Who is your favorite Chubuggin?

The Iowa Civil Rights Act would be changed by removing gender identity as a protected class, and by adding gender dysphoria to disabilities covered by the act, under legislation that will be considered by state lawmakers next week at the Iowa Capitol.





ADVERTISING




Created in 1965, the Iowa Civil Rights Act prevents discrimination based on identifying characteristics like age, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability. The Act was amended in 2007 to add sexual orientation and gender identity.

Rep. Jeff Shipley (R-Birmingham)
A bill introduced by Iowa state lawmaker Jeff Shipley, a Republican from Birmingham, would remove gender identity from the Iowa Civil Rights Act.


Shipley’s bill would instead add to the act’s covered disabilities gender dysphoria, which the American Psychiatric Association defines as psychological distress that results when an individual has a gender identity that is different from their sex at birth.


Advocates for transgender people expressed their vehement opposition to the proposal.


“Oh, it’s horrible. I mean, it’s going to hurt a lot of people,” said Keenan Crow, with the LGBTQ advocacy organization One Iowa.


The proposed bill, House File 2082, would need to move through the Iowa House Judiciary Committee, which is chaired by Rep. Steve Holt, a Republican from Denison.


A 2020 proposal simply to remove gender identity from the Iowa Civil Rights Act did not advance through Holt’s committee that year. This time, Holt told the Des Moines Register that he wants to hear the conversation around the new proposal from Shipley, calling it “an interesting concept.”


“I just want to hear a conversation about it. I want to have a subcommittee (hearing) and hear a conversation about it,” Holt told the Register. “I still have concerns about this, but I at least want to have the conversation and see where it goes.”

​

Sign up for On Iowa Politics

Subscribe now and receive a roundup of Iowa politics news sent directly to your inbox.​

The subcommittee hearing -- the first step in Iowa’s state lawmaking process -- is scheduled for Wednesday at the Iowa Capitol.


Iowa Rep. Sami Scheetz, a Democrat from Cedar Rapids who will represent his party on the subcommittee’s legislative panel, said the proposal is “terrible” for multiple reasons, including the way the bill removes gender identity from the act’s protections but includes gender dysphoria among protected disabilities.


“First off, it’s insulting,” Scheetz said. “To characterize people who are nonbinary and transgender as having a mental illness, essentially, which is what it does, to say that they're disabled mentally for being themselves, I think is just wrong.”


Scheetz and Crow said the proposal likely would not provide the same legal protections to transgender Iowans as the current Civil Rights Act. Crow noted that not all transgender people are diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

Keenan Crow, One Iowa (Photo Submitted)
“Being transgender and having gender dysphoria are two separate things. There are a decent amount of trans people that have gender dysphoria, and a decent amount of trans people who don’t have gender dysphoria,” Crow said. “So you’re going to leave out that entire group of people who has no need for a diagnosis.”


Rep. Jennifer Konfrst, the leader of the minority-party Democrats in the Iowa House, called the proposal “hateful,” “unnecessary,” and said there is a “huge risk for unintended consequence.” She said amending the Iowa Civil Rights Act in this way would be “the exact opposite of the spirit of who Iowans are and what Iowans want.”


Statehouse Republicans in the past two legislative sessions have passed a series of new laws impacting transgender and other LGBTQ Iowans, including a ban on gender transition treatments and surgeries for minors, a ban on the teaching of gender identity or sexual orientation through sixth grade, a ban on transgender students using K-12 school bathrooms that align with their gender identity by requiring students to use the bathroom that aligns with their gender at birth, and a ban on transgender girls competing in girls sports.

Major was THE MAN

Anyone got the goods on how it would've worked out if Johns was hired?

WEAK POS: President Joe Biden is reportedly set to unveil a plan that would pay foreign countries with American tax dollars to control the inflow of illegal immigration to the United States.


President Joe Biden plans to use American tax dollars to pay foreign countries in order to help mediate illegal immigration to the United States.

The plan involves financing economic projects in North and South American countries to expand economic prospects and discourage migration to the U.S.

The United States will collaborate with the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) to establish a new financing platform and increase contributions to the bank.

The plan also emphasizes areas where the region can compete globally, such as clean energy, semiconductors, and medical supplies.

Despite already handing out well over $1 billion in foreign aid, illegal immigration to the U.S. has yet to have been significantly reduced.

