Address by Rep. Ernest Istook (R-OK). Re: protecting children from Internet pornography in schools and libraries. Date: March 15, 2000. Source: Tech Law Journal transcribed this from its audio recording of the event. Several words were inaudible.

Thank you Janet. I want to thank the Family Research Council for its efforts to focus attention on this activity – this problem. And, as the lady from Seattle mentioned so corrrectly, parents believe libraries are a safe place for their kids to be unattended. And frankly, I think they are entitled to that belief because libraries should make sure that they are safe for children.

To give you briefly my background. Of course, I am a member of Congress in my fourth term serving the Fifth District of Oklahoma which includes most of Oklahoma City. Prior to serving in Congress, prior to serving in the state legislature, I was the chairman of the Metropolitan library system. I served as a member of that board for several years. I served as its Chairman. It operates the public library system in Oklahoma City and in surrounding communities, providing public libraries for over one million people, so it is, of course, one of the largest public library systems in the country.

So, from this perspective, I want to stress what is being said about the need for libraries, which are operated with public funds, to take steps to assure that public money is not used to provide access to pornography to kids. In fact, because they use public funds, public libraries have an obligation and a duty to protect children from being given access to pornography.

Free public libraries are wonderful, and the Internet is a terrific resource. It does, however, overflow with pictures and material that are harmful to our kids. We are not talking anything negative about public libraries. I am an individual with very few heroes. But, Andrew Carnegie has been one. His ____ [inaudible] to establish thousands of public libraries in the United States and also elsewhere in the world -- what it means to a democracy is just immeasurable when you talk about pubic libraries. There is something we want. There is something we need.

But, they also spend a great amount of time each year deciding what material will be purchased, what material will be put on the shelves. Libraries routinely are involved in making decisions on what is appropriate to purchase with taxpayers money, what is appropriate to put on the shelves, what should be in the reference area, what should be behind the counter. Any person that is capable of making these decisions should also be capable of determining what is or is not appropriate for children to be viewing on the Internet. And certainly, it is a matter of good judgment, it is common sense, to say that pornography on the Internet ought to be filtered out when children are provided access. When this is done with taxpayers money, we have a role to play.

In the last two years, two years straight, on the appropriations measure that provides funding for education, among other things, in a bipartisan way, that unanimously, the Appropriations Committee adopted amendment that I wrote to require a library that is using public funds to provide Internet access to filter out pornography or obscenity from children who are accessing the Internet.

It is very inexpensive. It is very easy. It is very simple also to override it if it is necessary. ____ adult users of the filter ___ it should not.

This is a common sense measure. It is even done by a great many libraries around the country. And I think that it is important to say that we should applaud the many libraries across America who are filtering Internet access for minors. They are being very responsible. They are finding their own mechanisms, how they think it works best in their system. We need to give them praise and express our appreciation to them.

However, to say that many are doing this is far from saying that all are doing it. And again, taxpayers money is going to provide Internet access that is only proper that we make sure that is not providing access to pornography or obscenity for kids. We need to make sure that libraries are kid safe. Parents deserve to know that their kids are safe in the public library. Public libraries have a duty to be sure kids are safe, whether it is a school library, or a public library. No library is required to provide access to everything. Librarians constantly pick and choose what materials to buy, and what not to buy, plus which ones belong on the shelves, and which ones belong behind the counter.

Anyone who cannot review what Internet sites are not appropriate for kids has not business reviewing what books to buy with our tax dollars. Especially, when you remember they are also reviewing what books to buy for the children's section of the library.

This is not censorship. This is simply using common sense and good judgment. Anyone who equates this with censorship frankly needs to spend some time sitting in a corner studying a dictionary. We are not talking about whether something will or will not be legal. We are saying that our tax dollars should not be spent to provide pornography in front of our kids' faces.

So I commend the Family Research Council and all of those who have been involved in this effort, and I call on all of those who would now take part, or have taken part in public library system, to recognize that they have a duty of, not only to ___ our kids, but to protect them also. This is not an issue of free speech. This is not an issue of free access. This is an issue of common sense, and what we should do and not do with our tax dollars.

Thank you. Thank you for inviting me here.

[Janet Parshall, of the Family Research Council, thanked Rep. Istook.]

I did neglect to say one thing. And that is the only reason the amendment did not get through the entire appropriations process was because the Clinton-Gore administration opposed it, and required that we take it out of the bill before it got to the White House. So, I thought it needed -- to make that clear. Many of us in Congress continue to try.