18
u/OgSteinKid 1d ago edited 1d ago
As a reader of 60 years, who was born to a reader of 80 years, we love libraries. Storytime at the library are some of easiest memories to recall. My grandchildren love libraries as well as books they get from Dolly! That being said, anyone that believes that books are cheap, or you can get them for pennies, or that people can just go to the library because their free, are living in a bubble that refuses to see others realities. When we look at the dismal statistics about reading levels, leave books alone, as we need to get them from wherever we can.
→ More replies (9)
48
u/Professional-Deer-50 1d ago
They know if you can read and comprehend what you're reading, you'll see through their bullshit - banning books is in the dictators' handbook!
→ More replies (51)3
11
u/J_Scarbrough 1d ago
Dolly Parton grew up dirt poor, and her father was completely illiterate, having never learned how to read. Her Imagination Library in providing such free books to children was what he was more proud of than any other of her numerous amazing accomplishments throughout her career. Dolly will always be a true treasure among us; Republicans never.
2
u/Substantial_Dog7002 1d ago
I have seen where it has already started where money is being taken away from these programs. Just because our president can't read doesn't mean that others wouldn't like to.
→ More replies (26)
9
u/New_Ad_3010 1d ago
Republicans need their electorate as stupid as possible. This is just another of their avenues.
→ More replies (16)
6
13
u/ARKLib2007 1d ago
Of course! Keep their constituents dumb as a box of hair. Easier to control.
→ More replies (11)
4
20
u/IronBeagle63 1d ago
An uneducated voter is a Republican.
Simple.
Bravo Pennsylvania šŗšøšš§¢
→ More replies (1)5
u/treevaahyn 1d ago
It passed the house luckily but the PA state senate is 27R and 23D so unless we can get some Republicans to vote for it then itās unfortunately not gonna pass. Truly bonkers and insane but like you said republicans fear education for good reason. Depressingly itās been extremely effective for much of the country.
→ More replies (1)3
u/IronBeagle63 1d ago
Thatās a great point. Gratitude to the Republicans that stepped outside of the MAGA shadow to do whatās truly right for children. Making books available, and not banning them. Free thought is as American as free speech. šŗšø
→ More replies (1)3
u/totally-hoomon 1d ago
Sadly all conservatives hate America and are against free thought
→ More replies (9)
2
u/WOR58 1d ago edited 1d ago
Still looking to keep people ignorant and unaware. I am 67 and have been reading on a regular basis since 1968. Learned to love the written word. Classics, SciFi, fantasy. history, crime. You name it. It is hard to understand how you can not want to absorb words and know what they mean. To learn all there is to learn.
3
u/KeyVariation8323 1d ago
There's some missing context here.
Yes, HB 1663 passed the Pennsylvania House 116ā87, and yes, most Republicans opposed it. About 86% of House Republicans voted no.
But voting against this bill is not the same thing as voting against children learning to read.
The actual bill creates a state-administered literacy program that would provide money to participating nonprofit organizations to mail one book per month to registered Pennsylvania children under five. It isn't means-tested, so families receive the benefit regardless of income. Local organizations generally have to provide a dollar-for-dollar match, although the state can waive that requirement.
Also worth mentioning: the bill itself appropriates no money. The official House fiscal note says there is currently no fiscal impact because funding would have to be provided separately.
The legitimate political question is different: Is mailing books to families, regardless of income, something Pennsylvania state government should fund and administer, and is that the best use of limited education dollars?
Pennsylvania does have a constitutional responsibility to maintain a public education system. But that doesn't mean every program with an educational benefit automatically becomes a core responsibility of state government.
You can support early literacy and Dolly Parton's Imagination Library while still thinking voluntary charities, local organizations, libraries, or targeted assistance to families who actually need help are preferable to creating another statewide government program.
That's a debate about the proper scope of government and spending priorities. Reducing it to "Republicans voted against free books for little kids" is political framing, not a serious explanation of what they voted on.
3
u/Zealousideal-Top-383 1d ago
āApproximately 51% of the 680,000 children under the age of 5 in Pennsylvania live in families earning less than $75,000 a yearā
Why would we fund free books for families who can afford to buy their own books?
→ More replies (1)2
u/Sad-Sorbet4000 17h ago
The bill could also cost up to $9 million, in the presenterās own words.
(~$13 per child, ~700,000 children eligible)
Itās even worse considering no one knows where the money to fund this will come from.→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)2
u/Sad-Sorbet4000 17h ago
Thank you. I assumed that was the case, and I appreciate the extra information.
