Meeting Public Comments

Susannah Crichton []

I urge you to vote NO on this ridiculous bill. How are we at the point of restricting diversity and inclusion training when it is so redundantly clear that this state and country are in such dire need of it? Do not attempt to get rid of or restrict this important training. It is absolutely necessary and not even nearly enough of what we need to be doing to combat this country and state's institutional racism.

Marcia Swift []

Iowa has seen a brain drain in the last 20 years. My children and the children of my friends have left this state to live and work in a place that is welcoming to all people. This bill will only exacerbate the migration of our brightest and most talented youth to other states. In addition, why would people want to come here and take jobs where they will be micromanaged by the State Legislature? Who would want to become President of the University of Iowa when they are not allowed to implement efforts for diversity, multiculturalism, and inclusion? Iowa will not attract the best scientists, physicians, and researchers. These people are not the white straight males you think they are. Think twice please before you make this most unwelcoming of messages. Think twice please before you decide to allow yourselves this micromanaging of all governmental levels and entities. Please put trust in the hands of the administrators and political leaders who know best what type of diversity education is needed in the city, county, department, or agency they run.

Kay Pence [QC ARA, AAUW, PACG & IA ARA]

I strongly oppose HF 802. Banning discussion does not make racism and sexism disappear. IA needs to be more welcoming not more closed minded.

Alison Cocks []

The Interfaith Alliance says it well, prohibits effective diversity training for all state, county, city, public postsecondary education, and public K12 education entities. Diversity training should be intentional and proactive in addressing bias, privilege, values, beliefs, and the presentday impact of our nations history regarding racism and sexism. The overreach by the legislature will impact all government entities at every level and their ability to determine the appropriate diversity training for their employees and locale. Ultimately, HF802 will impact Iowansevery one of usand particularly those interacting with our government at all levels every day including students, families, residents, customers, and clients. This is an economic issue for our state (Iowa being perceived as backwards and unwelcoming) and it is a social justice issue for Iowans, disproportionately impacting people of color, women, the LGBTQ+ community, and the immigrant community. As a retired teacher I am appalled at this attempt to curtail any diversity education. This is not the Iowa I grew up in. We are moving in the opposite direction of what the majority of Iowans believe and accept.

Pat Bowen []

HF802 is bad for Iowans and our state. It says to the rest of the nation that Iowa does not value diversity. Diversity training must include discussion on racial bias, white privilege, and systemic racism. As Iowans we need to recognize and admit we have systemic racism in this state and it is unacceptable. Iowa being a welcoming state is important. HF802 sends the wrong message. It will hurt our state and it will harm Iowans.And notably I see more lobbyists groups declaring against this bill than for it. (Like 122) This bill needs to go away. Two thirds of my children have left the state. They will not be back. What will be left in Iowa?

Monica Maloney-Mitros []

I oppose this bill, HF802Why do those who propose a bill to limit knowledge of history and the way it has led to a lack of diversity want to persist in this? We should learn from mistakes we have made as a state and as a nation and move forward with training and information on how we can promote welcoming diverse cultures to Iowa. Diversity of people within a state adds to the reputation of a state as welcoming and supportive to all who want to live and work here and to then welcome others. Iowa needs to be known as a state offering opportunity and diversity in order to grow in a positive way. This bill will keep people away!

Cameron Gale []

Did you know that as of 2019, women in the U.S. who were yearround, fulltime employees made 82% of what men earned? And that in Iowa, women made only 78% of what men did? That data says our system is sexist.Did you know that Black and Latinx Americans are highly underrepresented in professional and managerial employment? And that in Iowa, Black folks make up only 4% of the population yet comprise 20% of the prison population? That data says our system is racist.Systemic sexism. Systemic racism.Yet this bill, HF 802, would ban entities from addressing these issues that affect our fellow Americans, our fellow Iowans. This bill tells them their issues dont matter. It attempts to silence, cancel, censor educational efforts to make our state more understanding and empathetic. Ignoring hard topics will not make those topics disappear. We can do hard things. Please vote against this cowardly bill.

