Letters: Kim Reynolds is demonstrably on the side of Iowa's children

I’m a Democrat. Reynolds’ 'choice' plan is right for Iowa.

I am a lifelong Democrat, a single-issue voter, and I fully support Gov. Kim Reynolds’s proposal to expand student choice for schools.

As a single-issue voter, I vote for candidates who support fully funding quality education. I have no preference for whether quality education is from a public school, a private school, online, or homeschooling. Our children deserve a quality education regardless of ZIP code.

As the former chairperson of the Iowa Senate Education Committee from 1983 to 1985, I wrote the original open enrollment law in Iowa. Minnesota and Iowa were the first two states to legalize open enrollment for public school students. I have never understood how quality education became a partisan issue. I always felt that schools get better when they compete with one another the same as athletic teams get better when they compete.

I believe in the freedom to choose where I attend church, where I purchase my groceries, where I purchase books, and where students may obtain a quality education.

Senate Study Bill 1022 is a comprehensive expansion in providing parents and students additional choices on where to attend school. Iowa is fortunate with the number of quality public and private schools that already exist. The bill provides a specific list of the appropriate uses of the revenue that is provided to schools. It also provides a specific list of restrictive uses of the revenue.

The bill provides flexibility to public schools on how they may use previously dedicated revenue for minimum teacher salaries, staff development, and gifted and talented programs. Excess revenue in these categories may now be used in the general fund. Each pupil participating in the education savings account is required to take all applicable state and federal required student assessments. and the results of those assessments shall be provided to the pupil’s parents and reported to the Department of Education.

My hope is that the Legislature acts on this plan in a timely fashion and that rules and regulations are written so schools may start making plans on staffing, curriculum, and special education programs.

— Joseph E. Brown Sr., Clinton

I’m a Republican. Reynolds’ ‘choice’ plan is wrong for Iowa.

Gov. Kim Reynolds has been one of our best governors, gaining positive national attention to Iowa. As a life-long GOP activist, I'm very happy with her accomplishments. However, I respectfully disagree with her desire to use our tax dollars for non-public entities: private schools in other words.

She obviously has a focus on education – the key to our personal success. However, diverting public funds rather than increasing investments in our public schools is counter-intuitive to fiscal conservatives. Our public schools accept AND provide for ALL types of students, including those with physical, mental and behavioral challenges. Public students experience the full range of our populace. Taxpayers control public schools via local elected school boards with transparent budgets. Like Reynolds, I too am Lutheran, a denomination that provides the second-largest number of private schools in Iowa. I donate to them of my own free will but do NOT expect my neighbors to do so with their tax dollars.

Private schools can refuse admission to ANY prospective student, do not have open, elected boards or transparency. Many are indeed excellent schools, but we have little access to evidence of same. Public schools, however, if we as taxpayers wish, will provide for both “gifted” as well as “special needs” students. Public schools are indeed the foundation of our countries' greatness!

— Gerald Edgar, Garner

Reynolds is demonstrably pro-children

State Sen. Claire Celsi’s Dec. 25 guest column calls for a defense of Iowa public schools. She suggests that Gov. Kim Reynolds is in league with private education advocates who are “determined to tear apart public education.” She argues that “charter and voucher schemes have caused scandalous outcomes in other states, including discrimination, plummeting test scores, lack of qualified educators, and outright fraud.”

I doubt that Celsi can produce any evidence that Reynolds wants to tear apart public education. Reynolds is not anti-public schools but rather pro-Iowa children. Celsi states: “The school privatization movement is not an Iowa value.” Again, no evidence. In fact, thousands of Iowa parents who enroll their children in private schools represent an Iowa value: Parents are their children’s primary educators. They desire the best possible educational opportunities for their children.

Status-quo, monopoly-endorsing folks typically talk about “schools,” not about children. Healthy public schools is often a euphemism for a government school monopoly, well-paid administrators and teachers, strong teacher unions, local jobs, and excellent buildings that contribute to local businesses and chambers of commerce. Is not the mission of schools to assist parents in educating their children? Schools do not exist for administrators, teachers, unions, school boards, or local businesses. Schools exist for parents and their children.