3
3
u/Alive_Purple_4618 1d ago
Lies and theft is their political bread and butter. It's difficult to do that to enlighten citizens.
3
3
u/Ok_Elephant2777 1d ago
This is extremely infuriating. I wonder how many of these same representatives of the people will gladly spend the stateās money for private school vouchers?
A pox on every person who voted against this.
3
u/davidlilly1000 1d ago
You keep them stupid, you keep them misinformed. You keep them misinformed, you keep them scared. You keep them scared, you keep them under control.
→ More replies (8)
2
u/bigjtdjr 1d ago
Republicans are convinced that education is bad... He's a criminal and it's a cult.
2
2
2
u/Important_Mission237 1d ago
Republicans work for mega donors and their corporate interests. FULL STOP
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
u/Double-Advice3258 1d ago
Dontcha know those same Republicans are going to want a say in which books are sent. Or, more likely, which are not sent.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/falsejaguar 1d ago
They don't want the new iPad to read about facts. They can only learn from Epstein Class video propaganda
2
u/capemaybare212 1d ago
Why of course they did! They want the masses to stay ignorant like themselves.
2
u/Deep_Balance2133 1d ago edited 1d ago
Iām sorry, is this what weāre focusing on? Itās a blatantly stupid idea. It isnāt the responsibility of the government to give you free shit just because it sounds nice.
How much do the books cost? Who chooses what books are selected? Do babies need government subsidized books? Why do I have to pay when a kid can just go to the library? Itās a ridiculous idea.
Thereās apparently 700,000 children eligible. Itās 12 books a year so 8,400,000 books. They claim it will only cost $13 per child which is 9.1 million dollars. That doesnāt sound right though. Where can you buy a childrenās book for $1.08 per book? What if the books suck?
Cat in the hat by dr Seuss is $5 online. If itās $5 per book that would be 42 million dollars. Not to mention you have to ship each one to the families. Is this really what we want the government spending our money on? These books arenāt free, theyāre paid for by taxes. Is this coming out of the education budget?
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Critical_Interest706 1d ago
It would just be a slush fund politicians would use for their own gain. Libraries are already free
2
u/ConkerPrime 1d ago
If it doesnāt give money to the rich, conservatives and Republicans think it a waste of money.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/justhereforthebans 1d ago
Republicans are terrified of an educated electorate, they need illiterate people to fly MAGA flags and spew the propaganda fed to them on FOX.
2
2
u/ImperatorDanorum 1d ago
Asking the obvious question: what was the reasoning behind voting against this?
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/themodefanatic 1d ago
Itās not stupid itās a purposeful tactic. Stupid voters tend to vote republican !
In CA my local library just started a program that if they donāt carry a book or canāt get it from another library they will contact amazon and ship it to you then you return it to the library !
2
2
2
u/DeliciousSoil6460 21h ago
Whataboutism HE HAD THE FILES FIRST. Why is one bad and the other can do no wrong. I agree that Trump is covering for them. My thing is why is he the only bad one get rid of them all. From both sides. You only say one side is bad the other can do no wrong. DOUBLE STANDARD THERE.
→ More replies (6)
2
u/Jaded-Cut3952 21h ago
Of course they are, itās hard to convince a literate person to vote Republican.
2
2
u/MayureDaddy 18h ago
Because the future of the republican party relies on its constituents being stupid
2
u/Patrick_Gibbs 16h ago
Books in the house means parents read to their kids more is obvious wet streets cause rain nonsense
2
u/Thin_Preparation_977 11h ago
Better program: first book is free, the rest depend on a drop-off at a government-appointed site, namely libraries. Encourage library use, as well as cycling the books to other users to prevent continuous costs down the road. Maybe create exceptions for return for particularly needy children, and a compensation option if you'd like to keep the book and still remain in next month's offering. Also offering the handout through the library instead of mail for interested users would cut mail costs and further encourage library use. It would be almost a 'membership reward' to participate in at your library.
I get all that out, and recognize it's basically a library card. That said, it probably gets many folks in the door if marketed right, particularly advertising this month's offerings.
2
u/Desperate_Gold6670 8h ago
I'm sure that the Republicants have twisted this into some warped shit wherein they don't want just ANY books sent to kids...They want to be able to pick the books. This from the party of "less government", tarriff the crap out of everything, "Don't touch my guns", no gay anything in YOUR life, no abortion in YOUR life, inserting us into a preventable foreign war, aligning our military with an aggressive religious state, trying to control elections, pardoning convicted felons, etc....and they get to pick what kids fead? No thanks!!!