Shelley Skuster [n/a]

Its ironic this overreaching legislation is being discussed on the heels of a hate crime toward Asian Americans in Atlanta. As the mother in a multiracial family, I assure you such hatred and prejudice exists across our state as well.HF802 sends a poor message to Iowans and to the rest of the country. Diversity should be valued and celebrated. Diversity training is essential and should include discussions on racial bias, white privilege and systemic racism.Vote no on HF802.

Janice Brown []

I never thought I would be embarrassed to say I was raised in Iowa. That has all changed and as a retiree, I would prefer to leave Iowa, except my family and friends are here. How can we Iowans become so unwelcoming to people of color? Since George Floyd died, my friends and my church have undertaken a study of racism, implicit bias and systemic racism. We started our study with slavery and how it was justified in order to build the economy. We then studied the history and policies we have implemented since slavery was abolished. I never realized how complicit our government policies have been in limiting the ability of people of color to live and prosper. How can we ever improve as a nation without an accurate history of how this inequility came about? Why can we never admit that we have made mistakes in our history? Germany learned from the Holocaust. They taught their children about the past. Why can't we allow the truth to be told? This bill is shameful and I urge you to vote against it.

Carrie Gosnell []

I urge you to vote no on HF 802.I am a lifetime resident of Iowa and a successful product of an Iowa public education.I object to this bill because: It threatens the First Amendment rights of educators and students, because it restricts the types of topics that they can discuss. It prevents the teaching of critical thinking skills to students when some topics are off limits. A quality education requires thinking about a variety of situations and viewpoints and being able to compare and contrast. We need to learn about the important concepts like context, intention and impact. If we cannot truly dive into issues which create conflict, then how do we develop these critical thinking skills in our children? It prevents teachers and schools from creating students whom are prepared to interact in the world with people who are different from them. Without learning about and discussing perspectives of people from a variety of backgrounds, including their history, how can any student, especially one in rural Iowa, be prepared to treat new people at their technical schools, job sites, colleges and any other new living situation with respect and dignity? The economic impacts of this bill will be fewer jobs for Iowans. It will highlight our lack of diversity in the state as well as our unpreparedness to treat tourists, business travelers and fellow employees with respect, no matter who they are. Companies are investing in diversity initiatives, because they believe in them. Why would a company who believes in diversity want to expand operations or relationships in a state that does not show that commitment to diversity? It does not align with traditional positions for either party. Republicans would traditionally argue for local control and call this an overreach of power. Democrats would traditionally argue for anything that supports diversity, equity & inclusion efforts. So, who would be for this bill? Are you even listening to Iowans?Progress toward diversity, equity, and inclusion in schools and government agencies will always require that we discuss divisive concepts related to racism, sexism, and systemic oppression and this bill seriously interferes with those goals.

Margaret Notch []

I strongly oppose HF 802. Banning discussion does not make racism and sexism disappear. IA needs to be more welcoming not more closed minded.

Rev. Paul Witmer []

Please stop this horrible legislation. It is not good for Iowa or Iowans anywhere. As a pastor who has served within state institutions (Iowa Correctional Institution for Women) I really appreciated the wide range of training around issues of race, gender identity etc. that I received in the context of the state Department of Corrections.Especially in light of racial violence, the most recent antiAsian violence and hatred, this bill is poorly timed and supremely misdirected.

Carmen Lampe Zeitler []

I strongly urge you to oppose HF 802. I wonder how many members of the committee and the legislature have experienced the kind of diversity training the bill would alter. I have benefited tremendously from such trainings and I have heard many, many people who have participated in such trainings (many of whom were reluctant participants) say how much they benefited, saw themselves and their experiences differently, saw the experiences of others differently, and were changed as a result. My reaction to this bill, and to MANY other related bills in this legislative session, is, Where is this coming from? Who in Iowa and who among policy makers thinks that racism, sexism, classism does not have impact upon every Iowan, that we need to be doing everything we can at every level we can (individual, in our families and communities, state, national, and international) to stem, and ultimately, end that impact for the benefit of all? How I long for leadership that sees the complexity of lives and our life together and looks and listens for ways to live better together instead of diminishing lives and our life together with legislation like HF 802.