The US immigration system has been fundamentally broken under Joe Biden as the country experiences a historic and unprecedented crisis.

In 2022 alone, the US encountered the highest number ever recorded of illegal immigrants at the US southern border. This represents a 200% increase from former President Donald Trump’s last year in office in 2020.

BREAKING: @whitehouse @PressSec Karine Jean-Pierre claims @JoeBiden has done more than previous presidents to secure the U.S. border, says he was too busy to meet with the governor of New York who came to discuss NY migrants, says he has a lot on his plate.

Under Trump, Americans saw the lowest rate of illegal immigration in over 40 years.

Under Biden, we have seen the highest rate of illegal immigration over 60 years.

General Michael Flynn, who has personally witnessed the problem, describes the situation under Biden as a “mass invasion” that is “out of control.”

Biden notoriously ended Trump’s “remain in Mexico” policy, which forced foreign nationals seeking to enter the U.S. through the southern border — illegally or without proper documentation — to be returned to Mexico.

These individuals needed to wait in Mexico while their legal cases are adjudicated. This border security program under Trump and kept migrants in Mexico as they awaited their hearings.

Biden, on the other hand, opened the floodgates and created a disaster by removing this policy.

This signaled that everyone can come through the border even if it’s illegally and without proper documentation.

Suzanne Castello became emotional and at times raised her voice as she spoke Wednesday to Iowa lawmakers about the aid and services her son has received from the area education agency in her region.



Her son, Gabe, has dyslexia and dysgraphia, which impact his ability to read and write. He had difficulties in preschool with sitting still and needed an occupational therapist. For four years, Castello home-schooled him. Now he attends Grinnell High School.


And through it all, Castello said, the local AEA has aided Gabe with specialized professionals and services.





“There are deep problems in our school districts in delivery of education,” she told lawmakers. "I do not see the AEA as a problem. And I'm really mad that I am in an institution that is depriving school districts of money, and keeps on skimping and skimping and skimping. And then, when there's not enough money to actually get good education, then they say, 'Oh, you're failing, so we're just going to cut the overhead.'"


Castello was one of dozens of people at the Iowa Capitol to speak Wednesday against a bill proposed by Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds that would overhaul the state’s area education agencies and give schools the ability to opt out of their special education services and seek them from another party.


The proposal, House Study Bill 542, also met resistance from majority Republican lawmakers in both the House and the Senate as it faced its first hurdle to becoming law.


Republican Rep. Skyler Wheeler of Hull, chair of the House Education Committee, declined to advance the bill out of a subcommittee, saying he wanted “further conversations before we take action on the bill.” Over in the Senate, Republicans advanced the bill but pledged it would see more changes as it moves forward.


Republican Rep. David Young of Van Meter, an assistant Republican leader in the House, expressed skepticism about the bill’s future in the chamber. He said there is “not a lot of appetite” for the reforms called for in the proposal, but said Republicans support the teacher pay increases also included in the bill.


Reynolds pitched the bill as a key piece of her agenda for this year’s session. She said the change is necessary as test scores of Iowa students with disabilities have lagged but the state sends a comparatively high amount of money on those students.

​

"We need to just step back and start to ask some of those questions with the overall objective of making sure that we're doing everything we can to get these kids with disabilities the education that they deserve and hopefully see better outcomes," Reynolds told reporters Wednesday. "So you can't police yourself, get all the money, mandate I use you, and not be held accountable when the scores are not reflecting what they should be. That's unconscionable."


Iowa's nine AEAs, which are governmental agencies separate from the state Department of Education, provide special education services to school districts in their boundaries and assist with classroom equipment and media services, professional development and talented and gifted instruction, among other services.


Under the proposal, which Reynolds amended this week, federal and state special education funds would be sent directly to school districts, which could then decide whether to contract with the AEAs. If they do not, school districts would still have the legal obligation to educate students with disabilities, but could obtain that instruction from a third party, like a private company.


Currently, AEAs receive special education funding for the schools in their region and are tasked with providing that education to those districts.


AEAs would also still be allowed to provide other services to school districts under Reynolds’ amended proposal — if the district requests them and they are approved by the Education Department.


The bill would keep in place a $35 million property tax levy that schools can use to pay for the AEAs’ educational services, but remove a $33 million property tax stream that funds the agencies’ media services. The education service funds could be used for media services.


