Latest news with #HB1069
Yahoo
24-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
More book bans? Florida bill could define classics as pornography. What is SB 1692?
Two years ago, Florida passed a law that made it easier for concerned parents to get books they considered objectionable removed from school libraries and classroom shelves but allowed challenged books to be judged for their literary, artistic or scientific value. Not anymore, if a new bill moving through the Florida Legislature passes. Under SB 1692, if a challenged work contains nudity or sexual material it would be considered by definition harmful to minors and school boards would be restricted from considering any other value of the work, potentially risking the removal or restriction of some of the world's classic literature. Last year, six major book publishers and several prominent authors sued the state over "unconstitutional book banning" after they said the 2023 bill (HB 1069) allowed books to be removed from schools "with no consideration of the educational value of the work as a whole." The bill sponsored by Sen. Stan McClain, R-Ocala, the man who led the 2023 bill, seeks to clarify what "harmful to minors" means. 'I think that we're bifurcating here, so it's more clear as to what we're actually talking about so that school districts can make a decision," McClain said. "If it is in violation of the proposed law, if it's that, then it's considered pornographic and it's considered harmful to minors.' A companion bill, HB 1539, was filed by Rep. Doug Benson, R-Apopka. Critics say that the bill would expand the number of books that will be challenged and result in important works being removed from students' sight. 'The impact here is that book bans are going to get worse, censorship is going to be worse, censorship of actually the classics, which we've seen across the state of Florida, because Florida is now Number One in the country for banning books in our public schools,' Sen. Carlos Guillermo Smith, D-Orlando said. In 2023, House Bill 2069 declared sex an immutable binary biological trait, banned nicknames or genders if they didn't apply to the student's or school employee's biological sex, made it easier for a parent or resident to challenge books, and added "depicts or describes sexual conduct" to the list of pornographic material, among other things. The 2025 bill further defines "harmful to minors" as: "Any reproduction, imitation, characterization, description, exhibition, presentation, or representation, of whatever kind or form, depicting nudity, sexual conduct, or sexual excitement when it: a. Predominantly appeals to prurient, shameful, or morbid interest; and b. Is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable material or conduct for minors Material authorized as part of health education or authorized by the Florida Board of Education "for specific educational purposes" would still be allowed and could not be challenged by parents or guardians. Noncompliance may lead to the state withholding funds to the school district. In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court developed a three-prong test, called the Miller test, to define obscene speech. According to the Miller test, speech is obscene if: The average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; The work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and The work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value However, an analysis of the bill says that courts have found the state has a 'compelling interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being of minors" which "extends to shielding minors from the influence of literature that is not obscene by adult standards." SB 1692 completely removes the third prong of the Miller test. In a report on the 2023-2024 school year, Florida saw more than 4,500 instances of book banning in public schools according to national free speech group PEN America, a dramatic jump up from 1,406 the year before. That's nearly half of all the 10,000 book bans recorded across the country, the report said. The state maintains that no books have been banned in Florida schools. 'Once again, far left activists are pushing the book ban hoax on Floridians. The better question is why do these activists continue to fight to expose children to sexually explicit materials,' spokesperson Sydney Booker told The Guardian. However, PEN America considers any book made unavailable to students as banned and lists books that were removed from school libraries and classroom shelves by districts without a formal challenge, books that were pulled pending a review, and books restricted to students based on grade or parent's permission. Under HB 2069, any book challenged must be removed from within five school days and remain unavailable to students "until the objection is resolved." Last year the legislature restricted book ban challenges from Floridians who are not parents or guardians of a "student with access to school district materials" from filing more than one book challenge a month after reports that the bulk of challenges were coming from a very small number of people, some of whom did not have children in schools. Most of the objections were to books written by or about LGBTQ+ people or people of color. 'Let us live': LGBTQ advocates march to Florida Capitol for trans rights, protest anti-DEI bills None of the legislation concerning book challenges offers a way for parents, guardians or residents to challenge a decision to remove a book from a school. Last week, the state's new Department of Education workgroup tasked with redeveloping a training program for school librarians and media specialists on how to select and remove books met for the first time. Half of them were members of Moms for Liberty, the conservative group started in Florida that has been one of the driving forces behind the flood of book challenges in the state and across the country. If passed by the Florida Legislature and signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, the bill would take effect on July 1, 2025. This article originally appeared on Sarasota Herald-Tribune: Florida bill defines nudity, sexual content as 'harmful to minors'
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Daylight saving time: Where Arkansas efforts to ‘lock the clocks' stands