Vicki Nordskog []

Racism and sexism are uncomfortable topics because it is hard to learn we've hurt someone else with our words or actions, especially if the harm was unintended. Microinequities and unintended racial acts and words are a reality. Participation in discussions and classes on these topics are very illuminating, albeit uncomfortable at times. I know. Ive attended this type of training in the past and found it very worthwhilea great learning experience. Women will continue to experience sexism, and People of Color will continue to experience racism if we don't talk about their experiences or address them. Similarly instances of discrimination occurring against whites/handicapped/et al should also be discussed. In all instances, using real world examples, are extremely beneficial; but doing so openly acknowledges that racism and sexism exists. If we place the conditions around diversity and inclusion training as they are currently outlined in this bill, we could seriously limit our and our childrens chance to learn to treat each other better. Although the bill as it has come out of the house appears on the surface to be very even handed, it can have very limiting effect. Please take this into consideration in your review of this bill.Thank you.Vicki NordskogCass County

Jackie Stellish []

No to HF802HF802 prohibits effective diversity training for all state, county, city, public postsecondary education, and public K12 education entities. Diversity training should be intentional and proactive in addressing bias, privilege, values, beliefs, and the presentday impact of our nations history regarding racism and sexism. The OVERREACH by the legislature will impact all government entities at every level and their ability to determine the appropriate diversity training for their employees and locale. Ultimately, HF802 will impact Iowansevery one of usand particularly those interacting with our government at all levels every day including students, families, residents, customers, and clients. This is an economic issue for our state (Iowa being perceived as backwards and unwelcoming) and it is a social justice issue for Iowans, disproportionately impacting people of color, women, the LGBTQ+ community, and the immigrant community.

Karl Schilling []

While I am a volunteer lobbyist for some organizations I would comment on this bill as a retired civil rights worker having served with the Iowa Civil Rights Commission for some 25 years.I used to give a talk I called "How Nice People Discriminate." I would explain that most discrimination was not done by really evil people but by people caught up in a culture where race, sex, religion, and so on are important can often act on false impressions and misinformation.As an example, I would tell of a tip the Commission got about a hotel that would turn away Black men who want to rent a room if they were wearing work clothes. We ran a test. Three men, two white and one Black, dressed in work clothes making sure the Black man was a little better dressed. I was the first person to ask for a room and was told there were plenty available. Our Black tester came next about 1520 minutes later and all the rooms were taken. Fifteen minutes later the white tester was told there were plenty of rooms.Our policy when we did tests was not to file a complaint but to notify the persons of the test, that they had failed the test and to come to an agreement as to what to do about it. The person who denied the Black tester a room was very offended that anyone would think she would be racist or discriminate against anyone. The person said she thought he might be a drug dealer. She rented to Black people often and that was true. If a Black person was wearing athletic clothing or a business suit she would rent to them. What she did not realize or accept is that the reason she didn't rent to those she thought were potential drug dealers was because they were Black. She likely didn't intend to discriminate but the culture she was in taught her to be suspicious of Black men. In a sense she was a victim as well in that her culture encouraged her to discriminate, perhaps with no intent to do so.Just as many took up smoking because of Humphry Bogart and Lauren Bacall and I used to wear my belt buckle to the side not knowing that it became fashion because John Wayne's buckle slipped to the side in a movie, our attitudes and how we belong are shaped by our culture. The way we escape those constraints is by learning about them and overcoming them. It wasn't that long ago that Gary Cooper in "The Fountainhead" won the devotion of the woman by raping her and marital rape tamed Scarlett O'Hara. How much of our attitude towards Hispanics comes from movies portraying them as drug dealers are bandits? Undocumented immigrants have a lower crime rate than the public as a whole but one would not know that by comments in social media.If we are to overcome sexist and racist beliefs and actions we have to learn where they came from and why they persist. This bill prevents that. It shouldn't be passed. Thank you.

