakdown of proportion and prudence. That breakdown isn't found among critics who quote Trump accurately and challenge his claims. The most alarming political derangement today affects those who cannot conceive that there are legitimate reasons to be appalled by the president, and so explain anti-Trump dissent as a sign of mental weakness. If reason is the measure, then those who shout 'TDS!' the loudest are the ones most in need of treatment. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at

Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?
Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?

David Bumcrot Belmont Heather Mac Donald cites several shooting incidents in Washington, D.C., including two heinous crimes involving the shooting deaths of innocent young children. Nowhere does she mention how Republicans block every effort at enacting gun-control legislation. Also left out is the number of convicted felons that President Trump has pardoned. Let's stop pretending this isn't just Trump's attempt to initiate martial law. Advertisement Robyn King Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Ipswich In Trump's political theater, Washington becomes a prop President Trump's National Guard deployment to Washington, D.C. is less about public safety and more about political theater. D.C.'s violent crime rates have fallen sharply since 2023. Cherry-picking a few brutal crimes to paint the city as in crisis ignores the data and serves a narrative, not the truth. If homicide rates alone justified military involvement, other US cities — some worse off than D.C. — would already be occupied by federal troops. The National Guard's limited 'command presence' won't fix longstanding issues of gun violence, juvenile crime, or car theft. Lasting reductions come from targeted policing, intelligence-driven enforcement, and community partnerships — not a 30-day show of force. Advertisement Worse, the move undermines D.C.'s elected leadership and sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach. Washington's majority-minority residents have endured decades of over-policing. Imposing military oversight without an emergency inflames mistrust, chills cooperation with police, and treats citizens like subjects. Real safety is built, not staged. This deployment is a political stunt masquerading as crime control — and Washington deserves better than to be used as a prop in someone else's campaign. Paul Swindlehurst Londonderry, N.H. For this administration, an easy distraction It seems our president has found the secret for making the Jeffrey Epstein controversy go away: Invade Washington, D.C. It's amazing how short the media's attention span is. They are so easily distracted by the next outrageous thing President Trump and his representatives do or say. There is no follow-up, no accountability — essentially just narration and public relations. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon was so right: 'Flood the zone,' and you can do anything. Patricia Fabbri Lynnfield

Former New Mexico Candidate Gets 80 Years in Shootings at Officials' Homes
Former New Mexico Candidate Gets 80 Years in Shootings at Officials' Homes

Epoch Times

time4 hours ago

  • Epoch Times

Former New Mexico Candidate Gets 80 Years in Shootings at Officials' Homes

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.— A former political candidate was sentenced to 80 years in federal prison Wednesday for his convictions in a series of drive-by shootings at the homes of state and local lawmakers in the aftermath of the 2020 election. A jury convicted former Republican candidate Solomon Peña earlier this year of conspiracy, weapons and other charges in the shootings in December 2022 and January 2023 on the homes of four Democratic officials in Albuquerque, including the current state House speaker.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store