Deja Vu: GOP Senators Pass Anti-LGBTQ Education Bill A Second Time

Sen. Claire Celsi (D-West Des Moines) didn’t bite her tongue during the Iowa Senate’s second debate over Gov. Kim Reynolds’ education bill: “I’m ashamed of being a part of this body that has so callously cast our citizens aside.”

Celsi’s frustrations were twofold. One, Reynolds’ education bill has been blasted by LGBTQ people and advocates for being homophobic and transphobic. Secondly, several Republican senators smiled and held side conversations as Celsi read an emotional letter from a constituent who was concerned about the bill and the negative impact it would have on her LGBTQ patients.

“My constituent already said that kids have already taken their own lives because of legislation that has come out of this body,” Celsi said. 

Sen. Herman Quirmbach (D-Ames) was also displeased that the chamber was debating this bill again. After addressing a few of the issues he’s raised in previous debates about the legislation, Quirmbach summed up his thoughts.

“Let’s just face it: This bill needs to die,” Quirmbach said.

Quirmbach did not get his wish. SF 496 passed 34-16 in a party-line vote, the same vote count from the March 22 debate. 

Reynolds’ education bill has gone through a number of changes as it has gone back and forth between the Iowa House and Iowa Senate. Tuesday’s Senate debate was the second time that chamber debated the measure, and when it goes back to the House, that will also be the second time it’s debated over there.

Some items still in the bill include:

• Forced outing: A school district must notify parents if it becomes aware of a student who identifies as a different gender identity at school—or intends to—than the one on their birth certificate. This section also prohibits schools from using different nicknames or pronouns for a child if it differs from what is on existing school records, unless the school has received signed parental permission. There are punishments for district employees who violate this including possibly losing their teaching license.
• Book banning: School libraries for grades K-12 are only allowed to have “age-appropriate” books—although reasonable people would argue this was already the standard—by Jan.1, 2024. “Age appropriate” is vaguely defined as any book that does not “include any material with descriptions or visual depictions of a sex act” that is listed under Iowa Code Section 702.17. The bill carves out an exception for all religious books.  A new addition is that the identity of parents or guardians who report a book they want banned from schools will be protected. 
• Gender Identity: Dubbed “Don’t Say Gay/Don’t Say Trans” measures by opponents, this section of the bill prevents any discussion of gender identity/sexual orientation in grades K-6. 
• No explicit HPV or AIDS instruction: School sexual education curriculum would remove instruction about AIDS and/or the human papillomavirus (HPV) and the associated vaccine, which can actually prevent some forms of cancer. While no clear explanation has been given on why the specific mention of AIDS and HPV would be removed, attacks on the HPV vaccine are centered on Merck being the only manufacturer of the vaccine. Lawmakers who support this measure have embraced the bizarre claim that simply discussing the existence of HPV or the vaccine gives Merck free advertising, but in reality, the push comes amid the growing influence of the anti-vaccine movement over the Republican Party. 

Senate Minority Leader Zach Wahls (D-Coralville) made his objections to the bill known during the debate and highlighted why the forced outing and “Don’t Say Gay/Don’t Say Trans” provisions are problematic. 

“Senate Republicans are asking so many people across our state who play vital roles in our classrooms whether they are social workers, therapists, counselors, nurses to make impossible decisions; they’re requiring the forced outing of adolescents who may not feel safe at home,” Wahls said. “They are prohibiting, from my reading, a teacher who is in a same-sex relationship who might teach fourth or fifth grade from answering a question from a student about their family.”

Despite the presence of overwhelming evidence that SF 496 is an anti-LGBTQ bill, Sen. Brad Zaun (R-Urbandale) defended the bill and said that he does not consider it to be an attack on the LGBTQ community.

“The implication that we hate these young people makes me sick,” Zaun said. “I don’t hate these young people; no one in this chamber hates young people. These issues that we are talking about should be done with the parents with a psychologist or a counselor; they shouldn’t be done in schools.”

Zaun neglected to mention that a major component of gender-affirming care for trans and non-binary youth is having conversations with their family and a mental health professional, but the state made that form of health care illegal in March. 

Zaun also argued that removing books from schools isn’t banning them. According to the American Library Association, “a banning is the removal of those materials.” The First Amendment Encyclopedia would also classify the measure in the bill as book banning, which it defines as “a form of censorship, [which] occurs when private individuals, government officials, or organizations remove books from libraries, school reading lists, or bookstore shelves because they object to their content, ideas, or themes.”

“I get tired of hearing about this book ban,” Zaun said. “We’re not banning books here, last I checked you can get these books anywhere you want. You can go on Amazon, you can go to bookstores.”

Zaun also argued that the books he thinks are inappropriate are preventing schools from churning out quality workers for employers like himself, seemingly suggesting that the purpose of education is to help companies’ bottom lines and that access to books somehow makes children less educated.

“I want the people that I get to work with to have—who are my No. 1 asset—to have the tools they need,” Zaun said. “Many, many times I have employees—and I do know—that do not know how to read. Do not how to do simple math equations. Do not know how to measure.”

“These books, they’re terrible. I just want our teachers to concentrate on giving these kids the tools they need to prosper when they get out,” Zaun continued.

With its second passage in the Senate, Reynolds’ education bill heads back to the Iowa House for a second debate. If approved again in that chamber, it will head to Reynolds’ desk to be signed into law.   

by Ty Rushing
04/19/23

[inline-ad id=”0″]

If you enjoy stories like these, make sure to sign up for Iowa Starting Line’s main newsletter and/or our working class-focused Worker’s Almanac newsletter.

To contact Senior Editor Ty Rushing for tips or story ideas, email him at [email protected] or find him on social media @Rushthewriter.

​​Iowa Starting Line is part of an independent news network and focuses on how state and national decisions impact Iowans’ daily lives. We rely on your financial support to keep our stories free for all to read. You can contribute to us here. Also follow us on Facebook and Twitter.