Sarah Chang []

Dont we want Iowa to be a welcoming state? To do that, there are many areas where we could improve, and some of the most impactful to the quality of life of all current and prospective Iowans would be increasing racial and gender equity. But we cant improve upon what we cant discuss, and this bill creates a laundry list of topics that would likely lead to a drastic watering down of the conversations that need to be happening in order to improve in these areas. Growth often necessitates a little discomfort growing pains. If kids dont experience them, we should worry about their health, and if our state doesnt experience them, we should be worried about the health of our state. Improvement relies on constructive coaching and feedback. Uncomfortable conversations are what allow families to function, drive students to excel and employees to improve their job performance, get politicians elected, and inform businesses to make the changes necessary to continue to compete. We need to listen and foster open discussion instead of stifling attempts at understanding and growth. Please reject HF 802.

Megan Thomsen []

I urge you to vote no on HF802. Many of the pieces of this legislation will ensure and promote the status quo, where the dominant culture and sex can continue to hold power. As part of diversity training, it is imperative to learn about systemic racism and sexism. And as part of our learning and growth, it is natural to feel discomfort at times. Government agencies, school districts, and postsecondary institutions in Iowa need to be able to have these types of trainings and learning opportunities in order to be an inclusive state where all people can live and thrive.

Serena Parrish []

Please vote NO on HF802. Iowa is consistently ranked in the top 5 worst states for racial disparity. Bills such as this are an embarrassment for our state. Laws such as this will only exacerbate the brain drain.

Jane Robinette []

I am opposed to HF 802, which notably adds state and local governments to the covered entities and restricts K12 curricula in addition to trainingboth are departures from what passed the Senate earlier, and both further erode local control of local matters. The bill lists divisive concepts, some of which frankly would never be included in diversity training, and some of which are vital to diversity training and history and social studies curricula. HF 802 seems to be inherently contradictory, because it lists what cannot be discussed and what cannot be in curricula, then states these restrictions cannot impact freedom of speech or intellectual freedom or discussion as part of a larger course of instruction. It allows the topics to be covered in participant questions and courtordered remedial training both I would call reactive measures but won't allow a proactive, holistic teaching of systemic and individual bias in the first place. When we exclude systemic racism and sexism, unconscious and conscious bias, and more, from training and curricula at all levels of society, we lose the ability to effectively address those issues. We lose the ability to talk openly about our country's founding, and the laws historically and today that have either or both discriminatory intent and disparate impact. We must be honest about our country's past and where we are in this moment, and how they are joined. This bill does not help; it takes us backward not forward. Please vote no.

Kim and Lula Palmer [100grannies]

We oppose House File 802 because we think diversity training is an important tool in dismantling systemic racism which is widespread in this state. It can be an important forum to address divisive issues.

Patricia Stalter []

Iowa's population is becoming more diverse, and civil society must work to become more than tolerant. We must learn to respect the dignity of individuals and the beauty of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds.All government entities should be encouraged to include diversity training which helps public employees explore challenging concepts like implicit bias and systemic and institutional racism. Not all problems can be solved. But no problem can be solved unless it is recognized.Racism, sexism, and xenophobia conversations may be uncomfortable, but they are critical to creating fair, equitable, and respectful workplaces and society in general.Please vote no to HF 802.

Karrie Schachtner []

I urge you to not pass this bill. It is going to have irreparable harm for all of the reasons listed by so many others already. This is not who we are. This is not the side of history we want to be on. Please do not pass this bill. I want my children to know better and do better than my generation. Please do not pass this bill. We must be better than this.

Heather Isaacson []

HF802 is the antithesis of Iowa and our history of being a state of reasonable, rational, and good people. The ripple effects of such damaging legislation are farreaching and longlasting. Be wise; place yourselves and all of us on the right side of history: Vote no.