A policy of providing education vouchers (providing Iowa tax dollars to ALL Iowa students to spend in whichever school their parents choose) is profoundly democratic. All parents and children would be treated equally, regardless of age, ethnicity, intelligence-quotient, gender, religion, political affiliation, or other identity-factors. Why not?

Arguments about the First Amendment pretend that giving tax dollars to parents and their children in whichever school they choose is somehow equivalent to establishing a religion, even though education vouchers would enable Iowa children to attend a Lutheran school, or a Buddhist school, of a Hindu school, or a Catholic school, or a secular-humanist government school, or an avowed atheistic school. Parents would choose, not the government. It is the parents’ responsibility. Education vouchers would not go to the school, but to the parents and their children. Many Iowa parents want that choice.

Recent new data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress report that student test scores nationwide are suffering their worst decline in history. These results plus the COVID-19 pandemic reveal that perhaps children’s achievement is not the primary goal of our K-12 monopoly public schools. Between 2000 and 2019 the number of school district administrators grew by 87.6% while the number of students grew by only 7.6% and the number of teachers by 8.7%. The results have been: many layers of administrators, the deterioration of student learning, an explosion of the diversity/equity/inclusion agenda, the introduction of woke curricula (critical race theory, radical gender ideology, etc.), and non-accountability to parents. Emphasis on reading, math, writing, STEM subjects has been replaced by ideological, social-engineering objectives.

Parents are demanding more choices for their children, not the demise of public schools. Education vouchers would help to provide those choices to ALL Iowa children and their parents, to use in public schools or in private schools. That is competition. ALL Iowa children would benefit, not just schools or their multitude of administrators.

— Timothy Schott, Carroll

Do you value your local school district?

Gov. Kim Reynolds pointed out in her Condition of the State address that the Legislature has allocated a billion new dollars to K-12 schools in the past decade. I’m not arguing that point. The point is not how much has been spent on K-12 public education. The point is not enough has been invested in Iowa education at all levels, K-12, community colleges and the Regent institutions.

The point is Iowa Republicans have worked for years to diminish the quality of public education. The mantra from the Republican leadership is that Iowa’s public schools are failing, and parents should be able to remove their child and then provide them with public dollars so their child can attend a private school. That is, if there is a private K-12 school in their area, and if the private school accepts the family’s application for admission. Private schools do not have to accept every child, and they do not have to provide the same level of services to children with learning disabilities as public schools. In Iowa, private schools are largely religious. My mother taught in Catholic schools, and attended daily Mass with her students. I believe there is a conflict with the separation of church and state to use public dollars to support private religious-affiliated schools.

If Iowans value their local schools and want them to be strengthened with funding levels that make it possible for their district to hire and keep competent teachers, bus drivers, food service workers and administrators, I want them to call their legislator. Tell them you want your tax dollars to support your local school district and not provide what the governor is calling scholarships, to further drain dollars away from providing all Iowa students a quality education.

— Carolyn Stephenson, Cedar Rapids

Iowa for years hasn’t fully committed to public education

When I was in high school, one of our teachers checked the gas tank level in his car by slamming on the brakes in the school parking lot, listening for the swish of fuel to estimate how much gas was left in the tank.

He wasn't paid enough to have his fuel indicator fixed.

My mother was a kindergarten teacher. School budgets were so tight she was constantly picking up supplies for her students, paying for them out of her own pocket. And that was in the glory days when Iowa schools were the envy of the nation.

Now Republicans are proposing tax cuts and at the same time they plan to give tax dollars to private schools.

That is perplexing, because I wonder what it is about the word "private" that they don't understand. The latest news in education is difficulty finding college grads with education degrees to staff our schools. If it's tough finding qualified teachers now, siphoning money away from public schools is not the way to go. But Republicans are going to try it again anyway.