Under the proposal, much of the AEAs' operations and oversight would also come under the purview of the state Department of Education. The department director would be in charge of hiring AEA directors, making decisions on combining and dissolving AEAs and approving budgets submitted by the AEAs.


The bill would also create a special education division in the Department of Education and bring the employees in charge of oversight under the Department of Education. That change would lead to more than 200 AEA staff positions being cut, Reynolds said.


The bill also includes a provision to increase the starting salary for teachers to $50,000. Teachers with at least 12 years of experience would be paid at least $62,000.

School administrators split​

Superintendents spoke both for and against the bill during subcommittee meetings.


Some superintendents who backed the bill said they want to maintain control of the special education dollars for their students, and they said they can provide those same services for a lower cost.


Corey Seymour, superintendent of the Clear Creek Amana Community School District, said the Grant Wood AEA — based in Cedar Rapids — has provided vital services, but he believes districts should be in charge of funding for their students with disabilities.


“Each district is different, and with control of our flow-through funds, we will be able to create an individual education plan for our entire district,” he said. “If services are adequate and addresses the needs of our district, we will continue to use them.”


But others said smaller districts would not be able to provide the same level of services. Without absorbing the funding from all the schools in the district, they said, AEAs would not be able to pay for services needed by schools with less money.


Brad Buck, the Waukee Community School District superintendent and former Iowa Department of Education director under Republican Gov. Terry Branstad, said the bill would hurt rural school districts and create “winners and losers.”


“There's no way this math works like it's being described,” he told Senate lawmakers. “I'm just telling you that. It's far more likely that larger districts will come out in better shape and this bill will impact smaller, and especially rural districts.”

What’s next for the bill?​

After passing the Senate subcommittee, the bill is eligible for a vote in the full committee. The Republicans on that committee, though, cautioned that the bill would likely see a number of changes.


Sen. Ken Rozenboom, R-Pella, chair of the Senate Education Committee, said he believes the AEAs need a “tune up, or probably a more major overhaul.”


It is unclear whether the bill will advance in the House. After Feb. 16, any bill that has not been reported out of a committee is generally not eligible for further consideration.


“But I believe it’s also widely acknowledged that we don’t have all the answers in front of us today,” Rozenboom said. “I believe we need to continue the legislative process to find these answers. … I’ll roll up my sleeves and continue to find solutions that serve our children well.”


Democrats opposed the bill in both subcommittees. They said the bill would consolidate too much power under the Department of Education and worried that the bill was written without input from stakeholders in the state.


"There is no flexibility in this bill," said Sen. Molly Donahue, a Democrat from Cedar Rapids. "It takes local control away from our schools and our districts 133 times. … If you're unhappy with the administrative costs, then deal with the administrative costs. Don't throw the whole baby out with the bathwater."

Made my first camping reservation for May. Sugar Bottom booked.

BLT's last night. Bangers tonight.

<insert joke about my wife>

Gambling

So this interesting little item just popped up on my radar. My first reaction was, "Oh, I get it now, we're on BOTH sides." My second was, "this strikes me as a little weird in that it's invoking us financial sanctions authority against non-US persons for what sounds like conduct that is very much an Israeli domestic matter." I'll confess that I'm not that up to speed on sanctions authority, so a serious question for those who might be: what exactly is the misconduct/authority "hook" that these extraterritorial sanctions are based on? (Not being judgmental, just genuinely wondering.)

I see that Hemp drinks are all the rage in Iowa. Are there any good beers that have Hemp in it? I'm in Iowa, obviously. If I drink one, will I be stoned off my ass?

Tuesdays with Torbee​

by:Tory Brecht

I have thus far refrained from writing about Caitlin Clark not because I dislike women’s college basketball – on the contrary, I am among the thousands (millions?) that view any Iowa game featuring the super-senior as appointment television.

Rather, it is a writer’s fear of repetition and cliché. Every superlative adjective has already been heaped upon the star: amazing, outstanding, tremendous, fantastic, unbelievable,phenomenal generational, GOAT. My lexicon is devoid of any fresh or new praise. Frankly, writing about how great Clark is at this point feels derivative.

Something new and interesting is happening now, however: the inevitable backlash and pushback against a superstar that until now has received near-universal praise. Similar to the emotionally fragile and hilarious dislike of Taylor Swift by the neckbeard portion of the NFL fanbase, criticism of Clark is heating up.