Grant Wilson []

This bill addresses no problems Iowans are discussing at their dinner tables. It does restrict speech in order to advocate for free speech. It does so in a tonguetwisted, Kafkaesque manner.This bill operates as morbid satire in practice on inclusion trainings and trying to develop meaningful and productive conversations about uncomfortable topics like race the way large corporations often settle lawsuits we'll settle and buy you out but make sure we get that statement of nonresponsibility. It makes inclusion trainings absurdist theater where racism or sexism exclusion exist but you can't talk about this exclusion being done by any one or anything. It just evidently happens, in an ahistorical vacuum, by fluke, accidentally. As if one happened to trip and fall into feeling excluded. As if calling for all participants in Inclusion trainings to sign NDA's regarding history whether personal or otherwise and talk around these topics. What exactly happens if someone's accusation of race scapegoating is *itself* race scapegoating? What time period actually disqualifies something as legal speech because it wrongly attributes past actions to a person? a second? 24 hours? a week?Does it make inclusion trainings a meeting involving conversations that only deal in contemporaneous acts committed by no actor for no reason whose intentions we can never legally extrapolate beyond the ephemeral wherein all exclusion is a trick of the light on the part of the victim of exclusion?I fail to see what rational purpose is served with the legislature compelled to interject so heavily in the minute workings of inclusion trainings.After all, "I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes."That is from Dr. King's welltread Letter from a Birmingham Jail a letter, keep in mind, whose contents would be considered illegal, divisive speech if *read* out loud in an inclusion training.Surely, that can't be right? Right?

Bob Mueller []

Please vote NO on HF802. Discussing the issues that divide us is the way to bridge our divisions. Silencing these divisions through legislation is counterproductive, even harmful, to Iowans. Education needs to remain open, and local school boards are in the best position to decide curriculum. Passing this bill on will further damage Iowa's reputation as a welcoming state.

Amy MacKrell []

I am strongly opposed to HF802. This bill is in direct contradiction to free speech and is yet another way that Iowa is marginalizing and micromanaging people who live in the state. After years of being ahead of the curve on civil rights, we seem to want to turn back the clock to Jim Crow times. This type of legislation will definitely lead to the brain drain Iowa was trying to overcome years back. Honestly, I have to say that these types of bills are leading me to believe that Iowa is not where I should be living and that my educated family (and all that we offer the students of Iowa) should be looking for somewhere else to live that is more hospitable, forwardthinking, and embracing of difference. Bob Ray must be rolling in his grave over this one.

Blake Rozendaal [none]

This bill attempts to wash over history by restricting how training is done in the state. I'm concerned this will force trainings to ignore the truth about situations in which the government was not on the right side of history and stood in the way of equality.

Martha Doyle []

I strongly urge you to vote against HF802. As a lifelong Iowan, I have never thought about leaving the state but legislation such as this is making me think that it might be time to leave the place that I have called home for over 60 years. Iowa has a proud history of being a leader in creating and supporting the civil rights of all through laws and court decisions. This proposed legislation is not only an affront to this history but also directly conflicts with Article I of Iowas state constitution which states All men and women are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness. If this legislation passes, it will leave a stain on that proud history and portray Iowa as moving backward in the area of civil rights.More importantly, it will send a message to members of our communities whose lives are negatively impacted by implicit bias that their rights to enjoy life, liberty and happiness are not important. Implicit bias is real. It is the result of our brain taking shortcuts to draw conclusions based on what we have already stored in our brains hard drive based on media, past experiences, culture, and socialization. While this allows us to make quick assessments, it also can shortchange the people or situations we assess. Research has shown that such bias can impact everything from employment, education, criminal justice, and health care. Educating individuals, particularly individuals who work in those areas, about how ones biases can unconsciously affect how they view and treat others. Recognizing those biases in ourselves can indeed be uncomfortable but the best lessons often are. Lets not let temporary discomfort stand in the way of creating a more welcoming, inclusive state.