The Iowa 25-cent coin was minted in 2004 with the words "Foundation In Education." Our status as an education state was already slipping by then, and I remember wondering at the time if we shouldn't have chosen something else.

— Thomas Alex, West Des Moines

Public schools serve all who enter

Did you ever think you’d see the day when the governor of Iowa stars in a television advertisement for private school vouchers? Iowa, the state that has “foundation in education” on its quarter, the state that uses its public education as a drawing card for businesses and industries to locate here, the state where 92% of its students attend public schools, now has a governor who champions the use of public dollars for private school vouchers.

I graduated from a public school in rural Iowa. I had a wonderful education! I am now watching my grandson receive a wonderful education in a metro-area school. I am sick and tired of the lies that are being spread about Iowa public education. Iowa public schools serve every single kid that walks through their doors. Public schools don’t have the luxury of picking and choosing who they serve, rather they welcome all students. They always have, and always will.

Iowans know something about fairness. Public schools are highly regulated and are held accountable by their district patrons. These regulations were put in place to ensure kids are learning and kids are safe. The private school voucher plan requires nothing. Why is there no accountability for them? And, what about the districts that have no private schools in their area? Let’s not exacerbate the already-growing rural-urban divide.

We Iowa public school graduates are smart enough to know that this private school voucher plan is not the brainchild of Iowans, but rather the dream of out-of-state groups who, for decades, have wanted to dismantle public schools. Iowans want public money used for public schools!

— Jean Swenson, Waukee

Diocese’s leaders take a stand for what they believe is right

The Catholic Diocese of Des Moines does not discriminate against transgender people, despite what local LGBTQ groups say. And Jesus Christ would not discriminate either.

Catholics should applaud the diocese’s decision to require students and staff in Catholic schools and churches to use the bathrooms of their sex shown on birth certificates.

Plus, athletes at Catholic schools can only participate in sports according to that sex. Bravo! Catholics finally have taken a stand on what they believe is the right thing to do.

And Jesus would agree too.

— Tony A. Powers, West Des Moines

Nurses aide is not a low calling

I am compelled to comment on Rachelle Chase’s Jan. 8 column, “New programs aim to help Black youth in Iowa improve on math and reading.” Chase writes about and quotes Anita Fleming-Rife. One topic Fleming-Rife brings up is the perception of low expectations among Black students. I read with agreement until Fleming-Rife said, ”I think about that (all I’ve accomplished) when I think about advisors saying, ‘Oh, you’d be a good nurses aide.’”

Fleming-Rife, in my opinion, became a victim of her own bias when she perceived being a nurses aide as a low expectation. Just ask the opinions of persons who have been nurses aides or been under the care of a good nurses aide if being a good nurses aide is a low expectation.

— Carol Van De Pol, Des Moines

We can do something about guns killing kids

For much of our nation’s history, disease was the leading cause of death for children ages 1 to 18. By the 1960s, motor-vehicle crashes became the leading cause of death. But in 2020, gun violence became the leading cause. In 2021, 3,597 American children died by gunfire.

Our government did not respond to the motor-vehicle safety crisis by taking cars from their owners, but it did make cars safer by passing laws that, for example, ban drivers from using hand-held devices, and require passengers to wear seatbelts and child passengers to be restrained in car seats. It did order automakers to add safety features such as airbags.

While we take driver’s training and pass a driver’s test before being awarded a driver’s license, in Iowa we’re not required to take firearms training or apply for a permit to buy and carry a handgun. We undergo a background check if buying a handgun from a federally licensed dealer, but not if we’re buying from a private seller.

As this Iowa legislative session begins, ask your representative to pass laws that ban assault weapons and large-capacity magazines and that require universal background checks. How many more children must die from gun violence?

— David Duer, Iowa City

Should all medical calls require fire engines?