Whether it’s rhinestone cowgirl Kim Mulkey’s passive aggressive dig about shot volume, fragile Dawn Staley’s whining about officiating after a clear Clark game winner or the Runza-addled denizens of Lincoln complaining about a post-game flop in a crowd rush event their team wasn’t involved in, the nattering nabobs of negativity have their sights set on the Hawkeye hoops prodigy.

Login to view embedded media
Iowa fans have reacted to these provocations with fierce defense and unfeigned outrage. How dare they!? Don’t they realize Clark is expanding the exposure of the women’s game unlike any other? Do they not see the thousands of little boys and girls lining up for autographs, which she unfailingly and cheerfully accommodates? Do they not appreciate their typically moribund arenas selling out when the Caitlin show comes to town?

Iowa fans are right, of course. Clark is great box office and fantastic for the sport. She should be celebrated.

That said, I kind of want to see her embrace the hate and take a full heel-turn.

She already has the patented MJ shrug. She is not shy about letting officials know when they screw up. I say ramp up the bad guy antics! Not in a Bill Laimbeer oafish and obnoxious way, but more of an Allen Iverson zero-effs given, “it ain’t braggin’ if you back it up” way.


The women’s game feels like it’s entering a bit of a Golden Age and I think that has lots to do with big personalities and the fact those big personalities stick around for four or more years. Whereas modern men’s college basketball is more mercenary, familiar (and vexing) faces stick around longer in the women’s game, making for compelling match-ups.

Who doesn’t want to see Caitlin versus Angel Reese Part II? Will Iowa and Clark get a shot at Paige Bueckers and UCONN, pitting the alleged two best players in the sport head-to-head? Could freshman phenom Hannah Hidalgo from Notre Dame upstage the Iowa star if they face off? All of these are juicy storylines more interesting than whether Kentucky’s latest crop of one-and-doners or Kansas’ assemblage of well-paid recruits will prevail in the men’s tournament.

Clark has a big personality and has proven well-equipped at handling the giant target fixed on her back every time she steps on the court. Sure, universal praise feels good – but I have to think the hyper-competitive part of her also relishes squashing dreams and shutting the haters up in their seats.

For decades, Iowa’s wrestling team was feared and loathed for its aggressive edge and relentlessness. They leaned into the black hat role and played it to perfection (and multiple national titles.) I would love to see Clark bring that Gable-inspired attitude back to Carver.

To be loved is nice. To be feared is the highest praise possible.

nm

It is great to be an Iowa Wrestling fan.

Go Hawks!

HAGERTY, COLLEAGUES INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO END COUNTING OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN DETERMINING ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES AND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT APPORTIONMENT​

The legislation comes after video revealed a Democrat Congresswoman openly calling for more illegal immigration to her New York congressional district because she “needs more people in her district for redistricting purposes.”

Gov. Kim Reynolds could have been a collaborator. But, yet again, she chose to be a dictator.



Instead of calling together teachers, school administrators, parents, state lawmakers and others with a stake in the future of Area Education Agencies, Reynolds relied on the work of a consultant to guide her plan to dramatically alter AEAs.


All Reynolds would do is dramatically change how AEAs are funded and hand their management over to the Department of Education. When the dust settles, services they offer schools will be curtailed and some AEAs surely will close.






What’s the big deal?


Reynolds’ consultant, Guidehouse, bombed Iowa’s AEA system from 50,000 feet. It pointed to lagging standardized test scores for students with disabilities. Providing special education support for Iowa is the core mission of AEAs.


So Reynolds decided to allow schools to keep special education funds that now flow into AEAs and curtailed other services to schools.


It was critical of AEAs’ management structure and advocated for putting the Department of Education in charge. So Director McKenzie Snow, a school choice advocate with no experience as a teacher or school administrator, will call the shots.


But there were no boots on the ground. The Guidehouse report contains no interviews with teachers, parents or school administrators. Also missing is an explanation of how these changes will make education better or how test scores will rise.


Maybe you’ve noticed the governor is the only one advocating for its passage. Meanwhile, thousands of Iowans have weighed in to oppose her plan. Concessions she proposed did little to help. On Wednesday, a House subcommittee tabled her plan, but a Senate panel did vote to move it forward.

​

Who, exactly is in favor of this?


