Meeting Public Comments

Subcommittee meeting and times are as follows:

A bill for an act modifying sex offender registry requirements by requiring sex offenders whose registration requirements have expired to reregister, and making penalties applicable.

Subcommittee members: Fisher-CH, Shipley, Wessel-Kroeschell

Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2023

Time: 12:00 PM - 12:30 PM

Location: RM 304.1

Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.

Comments Submitted:

Download Comments

01-31-2023

Debra Decker []

I oppose this. While being new to the world of our children sex offenders I find the laws are ridiculous. Case in point, just today on news a man who had been missing 6 years was found, and charged with sex abuse of a young child got sentenced to 20 years while my son's involved over 16 & he got 45 years.(first time offender).What more can we do to fix the sentencing laws as well as making registy law fare?

01-31-2023

W Person []

I love how the registry is pushed as not punishment but just being civil. Very few registered citizens are able to deregister. And now passing this law, would make them reregister again when only a few have been able to move on with their life. I find it extremely disgusting and underhanded the people put in forth this bill. Please vote no!

01-31-2023

Roger Hunnicutt []

This bill is an emotionbased solution looking for a problem. If a registrant were still dangerous he would not even be on parole and would be declared SVP. If he can make it through years of parole requirement, that means he is not high risk. So why take away his incentive to get counseling and become a productive member of society?HF77 is unconstitutional. Iowa has a history of dehumanizing people groups and apologizing for the abuse later. Why is Iowa repeating history? Some politicians who claim to be Christian tell God that registrants are not human and not redeemable, and that their families and children are worthless and deserve public shaming and abuse because their loved one is on a public registry for life. Time to be led by God's word rather than emotionbaiting bills that solve nothing but getting votes.

01-31-2023

Ed Christy []

This is clearly a solution in search of a problem, and is quite possibly a maneuver to gain political advantage by appearing to protect the public. Recidivism among Tier I through Tier III registrants is extremely low (5%) to begin with. There is absolutely no evidence that adding a tier for those already revoved from the registry would in any way increase public safety. I suspect that the State of Iowa does not have the spare cash to fund every frivolous piece of selfseeking legislation. HF77 should be roundly defeated!

01-31-2023

Jennifer R. []

I am in strong opposition to this dehumanizing bill. This bill clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed.The punishment of registration should have an end, and registrants who complete their requirements should be able to return to a free life.

01-31-2023

Anonymous Citizen []

This is another unconstitutional act being imposed on fellow citizens who have met the said requirements. This has to end. If this is the nation that America has come to be, then it is time to inform the people of the power of the people. This bill must be stopped. My email is attached for anyone who agrees. Thank you. A concerned Citizen.

01-31-2023

Arax Krahling []

This bill should not become law. It is a dehumanizing bill. Citizens on the registry are redeemable humans in our society. This bill will harm families of registrants, including their children. These laws are made to protect children but they will be harming children. This is a cruel and unusual punishment, period.Please oppose this bill.

01-31-2023

Mark Judkins []

This bill should be rejected and opposed because it is attempting to amend a sentence already imposed by a court of law and therefore is unconstitutional. It is based on emotion and not fact. Registered Citizens do not as a rule pose danger to society for their lifetime. The fact is that 95% of the sex offenses come from people NOT on the registry. Very few Registered Citizens reoffend, especially after 10 to 20 years. This bill will damage the families of registrants, including their children. Not to fail to mention those registrants gainfully employed, and conducting a law abiding life. Many of those will lose their jobs, and likely their housing. By dehumanizing this population, this bill achieves nothing.

01-31-2023

Kathie Gourlay [Michigan Citizens for Justice]

This is a cruel, uneducated bill. Scientific research shows that people with a convicted sex offense have a relatively low recidivism rate, and that declines over time offense free. By 20 years out in the community with no reoffends, even the people who started out high risk are now no more likely to commit a sex offense than any other felon. There is no reason for lifetime registration.

01-31-2023

David Whitehead [unaffiliated private citizen]

This proposed Bill is punitive and UNNECESSARY! Registries themselves have been determined by numerous courts to be Unconstitutional. And extending registration is EX POST FACTO and Cruelty & Unusual Punishment!

01-31-2023

Paul Lambert [ACSOL]

This bill is an emotionbased solution looking for a problem that doesn't exist.Iowa cannot amend a sentence already imposed by a court.It damages the families of registrants, including their children.This bill clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed.This bill dehumanizes registrants.No other category of crime, however violent, is treated this way.There are no gangs of registrants roaming the streets.HF77 is cruel and unusual punishment.