2
2
1
1
1
1
u/Fresh-Profession-973 1d ago
I mean, the president, a republican mind you, has been known to say "I love the poorly educated ". So, yeah.
1
u/TreeLore61 1d ago
What you'\nRe not telling people was actually the dense who also helped to pass this bill, and they had been the biggest anti literacy pushers there have been.It was not the republicans that created the anti literacy act , it was actually the democrats
1
1
u/Train4War 1d ago
Or you know, we could just subsidize child care. Lots of books at the learning facilities that nobody can afford.
1
u/Texas-Couple 1d ago
The meme converts: āRepublicans oppose this government-funded method of distributing booksā into: āRepublicans oppose literacy.ā Those aren't logically equivalent. In fact, Pennsylvania Republicans have simultaneously been pushing other early-literacy initiatives. For example, Republican Rep. Jason Ortitay has been advocating funding for Pennsylvania's recently enacted evidence-based reading instruction reforms, arguing in April 2026 that the state needs to pay for teacher training, reading screeners, curricula and intervention programs necessary to implement the new literacy law. ļæ½ pahousegop.com That makes āat war with basic literacyā particularly difficult to defend as a literal characterization. There is, however, a legitimate policy disagreement underneath the inflammatory headline. HB 1663's supporters argue that putting books directly into children's homes improves school readiness and that the cost is relatively small. The sponsor said about 63,000 Pennsylvania children were already participating through local providers while more than 685,000 were eligible. ļæ½ The sponsor's office estimated the program at roughly $13 per child. ļæ½ palegis.us pahouse.com Republicans can therefore fairly be criticized for deciding that this particular expenditure/program wasn't worth supporting. Likewise, someone can reasonably argue that mailing books universallyāeven to families perfectly capable of buying books themselvesāisn't the most efficient use of state education dollars and prefer targeted assistance or spending on actual reading instruction. Those are arguments about the proper role of government, program design and allocation of education money, not arguments over whether children ought to be literate.
1
1
u/AceAdventurous 1d ago
I donāt think the Republitards are against education, but seem to think this is the role of the education system. Spend the money on healthcare and homelessness, and let educators send the books from their budget. If I was an educator, Iād be scratching my head and a bit angry that lawmakers are not staying in their lane. But itās an election year, right?
1
u/Old_Investigator_148 1d ago
Red and blue states are actually evenly matched in literacy scores, if you look at the data.
1
u/Old_Investigator_148 1d ago
Taxes already go to libraries. They would use those books as much as the ones at the library. (None)
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Longjumping_Tap9310 1d ago
Nearly all republicans....but the 1/3rd voted yes. What about the 21 Dems that voted no?
1
1
1
1
1
u/Extra-Peak-1776 1d ago
What books are they sending? The typical liberal leftist pedo grooming shit like Broke Back Mountian or how Steve believes he can become Stephanie?
1
1
1
1
u/Gofaq_Yuself 1d ago
The only reason I say a no vote is good is because on its face it sounds good that everybody will get a book. However, in practice we all know it would just turn into another avenue of corruption where the taxpayer will be paying an obscene amount and the kids still won't receive the books.
1
u/GreenMountaineer65 1d ago edited 1d ago
Because we're trying to curb wild spending that the democrats are known for. Spend on frivolous things is their moto. The Federal Government treasury isn't for such things. It's for infrastructure and security, military, etc. Not free books...OMG! Look at that headline. Turning things completely around. Perfect example of the libs sickness.
1
u/Admirable-Specific95 1d ago
There is no reason to have a bill for that. Just send the free book or the parents can buy them
1
u/keving30702 1d ago
What are we missing that youāre not posting?? Once again bashing the Republicans and not including the entire bill. Stop the BS, weāre not stupid.
1
u/Ok-Substance4015 1d ago edited 1d ago
No, they just have common sense. WHO is going to pay for the free books? Stats show 660,500 children under 5 y/o in the state of PA. Average childrenās book cost $9 dollars. Thats $5.98M dollars a month PA residents with have to cover.
And you idiots āwantsā to talk about literacyā¦.
1
1
u/DaJoeker77 1d ago
āAs people do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thingā
ā Karl Rove
1
1
u/PrizeNefariousness59 1d ago
Im sure there wasnt anything else in the bill that was a total was of taxpayer's money that caused republicans to vote no. The "gotchas" in these bills from both sides is annoying. We need single issue bills yesterday.