Not smaller school districts who will lose support and services if larger school districts take their AEA money and run. The objective when AEAs were formed in 1974 was that all districts in a region benefit by pooling resources.


Not school district leaders who are now realizing if they take the money and go it alone, they’ll be responsible for following a tangled web of federal rules. Currently, AEAs do the untangling.


Not private schools that currently access services through AEAs. Without AEA resources, private schools would have to ask local public districts for help. That could be awkward after the governor diverted hundreds of millions in public dollars for private school scholarships.


And not parents with kids who have Individual Education Plans, or IEPs developed with the assistance of AEAs. They’ve built a support system for their child at school that now could be unraveled. Even privatized. Will parents, for instance, be able to take time off work to bring their kid to private service providers?


It's those parents who can’t be bought off with campaign contributions, aren’t interested in the usual legislative horse trading and can’t be intimidated by political retribution from the governor. They’re simply advocating for their kids. And no amount of deck chair shuffling will convince them to dive into the frightening uncertainty spawned by the governor’s plan.


Those families and educators should be driving any AEA reform effort. This is no time for a dictator. It’s time to slow down and collaborate.


(319) 398-8262; todd.dorman@thegazette.com

...now let's NOT F**K this up, Burberry!!!

Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media

Trump might lose by 10 to 15 million votes in November. These results are fascinating in New Hampshire. Trumps gonna lose the suburbs in record fashion for an R nominee in November.

Lake County, a really backwards place. Entrepreneurial lady isn’t going to find much tolerance there.

Meet Chicago NAACP President Teresa Haley, who took things one step further in a leaked Zoom call from October, in which she likened immigrants to "savages, rapists and burglars."



"But these immigrants come over here, they've been raping people. They've been breaking into homes. They're like savages as well. They don't speak the language, and they look at us like we're crazy because we were the only people in America who were brought over here against our will, and were slaves.

"I'm tryin' not to be a ni**a but you know I'm pro-black, so, it's all about us, people. NAACP - what do those letters mean to you?"

Login to view embedded media
"Springfield, Peoria, Bloomington, Kankakee, just get ready if you declared yourself to be a safe haven or a safe place for immigrants to come, because they are shopping around, and the busloads are coming," she said during a different segment of the tape.

"Black people have been on the streets forever and ever, and nobody cares," while the government is rushing to provide housing and other services to immigrants, she said.

Haley's comments drew harsh rebuke from Gov. JB Pritzker.

"Reprehensible remarks, I would hope that she would apologize for the remarks. I also think that people should recognize that immigrants to this country are all around us," he said.

Haley did apologize - but then after she was tracked down on vacation in Dubai by Chicago ABC station WLS-TV, she suggested it was a deepfake, saying "With AI, anything is possible."

Login to view embedded media
Haley's comments sparked the resignation of Patrick Watson, who until recently was the president of the DuPage County branch of the NAACP.

"I think she should absolutely resign. I think she's unfit to be the president, the state president of the NAACP, someone that has that kind of sentiment and that kind of thought against migrant communities," he said.

And of course, the new branch president, Michael Childress, says Haley's comments were 'taken out of context,' adding "These comments are not indicative of what the NAACP stands for. But again, I'm not going to speak on behalf of Teresa Haley and say she should or shouldn't resign or things like that."

Chicago’s illegal immigrants are eligible to receive up to $9,000 in rental assistance under a newly introduced state-run program, which also provides funding to help furnish homes.

An estimated 68,440 homeless Americans are living on the streets of Chicago as of 2023, according to the Chicago Coalition of the Homeless.

Speaking to The Daily Beast Wednesday, Mr. Watson said the meeting between Ms. Haley and other NAACP state leaders took place on Oct. 26.

Ms. Haley had presided over the conference, he told the publication, adding that her comments amounted to "hate speech."

"The comments came up when some of the Chicago-based presidents started to talk about the migrant crisis, the funding that was going into neighborhoods, and they had differing opinions from my own. It's OK to have differing opinions," Mr. Watson said.

"They had different opinions about some of the resources that were going to the community, that resources weren't going towards individuals within the community, even though those resources are coming from different sources… That's OK to have a different opinion. But President Haley engaged in what I would call absolute hate speech."

Mr. Watson has resigned from the NAACP in protest of Ms. Haley's comments, he told the publication, adding that he believes Ms. Haley should also step down.