The front-page story Jan. 9 focusing on the strengths and staffing issues of the metro fire departments confirmed how fortunate Des Moines is to have such a public service in our city. The repeated reminder of their staffing shortages made me wish the article would have addressed how the present staff could be used more efficiently.

The most frequent calls come from people needing medical attention, transportation to a medical facility or lifts from falls. Moving from downtown high-rise housing with many older residents and now living across from a retirement complex, I have had ample opportunity to see them in action. However, I have also observed that most rushing ambulances are followed by a large staffed fire engine also with lights and sirens blaring squeezing their way through busy streets and intersections. Once arriving it is not uncommon for two or three responders at the most attending to the call while a similar or greater number wait outside by their vehicles.

Perhaps attention should be given to creating a more efficient dispatch system where screening over the phone could determine if a fully staffed large fire engine is really needed each time to trail behind?

— Lloyd Kaufman, Des Moines

No surprise that public service is less attractive

The staffing shortages in our local fire departments seems to be the result of a general feeling among younger people of burnout and changes in attitudes toward lifelong public service careers.

Who can blame them for this change of attitude? After all that has been going on with our state government cutting benefits, taking away the power of collective bargaining, treating public service workers as annoyances and drains on the public coffers? Not to mention the general attitude of the public now towards anyone in authority. Who would want to take such risky and dangerous jobs that don't offer the 9-to-5 work experience that is the gold standard in this country?

We and this state government have created this problem.

Until we get our minds straight about what is really important in this state and country, this downward trend in public service jobs will continue at our own peril.

— John Moore, Newton

Des Moines Diocese inflicts needless harm

I am writing with a heavy heart as a parent of a transgender child and as minister as once again I witness the Catholic Church fail to protect and care for the children. The reporting diocesan policy regarding transgender youth refuses to accommodate and acknowledge the existence of and protect transgender youth, much as the church for decades refused to acknowledge the sexual abuse of hundreds of thousands of children around the world. The ongoing harm inflicted in this recent edict is undeniable and unacceptable.

Once again the Catholic Church chooses to ignore reality so that no one, other than the children and their parents, has to experience discomfort. How long will it take for true spiritual maturity to be evident in the leadership of the church? Jesus hung out with the marginalized and excluded and constantly questioned the status quo and those who supported it. Are we not to do the same, even when it is uncomfortable? Why are transgender people an exception? There is no reason other than fear of the unknown and a desire to protect the comfortable. May the Catholic hierarchy truly mature into the full understanding of the message of Jesus.

— The Rev. Deb Hill-Davis, Des Moines

No relief for vexing parking ticket

Before Christmas I drove to downtown Des Moines as I wanted to find some unique gifts. I went to East Village as I wanted to support local businesses. I found a place to park near Raygun. Of course, there are parking meters. Being a law-abiding citizen, I had downloaded the Des Moines parking app; I wanted to avoid parking tickets.

Unfortunately, this meter did not support the app. However, I had my credit card on the ready, which I slid through several times to no avail (my card was good). I scrounged through my purse and my car until I found 45 minutes worth of change. In this credit card world, change in not always readily available.

Satisfied that I had enough time, I was on my way. When I was finished, I hurried back to my car to find a $15 parking ticket. I was five minutes late. Yes, my meter had expired. The meter person was right there, I explained, she wouldn't budge. She was very eager to point out the website online that I could go to for an appeal. Frustration was high. After all, I had taken all the precautions to avoid just this, and I was supporting small business.

I promptly filled out the online appeal. Last week, I received a letter from the "Parking Ticket Administrative Review Panel," which denied my appeal. I paid my ticket, reluctantly.

I was trying to do the right thing. Where is the justice? The compassion? There was certainly no "good will" shown. If I was a repeat offender, I could understand the panel's decision. Is this really what downtown wants? I'm sure the retailers don't want discouraged shoppers! I was so discouraged. I know I am only one person, but this one person will think twice about going downtown to shop again.

— Linda Jones, West Des Moines

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Letters: Kim Reynolds is demonstrably on the side of Iowa's children