01-31-2023

Martin R []

Absolutely offensive. The registry has been declared as punishment and unconstitutional in Michigan,Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. To enact a law to add more punishment past what the courts declared is illegal. I oppose this at every turn

01-31-2023

Linda May []

01-31-2023

Kim DeBacco []

Please, please reconsider this bill which dehumanizes registrants. S.O. registrants are not monsters; they are somebody's son, husband, brother, father. Once registrants have completed registration requirements (which are often questionable, anyway), please allow them to move on with their lives. People can and do change. Don't give in to your fear/s. Show some courage and belief in human nature; lead the thinking on S. O. registration, and OPPOSE THIS BILL.

01-31-2023

Mark Pav []

This bill is all together not a smart way to fight crime or address a problem. Police and Public safety need to focus on their priorities of protecting Iowans, not in managing the registration of lowrisk individuals. No other category of crime, however violent, is treated this way.

01-31-2023

David A [Individual]

Do Iowans care at all about the constitution?This is cruel and unusual punishment for individuals who have served their sentence and are at no more risk of reoffending than any other formal criminal.It is also unchristian! Didn't Jesus teach to forgive? I guess some Iowans decide that they are better than our Lord at deciding who to forgive. You should be ashamed of yourselves for proposing this law!Don't kid yourselves: This is a selfserving political move, and does nothing to protect Iowans.

01-31-2023

Michael Neuman []

I strongly oppose this bill. Please leave people their dignity, privacy and ability to move on with their lives with some hope to restore and rebuild; consider, without prejudice, that they can now do good for themselves and their community removed from fear and shame, and use their experience for good. The registries are political, toxic, unproductive, shaming, costly; they are harmful to families, neighborhoods and communities. What would Jesus do? He would acknowledge them (with decency and respect) and call on them (which includes every person) to go and sin no more. Leave these people alone.. in fact start initiating ways to remove more people, that should be your intention and goal.

01-31-2023

Bob Jones []

Oh look, more idiotic laws based on the idiotic sex offense registries. America's outofcontrol big governments never learn. They'll do stupid forever.People who support the registries are nothing but harassers who love big government. I promise you that registries don't "work". But they aren't just worthless, they are a lot worse. But do go ahead and carry on. Never wonder where the hate in America comes from. Everyone wants it.The harder you try to oppress people the less successful you will be. Guaranteed.

01-31-2023

Michael E []

I fail to understand why politicians refuse to do their homework before they decide to create these unconstitutional bills. What are they attempting to accomplish here? This community of former offenders are just trying to move forward and live productive lives. I don't see any kind of effort to apply this kind of nonsense to former murderers, drug pushers, etc. Please leave us alone.

01-31-2023

Craig Conner []

Please stop trying to repunish people who have already served their time. The registry is already proven to be a false sense of security that only does more harm than good. This is an unconstitutional attempt at double jeopardy. Even murders get a chance at rehabilitation. Please read the facts and studies on the effects of registry before making such a rash decision to approve a crazy law.

01-31-2023

Art C. []

As a former registrant in CA, I am here to say redemption should be available to everyone. We human beings CAN grow and changeespecially with God at your side. I am living proof of the miracle working power of Jesus. Being a registrant is punishment. It is not redemptive. You are forced into the shadows. You are forced into difficult financial conditions because no one will hire you. You are forced into shame with the Scarlet Letter of having to register as a sex offender. There is no refuge in the Earth realm. After the proper time of CORRECTION has occurred there must be redemption on the other side. Most sex offenders do NOT reoffend per studies done. Many are told the sex offenders are animals who will never change. Fear is stoked. The problem is, those fears are not based on real life situations. Many offenders are not even suffering from pedophilic disorder. A OneSizeFitsAll solution does not apply here. Dont needlessly ruin lives by enacting such a misguided proposed law.

01-31-2023

Ben Adams []

I am voicing my emphatic opposition to HF77. People whose registration requirements have expired by definition have committed no further crimes. Why continue to monitor and penalize them? Do you do this for any other category of crime? Where is the redemption? This is a contemptible ploy to grab votes from people who actually think that everyone on the registry is evil and out to get them. The registrants whose registration requirements have expired have served their time. Let them try to rebuild their lives in peace.

01-31-2023

William Ho []

I am opposed to this bill that Unconstitutionally compels former Registrants to reregister beyond the court mandated order. It is wrong to circumvent the law to amend a sentence already imposed by the courts. Similarly, the new SORNA rule imposed by DOJ has already been blocked in a California court because it has violated due process and the first Amendment creating precedent for future cases in regard to force registration beyond the sentencing of the former registrant. Pass this law at your state's peril. for the government of Iowa will experience mass lawsuits at such a scale you will not believe and lose massive amounts of tax dollars that could otherwise been better spent. You have been warned.