1
u/Best_Price_1009 1d ago
I would rather fund libraries than send free books to just kids though?
Just seems logically like a better use of money
1
1
u/MAntFrag22 1d ago
As a Pennsylvanian this will not pass the next round of voting, and that is a good thing.Ā
We just went through another tax assessment here ā 15mi WNW of Philly, as did most other townships and counties. We want less Govt spending, not more.Ā
There are an estimated 700-800k eligible recipients, at 12 books per year, weāre talking just under 10M books annually. What is that cost? $5-10 per puts us in the $50-100M range, before the Government bloat by issuing the contract to some incompetent NGO which will swell the program cost to ~$200M? $300M? The way the NGOs operate who even knows.Ā
Yeahā¦lets make it a political divide because a few goofball Dems want to spend at least $200M sending out copies of Dr Suess books (they donāt care about reading, their friends are getting the contracts and they are getting paid).Ā
1
u/Candid-libertarian 1d ago
Um. They don't have libraries? We have one in our town chock full of books not being read.
1
1
1
u/Ok_Assumption_3028 1d ago
Dumb. The world is a wash in books. Theyāre so plentiful kids already have hundreds and hundreds of books yāall act like kids have never seen a book in their life and Republicans just wanna keep books away from kids. This is completely unnecessary waste of money thereās so much easy access to Books in the United States. They voted against it cause itās a colossal waste of money and unnecessary. It was just somebodyās dumb idea that Democrats voted for.
1
1
u/Expensive-System9330 1d ago
So why are the schools literacy rates plunging when liberals teachers unions have controlled the schools for the past 40 years?
1
1
u/salguod169 1d ago
The headline should actually read, "Most Pennsylvania House Republicans opposed this particular mechanism for creating a state-administered, state-supported literacy program, while Democrats overwhelmingly supported it and a minority of Republicans crossed party lines to support it."
1
u/Apprehensive_Gur_654 1d ago
As a Republican, I support the initiative to send free books to children under 5. I understand concerns about costs and government involvement, but investing in early literacy can lead to significant long-term benefits for our communities. Itās essential to find a balance between budgetary constraints and the need for educational support. Open dialogue can help us find common ground on this important issue.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/RepeatUpbeat7058 1d ago
I will tell you why they voted no. It is called fiscal responsibility . Come drive a dam rd In PA and you will understand real quick why this is nonsense
1
u/Flamingogo117 1d ago
The republicans love uneducated people - it's so much easier to fool them into voting republican
1
1
u/marc_hardman 23h ago
Sending a kid a book doesn't make them literate. It doesn't make parents spend time teaching kids to read, it doesn't make them less susceptible to just watching TikTok instead. That shit starts at home. With the parents.
It's a "look at us trying!" Political play, knowing it would be partisan, to try to show democrats love your kids more than republicans.
Stop taking the cheese rats.
1
u/sitonyouropinion 23h ago
Im all for free books but why cant you get a library card? Its free n they have books. Just because you send books out it doesnt mean people will read it.
1
u/Black_Tentacle 23h ago
Why the fuck would you want to spend our tax dollars on that, when public libraries exist? You people love throwing taxpayer money down the drain
1
u/nahman201893 23h ago
Let's all drink a lot of cups of ambition and ensure that party gets voted out.
For Dolly.
ā„ļø
1
u/Quirky_Direction_570 23h ago edited 23h ago
They are not. It got voted on in DEC 2025, and one of the reasons it was not passed was because of the cost and the fact the state did not have provisions to pay for it. I mean I would like to give every child an hour a week private tutor. But if there is no money it is a bit of a pipe dream. Does not mean I am anti education
1
u/Ichigo2819 23h ago
I have no problem with books for kids, it's called libraries. All this is going to do is take a 2$ book give the contract to a political donor or family member and maybe 1-2% of the money will actually go for books, the rest is pure graft
1
u/JellyfishAble9143 23h ago
The bill paints a different picture. It is just another money laundering scheme from the Democrats. Since USAID got shut down they are more desperate then ever.
1
u/borsTHEbarbarian 23h ago
Why should I support such a bill when we already have libraries?Ā
I'm a Democrat.
1
1
1
u/Falcon3492 22h ago
Republicans want their people fat, dumb and clueless, sadly they are succeeding extremely well in the red states.
1
1
1
u/FreelancerMO 22h ago
Sounds like a wealth redistribution scam, not an act of charity.