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KNWA/KFTA) — Arkansans will soon lose one hour of sleep as the clocks spring forward on March 9, marking the start of daylight saving time. However, some Arkansas lawmakers are attempting to 'lock the clocks' and end the twice-a-year time change. Arkansas is one of at least 31 states with bills introduced in their current legislation regarding time change, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. One bill currently in the Arkansas legislature, House Bill 1069, would keep standard time year-round and eliminate daylight saving time. The bill would allow state employees the option to adjust their work schedule one hour earlier during the portion of the year when other states observe daylight saving time. HB1069 is sponsored by Rep. Stephen Meeks (R-Greenbrier), and if passed, Arkansas would join Arizona and Hawaii as the only states to not observe daylight saving time. As of March 6, the bill remains in the House with no updates since Feb. 13. This bill is not the only attempt by Arkansas lawmakers to end the time change in the Natural State. Daylight saving time 2025: These states are trying to 'lock the clocks' State Rep. Sarah Capp (R-Ozark) filed House Bill 1368 in February 2019, which would adopt year-round standard time and eliminate daylight saving time in Arkansas. However, Capp withdrew the bill 23 days after filing it. Rep. Johnny Rye (R-Trumann) filed House Bill 1017 in 2020, the exact opposite of Capp's bill. Daylight saving time would be adopted year-round and standard time would go away. The bill passed the House in February 2021 by a 71-24 vote but died in a Senate committee meeting in October of that year. Rye tried again in 2022 with House Bill 1039, which would have also adopted daylight saving time. One month later, Rye withdrew the bill. Meeks made an attempt in 2023 with House Bill 1568. The bill would have eliminated daylight saving time and observed standard time year-round. The bill was withdrawn three weeks later. Another attempt made in 2023 was done by Rep. R. Scott Richardson (R-Bentonville) and co-sponsored by Rep. Wayne Long (R-Bradford) with House Bill 1104. It was also withdrawn about two weeks after it was filed. Whichever Arkansans prefer, the clocks will be turned back an hour on Sunday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
06-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill to regulate vape products heads to House floor
SIOUX FALLS S.D. (KELO) — A bill that would seek to regulate vapor products in the state has passed through the House Health and Human Services committee. House Bill 1069 would require a person to secure a vapor product distributor license prior to selling vapor products in the state for resale. In a vote of 7-5 HB1069 passed and now heads to the floor. Senate panel moves to cap school administrator pay If the bill were to pass prior to selling or offering to sell vapor products in state, a vapor product distributor would have to obtain a certification by the manufacturer of the vapor product. A person would also have to register with the Department of Revenue prior to selling vapor products at retail. If a person owns or operates more than one place that sells products at retail, the person must secure a separate registration for each place of business selling vapor products. Prior to selling or offering to sell vapor products in this state, a vapor product distributor shall obtain a certification by the manufacturer of the vapor product stating that the distributor has applied with the United States Food and Drug Administration for a premarket tobacco product application for the vapor product and the application was accepted for filing, and the application remains under review by the United States Food and Drug Administration. A manufacturer who provides any misrepresentation or false statement in any certification pursuant to this section is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A vapor product in this state that does not meet the certification requirements would be and any person in possession of a contraband vapor product shall ensure it is disposed of. Any vapor product distributor in the state selling, offering to sell, or distributing vapor products that do not meet the certification requirements of this act is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor. Republican Rep. Brian Mulder said the bill seeks to go after illegal's products and would seek to clean up the vaping industry and clear it of illegal products. 'What we are asking for is retailers to register, distributors to file a $100 fee, the retailers should work with those distributors to say hey make sure I'm getting legal products,' Mulder said. 'We do not want the Chinese products and we have no idea what's in them.' Sam Madson, a lobbyist with the South Dakota Petroleum and Propane Marketers Association, said he represents gas stations in the states and they want to make sure they are selling legal products. 'We do not want to endanger customers by selling them vape products that are illegal from our stores and secondly we want to ensure that what we are purchasing from our distributors is legal,' Madson said. 'We are already doing this with cigarette and other tobacco products.' Speaking in opposition to the bill was South Dakota Retailers for Better Alternatives. Jordan Mason said the bill proposes unconstitutional restrictions, devastates small businesses, and threatens public health. 'HB 1069 destroys small businesses, the industry supports hundreds of jobs and millions in economic activity in South Dakota and this bill hands the market to big tobacco,' Mason said. 'This is a business protection plan for big tobacco at the expense of small businesses and public health.' Vice President of South Dakota Retailers for Better Businesses, Kurt Kadlik said manufactures in other states have sued the FDA over their PMTA process in the past. 'It proposes that the state uses their scares resources to enforce a failed FDA regulatory scheme, declared illegal by courts to shut down hundreds of South Dakota businesses,' Kadlik said. ' The vape industry contributes over $74 million to the South Dakota economy, provides 429 jobs, $27 million in wages and $6.1 million in state and local taxes. Our members cannot survive if 99% of their products are banned.' Republican Rep. Taylor Rehfeldt asked what exactly are we making illegal and how many products are there actually being sold that are from China and are the products that are legal coming from China? Mulder responded to the question saying there would still be numerous legal products available the bill is about getting illegal products off of the shelf. 'We'll build that registry here in South Dakota with the Department of Revenue. We wanna know those products. What would you like to sell? Has it been applied for with the FDA? It fits these categories. The illegal products are those from China and we hear,' Mulder said. 'Those are the legal products that we're trying to limit in this market.' Mason responded saying if this bill passed it would give big tobacco a huge control over the market in South Dakota. 'The reality is out of 26 million applications, 23 were actually approved and they're all owned by Big Tobacco, so that is the current FDA PMTA process,' said Mason. Kevin Quick, owner of Down Ohm Vapors, said the bill only hurts smaller companies that serve South Dakota. 'It's kind of a complicated question so there any type of disposable device like this comes from China,' Quick said. 'What this bill really cuts out is the small businesses that sell the e-juices in the mods and the things like that that are American companies.' Yes votes – Reimer, Halverson, Andera, Kayser, Schaefbauer, Heinemann, Mulder No votes – Rehfeldt, Baxter, Jordan, Garcia, Manhart, Excused – Emery Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