01-31-2023

Cory Wessels []

I am opposed to this bill. We need to focus on real rehabilitation (our prison system is not about actual rehabilitation), mental health, proper sexual education and helping people on both sides of the story. This does nothing more than just hurt people (they already have paid their debt to society) and doesn't solve anything.

01-31-2023

Louise Bruce []

I strtongly oppose this bill. It clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed.Please consider facts before introducing "feel good" legislation that does not protect children or the public but only further dmamges and punishes registrants and their families, including children.

01-31-2023

William Ho []

01-31-2023

Karen Rothstein []

I am unable to attend this meeting and I strongly opposed this bill. No other crime has this requirement. It is cruel and unusual punishment to require a person who has shown their rehabilitation and met the requirements to complete registration to have to register again. To me, this seems like some law makers looking for low hanging fruit on which to hang a victory hat. They are grandstanding on people's fears instead of facts. This is punitive punishment. If people reoffend then they will be put back on the registry. If they are off the registry because they have meet their requirements and served their time, I see no reason to support their requirement to register. It is unconstitutional.

01-31-2023

Ronald Pedersen []

This is totally unconstitutional punishment, unfair, unjust, a dangerous precedent to set. Once sentenced there should be retroactive vengeance. This is nothing but another reason for people to go postal!

01-31-2023

Michael Pardun []

I totally disagree with the proposal as it is grossly unconstitutional as well as the registration law to begin with. These lawmakers just need to stop! Or we're going to vote them out of office. Stop doing what you're doing and stop making Americans second class citizens and a subcategory!

01-31-2023

Joanne Doyle []

I am grateful that my local law enforcement personnel are familiar with the 1% reoffend rates of sex offenders, so that they are not poisoned with the apparent sick imagination of people like Iowa lawmakers!

01-31-2023

Angela Gemini []

I strongly oppose HF77. It is unconstitutional, cruel, and vindictive. Registrants, like other people who have been convicted of a crime, are human and should be allowed a chance for redemption and self improvement once they pay for their crime. This bill does not protect anyone please research the data and make informed decisions that are not based on emotion. The registry makes it almost impossible for registrants to better themselves and it crushes their families, which include children. Please look up the statistics. There are almost a million people on sex offender registries including minors! The list grows daily with social media and the proliferation of illegal images on the internet. These offenders are not all violent rapists and killers, please review the data. This is the United States of America and once people are punished for their crime, they should be allowed to work toward redemption. Please, please review the facts before destroying peoples lives. Thank you.

01-31-2023

JoEllen Wiggington [Pacific Professional Associates]

As a psychological treatment provider I can attest to the fact that this legislation could severely hamper the individuals involved motivation to change and move forward in a prosocial way, inadvertently increasing the risk to public safety.

01-31-2023

Alex Ostroum []

This bill serves no purpose. Someone's who's completed their time should not arbitrarily be placed back on the registry for nothing more than a purely political decision. This is being done for no other reason than for the bill sponsors to have something to hang their hat on for the next election. It's certainly not being done for public safety. You should be ashamed for harassing people and wasting tax payer money.

01-31-2023

David Ray []

This bill is facially unconstitutional and judicially illlegal.You cannot revisit and refinalize a judges' decision for the length of registration nor can you change the length of registration without due process of law.You are probably going to pass this no matter what people tell you, but you are going to lose in court, because it is going to produce multiple lawsuits and they will win and you will lose.Also, there is no good reason for this bill at all!All the premises for the sex offender registry have been proven false!A truly effective bill would be one that installs cameras in all daycare centers, all classrooms and teacher lounges, all doctor's offices, etc., because this is where 95% or more of all sex offenses occur, and these people are NOT on the registry, and also a bill that educates children that no one, not family member, not doctor, not gym coach, not teacher, not police officer, nor anyone else is to touch them where they should not and they are to tell when they do, even if threatened.All of America is being foolishly programmed to bark up the wrong tree which is the registry instead of focusing on where 95% or more of these offenses occur and therefore by creating and attempting to pass this bill YOU are adding to the problem and bypassing the solution and allowing the real dangerous places(day care centers, school teachers, gym coaches, doctors, etc.) to go unchecked.People are sex offenders BEFORE they are caught.No one walks into the police department and tells them to put them on the registry before commit a sexual offenseno one!The sex offender registry is an afterthefact obligation.You ought to work on a bill that is preventitive against the 95% who are NOT on the registry that are molesting children right under your nose, instead of trying to pass a bill that does nothing but fool the public into thinking you are making laws that make the community safer.