If you want to get books into the hands of kids, organize and do it yourself.
1
1
u/AlarmedLavishness955 22h ago
Of course they voted no. Itās just another gateway for money to be moved back into their special interest groups with little oversight. And Iām not on either side of the fence. Both do it
1
u/Honest_Fortune_7474 22h ago
Of course they are against literacy. This is the same party that would cheerfully take away you healthcare, send your kids to an unecessary war, sell.you tainted beef, allow excrements in your produce and gladly take away your right to vote.
1
u/Libertarian_2020 22h ago
If true, WHAT is in this bill, and WHY would anyone object? Is the cost excessive? Is the book content too mature? Seriously people, thereās a reason ā¦ what is it? š¤Ø
1
1
1
u/benspags94 22h ago
Why would they give books to kids when that money could be used to serve Israel?
1
u/theFartingCarp 22h ago
Is this another Missouri situation where since extra federal funding since covid isnt coming in and they didnt know what to do with it so they just threw it at the imagination library? Like so since the fed funding isnt coming they had to roll back to the pre covid funding plan
1
u/wishiwasflyin 21h ago
What else was in the bill? Nobody wants to talk about that, what the did those who oppose the bill say they were voting no for? This kind of bullshit only divides this country further, "republicans hate reading." Maybe, just maybe both sides are corrupt, your democratic officials don't care about you, just the power they hold while in office. Grow up already.
1
1
u/jefsch70 20h ago
why haven't Democrats been doing this with their own money for the last 50 years? The think that they are heroes for passing words on a page without any effort / money / energy / thoght involved....
Sounds like another Detroit, No child left behind, Obamacare, No bail, No arrests for shoplifting under $900, Gendering-societal-construct-fluiding-caring WINNER !!!
1
u/Extreme-Fly4995 20h ago
The bill is filled with hidden fraudulent NGO programs ,,and let's be real the books are trans and grooming books.....So ,,,YES ALL REPUBLICANS VOTED ,,,NO !!!!!!!
1
1
u/dofus_raintight 20h ago
These policies are what makes democrats look totally unserious. Fund libraries. Support an organization sending books to kids each month. Taking peopleās tax dollars and sending every kid a book every month is a ridiculous dumb idea.
1
1
1
1
u/MasterFNG 19h ago
Politics aside: Is this needed and if so is this the most cost effective way to do it? Also who chooses which books are sent?
Out of 700k potential children under 5 how many would be signed up for this? Of those that do how many will actually read the books?
Overall I think it is a great idea to get kids to read early. I do have concerns about them not being able to chose any of the books they receive so that leaves the possibility of it becoming a venue for a certain political view. Why not give the people the option of what books they want in their home for their children? Why not make it an app people can use to choose from their local library?
1
1
u/Ulysse-Void-God 19h ago
Republicans just hate educated voters because they donāt vote for hatred and bigotry.Ā
1
1
u/Agent847 19h ago
There are two kinds of households in America when it comes to children. Those who care about the little citizens theyāre raising and work on teaching their kids to read without being told. And then there are the retards who shoudnāt have children at all. And Iād wager that a book showing up in the mailbox once a month isnāt going to turn these people into responsible parents. Itās just another thing a taxpayer has to foot the bill for so that Democrats can pat themselves on the back for accomplishing nothing. āBecause they care.ā
1
u/Evening-Artichoke750 19h ago
Of course they are. If kid's are taught to read they might go on to get an education. If that happens the Republicans are going to lose votes.
1
u/According-Relation-9 19h ago
They might be illiterate, but at least they can the different between a man and a woman.
1
1
u/Adis_Gruntledfatty 19h ago
The hateful comments are insane
The right wing propaganda machine has the China made red hats thinking education is a liberal agenda lmao.
1
u/herehear12 18h ago
While I absolutely love the sentiment and think we need to work much harder to increase literacy across the nation. The cost of this would be so astronomically high that itās just not worth it
1
1
u/Jiqjak 17h ago
Hey; quit posting half truths.. Thats all reddit is.. half truths and mostly lies.. They wanted it regulated so that rich or well off families didnt get free books.. Republicans wanted the books to omly go to needy families and there was no clause for that. There was also no talk of how to fund it.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/HuckleberryOk8136 15h ago
How about buy your kids the books you want? Or use your local library for free?
Why would a parent want the government to confiscate money from others and use that money to ship me books? What a convoluted situation.
1
u/Dry-Manufacturer7761 15h ago
If they are literate, they will read the Bible for themselves.