Sarah Singelee []

I urge a NO vote on HF 802. I take issue with Section 2, 261H.7, lines 2728 that includes in the definition of prohibited divisive concepts, "That the United States of America and the state of Iowa are fundamentally or systemically racist or sexist." This is a point of contention. There is no question that the USA and State of Iowa have a history of fundamentally and systemically racist and sexist laws. Take a look at the State of Iowa's own original Constitution. Article II, Right of Suffrage, "Electors. Section 1. Every white male citizen of the United States, of the age of twenty one years, who shall have been a resident of this State six months next preceding the election, and of the County in which he claims his vote sixty days, shall be entitled to vote at all elections which are now or hereafter may be authorised by law." Does such racism and sexism extend to the present? Some would say so. Take a look at mass incarceration, eternally recurring instances of unjustified use of force in policing, and racially and sexually motivated domestic terrorism. Our own Iowa House of Representatives passed a bill this session proposing a constitutional amendment that will take away state constitutional protections to women's rights to abortion. Proposed amendments to that bill (HJR 5) that would protect the right to an abortion in cases where the woman's life is at risk or in cases of rape or incest were rejected by the House. I would say the passage of HJR 5 is an example of current fundamental and systemic racism and sexism that specifically targets women and girls. If you look at the IDPH data on the demographics of who actually gets abortions, you see that AfricanAmerican women are disproportionately impacted by such legislation. It's great that we aspire to NOT be fundamentally or systemically racist or sexist. However, the language in HF 802 shuts down conversation regarding these important topics and introduces the possibility that education will be stifled out of fear of breaking the law. Some of the bill is too vague and could easily be used to persecute educators acting in good faith and attempting to address difficult topics. Please vote NO on HF 802 and stop this before it becomes law.

Gabriela Fuentes []

As a new Iowan who emigrated from South America, I need to feel safe. I need to learn about real facts in our history, about sex, gender, and about how most of you all, white people, see me as a different person just because I look different than you. What you call "divisive concepts", are the key to understand our biggest issues in our community today. You are not helping people by prohibiting having "difficult conversations", you are prohibiting freedom of expression, and that is not democratic at all. An education focused on diversity and equity is necessary today to stop all the shootings and hate crimes increasing every day. Last week was Atlanta, yesterday was Colorado, and tomorrow if this bill pass, it might be me, dying in hands of an ignorant white person who did not receive the education about systemic racism in Iowa, but easily received guns because our legislators are more worried about expanding guns' rights than expanding quality education. If you want to protect your community, stop covering your eyes. You need to see that part of being a human is being diverse, and we all need to learn from our mistakes in the past to build a better future. This bill will only bring more deaths and pain to our communities of color in Iowa, and your white fragility and privilege will be responsible for that. VOTE NO ON HF 802.

Jude Cigrand []

Please vote no on HF802, this state needs visionaries not fear.

Denny McCabe []

Gomes Eanes de Zurara was Prince Henry of Portugals biographer. He wrote about Africa and the slave trade. No other European, reported from Africa in the time of the slave trade when Europeans sought a need to justify it. His descriptions of Africans as savage animals that need training is the one that stuck. He never assessed the content of their characters, he just helped insert the idea that Africans needed slavery in order to be fed and taught Jesus, into the European mindset. A view that would make its way to America. Not very unifying. Very divisive. * The colony of Virginia in the 17th century was home to enslaved Black people and indentured white servants. Early on they experienced similar conditions, so much so that one historian reported:There are hints that the two despised groups initially saw each other as sharing the same predicament. It was common, for example, for servants and slaves to runaway together, steal hogs together, get drunk together. It was not uncommon for them to make love together. In Bacons Rebellion, one of the last groups to surrender was a mixed band of eighty negroes and twenty English servants. * *The two groups had, no doubt, examined the contents of each others characters, and found kindred spirits. They shared a lot of unity. Who divided them? Your historical counterparts stepped in. They were members of the Virginia Colonial General Assembly. Their constituents were exclusively white, male landowners.Overtime, they produced legislation that legally established supremacy for all white males regardless of condition, class, status or wealth. Content of character was not a criterion. Not very unifying. Very divisive.Eventually, The U.S. Constitution would enshrine that same supremacy. No consideration or exceptions for character content. Not very unifying. Very divisive.Countless examples persist throughout American history. Government policies granted privilege to new European arrivals over indigenous people, whites over Blacks, men over women, rich over poor, native born over immigrants etc. Factory owners when faced with the unity of Black and white workers, encouraged divisiveness to protect profits. Banks made loans more easily attainable for whites than for Blacks. The contents of the characters of those involved were not an issue. Not very unifying. Very divisive.Now white critics of inclusive American history instruction or diversity training claim that such initiatives are divisive, that we should follow Dr. Kings dream of being judged by character content as opposed to skin color. They disparage the concept of white privilege as racist while turning a blind eye to the scope of American history, and all the privilege they unwittingly accumulated.They decry the notion of white fragility by exhibiting exactly that fragility. Strong people do not shy away from truth, even if that truth is not what they learned in school or veers from what they choose to believe. Fragile folks, do just that.That denial of privilege and fragility is not very unifying. Its very divisive.Ive never heard an outcry about teaching the George Washington, I cannot tell a lie,cherry tree story. Ironically, it is a lie, a myth, that has no basis in fact. Yet when teachers and trainers seek to teach truth you seek to censor them. Attempts to keep historical truth from students and training participants, does not unify, it divides.I sincerely hope that when you decide on this legislation your vote will be based on the content of your character, not the color of your skin.* Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You, Jason Reynolds 2020 (The Reynolds book is based on Stamped From the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideals in America, Ibram X. Kendi, 2016 **American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia, Edmund Morgan, 1975. Quoted in A Peoples History of the United States, Howard Zinn, 1980.