01-31-2023

Raquel Ayra []

I wish to express my opposition to this bill. Registrants should be treated as are others who have already "done the time". ALL people have basic human rights and this bill passing would make it impossible to reenter society which is a big piece to preventing recidivism! It is unconstitutional. Iowa cannot amend a sentence already imposed by a court.It damages the families of registrants, including their children.This bill clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed.This bill dehumanizes registrants.No other category of crime, however violent, is treated this way.There are no gangs of registrants roaming the streets.

01-31-2023

Barbara Preston []

This bill appears to add requirements to those who have already successfully met the requirements imposed by the courts. It does nothing to improved public safety but continues to punish people who have served their sentence or met requirements. No other persons are singled out for such ongoing penalties. It seems unconstitutional to amend a sentence already imposed by a court. The bill clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed and it further punishes and damages the families of registrants, including their children.

01-31-2023

Aaron Davidson []

I strongly oppose this. So the decision is, are you going to keep pushing laws and spending money on ineffective things like this, which all the data available shows is ultimately a waste of money because it's ineffective, causes more problems, and doesn't actually protect anyone, or are you going to put the money towards things that actually help, protect, and provide a service to the population? It shouldn't be a hard choice after all of that, unless actual data and facts don't mean anything to you.

01-31-2023

Ken Seim []

It seems that studies have show that registration doesn't improve the safety of our communities. This seems vindictive and puts the state and country in a position to support those trying to set their lives on a new course.Do not support this unjust action.

01-31-2023

David Kale [Private ]

I totally oppose this and any other attempt to double punish anyone who has completed the courts sentence, especially when a large percentage of registrants don't belong on the registry to begin with. All tier one and some tier two people should be removed now. Look at how many dead men and women remain on the Florida registry, only to now punish their children and grandchildren until its demanded by the public for correction.

01-31-2023

Aaron Perez [The NOA Firm]

Someone has done their time let them move on with their life. The whole point of jail & prison is rehabilitation. To punish someone for the rest of their life is a violation of our constitution, cruel & unusual punishment.

01-31-2023

Martin Smith [Citizen ]

I oppose this bill it creates problems for the families of registrants also it adds additional requirements after they serve the registration period plus its unconstitutional . It amends the sentence added down and it has been proven with facts that the registries only bolster political gain and do nothing to protect its citizens it actually hurts the citizens and families A person registering at 18 and being done after 25 years with no other sex crimes how is he a danger toAnyone. ?

01-31-2023

Michael Stolte []

HF 77 is an unjust poison pill. It is unnecessary, unconstitutional and unfair. No other category of exoffender in Iowa is subjected to anything close to the oppressive lifelong dehumanization that this bill would bring. Tiered registries are the national standard now that we are in the 21st century. You should instead advance real efforts in progress toward rehabilitation and civil restoration of all exoffenders in all categories.This observer sees no redeeming value, nor any genuine public safety interest, in this bill. It smacks of political pandering and vicious permanent retribution. Do not advance this misguided bill for any further consideration.

01-31-2023

Maton Fillmore []

This is another terrible bill about so called sex offenders. You politicians have made the register useless. If you only put dangerous people on there it would make sense. But there's people on there in their 80s and 90s. Why lower my property value because some dude urinated in public? Do not pass this.

01-31-2023

Mr Anonymous []

OPPOSE this awful idea:There is NO DATA set that indicates:1. That registration actually makes the community more safe2. That making persons register for life makes the community more safe.You have found a target population (which includes a WIDE VARIETY of actual offenses) that you can use as a scapegoat for increasingly harmful laws which do nothing but hurt individuals and families. In the event that you have a person who cannot be trusted in public, please keep them in jail. Otherwise, there is no legitimate reason to require ANY penalty beyond time served.

01-31-2023

Tara Lee []

My family strongly opposes this bill. The registry is already a bloated expensive mess for taxpayers. It does not protect anyone as most offenses are committed by someone known to the family and NOT on the registry. Its a false sense of security and even those on it hardly ever reoffend with another sex offense. A persons sentence and punishment has to end at some point. This is is just crazy government overreach. And who will pay the bill when this gets challenged and overturned in court.the taxpayers. Your time could be better spent on things that actually effect Iowans.

01-31-2023

Mark J. []

I am an Iowa native and I oppose this bill. Individuals who have completed their sentence and have been removed from the registry should not be required to reregister. The individuals have completed what the courts have said was required for their crime. This bill should not move forward.

