On July 1, Iowa will eliminate its established state divisions for various marginalized communities, such as women, African-Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian and Pacific Islanders, and people with disabilities. Additionally, the state commissions that previously aided in setting policies and priorities will also be abolished. This drastic measure will result in the termination of 67 commissions that represented underrepresented communities, including those for individuals with autism, special health needs, and aging adults, among others.
The term “purge” is not a new concept as it has been associated with statewide book bans that are already in place. This is not a coincidence as the objective is quite similar – to silence the voices and experiences of marginalized communities and prevent them from having a say in important matters. It is an attempt to erase their lessons and histories, which is a concerning issue.
Starting July 1st, the gender-balance requirement that has been in effect since 1987 will no longer be in place. This requirement was the first of its kind in the United States, mandating proportional representation of men and women on state boards and commissions. In addition, the Iowa state legislature, along with Governor Kim Reynolds, has prohibited the establishment of offices and personnel dedicated to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at public universities, except in cases mandated by federal or accreditation standards.
Advocates for the elimination of commissions argue that consolidating their objectives and priorities into a single, multi-purpose board would increase efficiency and reduce costs. However, this claim is far from accurate. For instance, after the human rights agency was abolished, the Human Rights Board was absorbed into the Health and Human Services Department. As a result, only seven out of the twelve board members will have the power to vote. This raises the question of how the governor will determine which minority representative will be granted voting rights. Therefore, the notion that a single board can effectively cater to the diverse needs of various commissions is highly questionable.
A seemingly public process produces ‘exactly what the governor wanted’
This Article Includes
While lawmakers and the governor may view the elimination of certain boards and commissions as a way to increase efficiency, some individuals view it as a form of erasure. It is important to note that the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency has found that removing these entities will only result in a minimal decrease in state expenses.
According to Polk County Democrat, Sen. Janet Petersen, the process was initiated last summer when the newly appointed Boards & Commissions Review Committee, under the governor’s supervision, conducted a series of meetings with the goal of reviewing and reforming the state’s numerous citizen-led committees. While Petersen acknowledges that periodic reviews are not necessarily negative, she believes that the process felt like a facade and culminated in a report that mirrored the governor’s preferences.
According to Petersen, the recent eliminations are putting the safety and well-being of Iowans at risk, and also endangering the funding streams for programs that have been saving Iowans money. He expresses his concern over the situation and fears the consequences of these actions.
According to her, a democracy that lacks public input, access, and oversight cannot truly be called a democracy. The political motivations behind this issue are quite obvious.
According to Keenan Crow, a lobbyist for One Iowa, an organization fighting for LGBTQ rights, the governor’s decision seems to be an attempt to suppress dissenting opinions. It’s worth noting that the LGBT community doesn’t even have a state commission yet, but they have already voiced their opposition to the bill that aims to reduce the number of boards and commissions from 67.
The argument presented for eliminating the gender-balance mandate on boards and commissions is not persuasive. According to the task force appointed by the governor, each of the state’s highest elected positions has been occupied by a woman at some point, implying that there should be no issue with gender representation. However, having one woman in a higher position for a brief period does not hold much significance, particularly if she is not in favor of promoting broader representation of other individuals.
We’ve very much not solved problems of inequality and discrimination
Eliminating deeply ingrained inequalities that have been rooted in history and culture is a continuous effort. While the particular concerns may change, entrenched biases and mindsets persist. Here are a few illustrations:
-
- Women in Iowa earn on average 82% of what men here make.
- The city of Des Moines just paid out $2.4 million to resolve four female employees’ sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuits.
- And Iowa women may also soon lack the right to terminate their pregnancies after six weeks if the courts allow a law signed by Reynolds to stand.
In July of last year, Nelson sadly passed away. One of her friends and colleagues, Dianne Fagner, had organized a public event to celebrate Nelson’s contributions in the fight against domestic violence. However, Fagner now feels that the work Nelson had done is being erased due to the dismantling of the systems that allowed for change. Fagner emphasized the importance of such commissions and noted that the governor and Legislature are essentially silencing important voices in the process.
In 2011, when Nelson was inducted into the Hall of Fame, she recognized the need for a state agency that would advocate for women. She saw the writing on the wall and expressed her concern about the unclear commitment to equality in the state. Nelson firmly believed that a strong agency would be vital in ensuring the state’s commitment to equality.
Higher education is already experiencing the negative impact of anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts. A video clip of Iowa State University President Wendy Wintersteen addressing the Board of Regents has been making the rounds. In the clip, Wintersteen discusses ISU’s compliance with state law and mentions the establishment of learning communities to provide a sense of belonging for students. However, her emphasis on “a young white man from rural Iowa” finding a place where he belongs has been criticized by Newsone for implying that fitting into a school with over 72% white population might be difficult for him.
A plan to ‘make America white again’?
Wintersteen mentioned that ISU has been working on an initiative since the 1860s to promote a sense of belonging among all members. However, her report on how ISU is implementing anti-DEI directives did not address the unique challenges that minority populations face on campuses or how these new regulations may impede progress in this regard.
Retired Iowa House Democrat, Ako Abdul-Samad, believes that the recent budget cuts, office closures, and bans will have a devastating impact on the community. He sees a Republican agenda that aims to turn America white again, with these policies filtering down to the local level. Abdul-Samad is concerned that most Iowa Republicans fail to grasp the damage that people of color will suffer due to these actions.
“This undermines the entire concept of equal rights,” he criticizes the current situation.
It’s clear that Iowa’s big table is losing seats and, as a result, becoming less representative, less equitable, and less democratic.
Read More:
- House in Alabama Robbed of its Whole Front Porch
- Jim Banks, a US Congressman, seeks explanation from WNBA regarding Chennedy Carter’s foul on Caitlin Clark.