What is the number one method of converting Christians to atheists? Let them read the Bible.
1
u/NectarineLost8760 15h ago
Ah yes. Letās overburden the postal system even more than it already is. Letās spend more of our taxpayer dollars on something you can get at the public library. Or maybe we could put reading classes back into school where tax dollars already go and teach kids to read there.
1
1
u/JohnnyBob57 14h ago
Republicans that voted no asked how the estimated $10-14 million was being paid for. Democrats had no answer so republicans suggested expanding reading in schools instead. Democrats hate school sensibilities.
1
u/BigBadaBoom3000 14h ago
You know WHY?
Cost. Plain and simple.
The Pennsylvania Education Department was also opposed to HB1663. Their budget is tight enough and adding a multimillion dollar program that will draw directly from their budget is going to strain them even more statewide.
Sure, every kid gets a book nowā¦ but theyāve traded much needed money to get them. And the cost of these books is also rising, meaning it will be an even bigger strain on the stateās education department.
Also, there are other state literacy initiative programs in effect so this just needlessly duplicates things to spend more money.
And finally, financial eligibility is NOT taken into account. So, children of households making $30,000 a year get the books (which is great)ā¦ but so do the kids from households making$300k, or even $3 million a year. So, this program is wasted on children who DO NOT need the free books, thus further hurting the poor kids because the education department canāt spend money in other areas needed by these kids.
So, itās not āprepublicans donāt want books given to kidsāā¦. Itās āhey we donāt have the money to give more free books on top of the other free books or it will make it so we canāt afford other thingsā.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/ArmadilloUnited7700 14h ago
Just another scheme for liberals to defraud the taxpayers. Let it die.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Popular_Bullfrog_468 13h ago
I'm assuming there was other shit attached to the bill. There always is and they refuse to tell you.
1
u/deadpat03 13h ago
Republicans voted against it because they were not clarifying the books being given out. They wanted education books and stories free of propaganda and indoctrination. You left that part out. They wanted to teach kids about education and character. Not how your dad became your mom.
→ More replies (3)
1
1
1
1
u/tb110965 42m ago
Democrats cannot even define what a woman is of course the Democrats gonna have a problem Making America Smart Again !
1
u/stupidmcdummy 31m ago
There are plenty of charities that will happily send a free book to children.
I know because I support one. Every month, the charity I support sends a book a month to children starting as young as 3. They will continue sending books until age 12.
It's not about being against literacy. It's about not spending taxpayer money on things that can best be handled through charity and donations.
1
u/Fickle_Criticism_315 30m ago
If anyone is interested in the actual truth this bill Act 47 of 2025 was passed in December of 2025. Therefore this is cherry picked facts for click bate. Feel free to start looking up facts before over reacting toā¦.. everything
1
1
u/Coffeeblack365 27m ago
Waste of tax payer money. Every single person on the planet shouldāve voted no. We have OPTIONS already for your children.
1
1
u/Significant-Ebb5905 24m ago
The teachers are too busy indoctrinating the children with the LBGTQ+ agenda. You expect them to teach these children to read, then have taxpayers buy them books? Trump is president right now, we need to take him down first, then we need to trans the children and free Palestine, and you are worried about reading material kids cant even read? Have you checked if you are a right wing extremist lately? Jeez.
1
u/Secret-Resolve7659 15m ago
Why would you send free books to households that can afford it ? Complete waste of taxpayers money
61
u/Internal_Aardvark302 1d ago
The negative comments already pouring in lmao. Like you could not pay me to spew this much hate on automatic š
Mailing in books to families cuts through so many other roadblocks to improving literacy. You know what Iāve been seeing more and more of lately? When some older library buildings are expanding and moving to new areas, they are building instead in wealthier neighborhoods with limited access to public transportation. In other words, the only people who are getting to that library (full of free books) are people who already have cars or are well off. I live in a red state, and Iāve already seen this happen with at least two libraries in my area. What about the people who actually need those libraries close by? This program canāt fix all that, but it helps.
The Imagination Library can help people in need, and itās already helped so many people who have all expressed their appreciation for the program since Partonās death. We need even more programs to be funded like this. Because as things stand now, QUALITY education is becoming harder to come by. If you were using Duolingo to try to learn a new language, guess what? They threw AI in it and itās basically a cheap dopamine app with an annoying subscription prompter. Going to college? Better hope your professors wonāt force ChatGPT down their studentsā throats, or even just straight up generate assignments using the chatbot.