Tammy Shull []

As a Human Resources professional, I know the importance of Diversity training to improving the culture of many workplaces in Iowa to welcome people from a variety of backgrounds and races. The fact that Iowa is an overwhelmingly white state makes it all the more important that diversity training addresses issues like unconscious bias and systemic racism. These concepts are not new to professionals in Human Resources and have commonly been included in Diversity training in the corporate world. The idea that the State of Iowa would try to control intellectual content of training in schools and government is appalling and an attack on First Amendment rights of free speech. Please vote against moving this legislation forward. It would signal to people of color and to progressive citizens that Iowa is not an welcoming state interested in attracting people from a range of backgrounds, races and national origins.

Bishop Alan Scarfe [Episcopal Diocese of Iowa]

I write in opposition to the Bill HF802, and urge its rejection. As the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Iowa, I encourage courageous conversations aross the various aspects of racial relationships. Unfortunately, there cannot be true healing across our racial divides, if we do not endure the pain and discomfort of facing up to the truths around such relationships, especially within the history of our nation. Jesus himself in the gospel of John invites us to know freedom by embracing the truth. "The truth", he say, "will set us free". Included in what is true are the painful realities of our past. as well as the evidence over time on how the treatment of people of color has created inequities, discrimination, oppressions and deep trauma. As Isabel Wilkerson writes in her book "Caste", "America is an old house. We can never declare the work over. The owner of an old house knows that whatever you are ignoring wil never go away..Whatever you are wishing away will gnaw at you until you gather the courage to face what you would rather not see". This bill seeks to mitigate the pain of our collective past and shared present. Unfortunately it is not black pain that it seeks to ease, but that of those of us who are white. In effect it censors how we address the situation. I embrace my whiteness within a multiracial family. It does not prevent me from acknowledging my white privilege, and working for repairs of the racial hurt around me, both for me and my family. There are distinctions to be made between the concepts of race, racial, racism and racist. These nuances need to be explored for healing to occur. This bill does nothing to help us into that understanding. It also hinders my children from ever wanting to grow up calling Iowa, which is my adopted home, as their own. You are telling them that their truth is not wanted here.

Kristin Johnson []

I carefully reviewed all the comments so far. Not one single comment in support of this misdirected bill. Will the Iowa Senate actually listen to Iowans? The majority of Iowans do not support this bill. The majority of Iowans support continuing to have conversations that help all of us examine our own potential biases. Diversity and being on the forefront of civil rights is an Iowa tradition (see attachment). Just six short years ago, under Governor Branstad's administration, the state celebrated 50 years of groundbreaking civil rights legislation in Iowa. But this bill flies in the face of that strong tradition. I urge you to vote no.