01-31-2023

Andy Daly []

The registry in general harms children, which is a wellstudied fact. It does little to nothing to reduce new victims but puts men and women, and even youths, in a situation where they and their own children are ostracized from the community, making it harder for them to get jobs and places to live.Let me repeat, this bill AND the registry as a whole HURTS CHILDREN.Do you care about the children of register citizens, who have a permanent target on their back often for convictions which took place before they were even born?The registry HARMS CHILDREN who live with registered citizens. That is a FACT. It doesn't prevent crime, it increases the likelihood of recidivism, which is actually low to being with, and puts CHILDREN at risk of vigilantism and insecure homes.VOTE AGAINST this bill and EVERY bill forcing children of registered citizens to have their home addresses plastered across the internet.

01-31-2023

S. T. []

This is unlawful, unethical, and unfair to registrants and their families. The impact of registering goes so deep, all you have is hope for the day you no longer have to register. This removes all hope and the ability to lead a full life free from fear. Every human being deserves that. Once the punishment is served, it is done. Why would registrants be the exception? Higher level offenders have a higher punishment. There should not be a onesizefitsall approach if the crimes differ. Please do NOT pass this bill.Sincerely, the wife and family of a registrant

01-31-2023

KEVIN POWELL []

I live in Indiana but I oppose. I was charged with a sex offense when I was a minor in Illinois. At the time I was told that I would be required to register for 10 after my release. After completing my sentence and parole in Illinois I moved to Indiana where I found out that I would have to register for life, even though it was a juvenile charge... With that being said, I strictly oppose imposing additional punishment to anyone who has already completed the original punishment ordered.

01-31-2023

tom a []

I oppose this legislation. This bill is dehumanizing, not only to the persons subject to it, but also their families. Let people move on, Let people heal. This bill will restigmatize a group of people who are only trying to live their lives! As well as restigmatize their families. This bill would penalize and punish individuals who have done the right thing since making the worse decisions of their lives. This bill will penalize and punish law abiding citizens who at a point in their lives made horrible decisions, but now want nothing more than not create any new regrets in their lives. There comes a time when people should be removed from the registry.

01-31-2023

Dustin McMillan []

Proponents of this fiasco should be required to provide a detailed list of the names and specific sex crimes committed by former registrants that makes this proposal necessary, as well as an explanation of how reregistration of former registrants would have prevented such. Personally, I would be surprised if they could find two examples of the former. I know full well they cannot explain the latter.Not to mention the unconstitutionality and likelihood of this bill being struck down in court (along with the costs to the state to defend it) as mentioned in other comments.This bill serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever beyond political grandstanding by its author and fleecing a little money out of FORMER registrants and a lot of money from the federal government (intended for registry maintenance but probably won't be used for such, at least not in its entirety). At the very least, the bill's author should acknowledge that upon presentment rather than the typical, nonsensical, and consistently disproven claims that the sex offender registry and any attempts to modify it have anything to do with the protection of society and children.

01-31-2023

cm mato []

Ronald Pedersenyou dont know how right you are about an uprising and going Balastic due to certain lawmakers wanting to make a name for them selves using families and the lives of Childrens 'safety and well being just to monkey climb their the way to the top.it is bad enough now for the families and children of the registered person they are collateral damage and expendable in the eyes of certain lawmakers this registry does way more harm to children then it does good, and to think now they put children on the registry, the same registry that was suppose to protect them, how Ironic is that? and to top that 8yr old on the registry i there lives and well being that young knowing what their future holds for them, nothing. due to the fact the government dont belive in rehabilitation and support to give a new start to another human being. then what is going on now to much. the people who completed there registry term finally making a new come back in life starting over building a good reputation and home life and family and friends who belive in them and trust them only to have this bill destroy years of what it took to rebuild your life.the fact is its not the people on the registry reoffending and the stigma of Stranger Danger Noits law enforcement congressman teachers priest etc etc its on the TV its on the internet they try to enforce this registry and all along doing exactly what we are being accused of time and time again. It is such a shame to tell my 8 yr old daughter not to hug the teacher or other children or hold hand and please dont give a kiss of kindness or our government will deem you as sexual deviant what a statement to have to say to my child. its just shows her time and time again there is no love or kindness left in this world. I know myself that hold true my offense was underage dating, not by choice the female lied about her real age no punishment for her that was 33 yrs ago a mistake I paid for daily and still do Ive not reoffended any type of sex crime due to the fact that what had transpired in my case was a unknowing mistake. and I paid for that with a term on the registry and I have that letter stating they you are no longer required to register as a sex offender and you are not a risk to the public if my letter states that then how can these the lawmakers in Iowa now claim your a risk just sayin double edged sward

01-31-2023

Chris Me []

HF77 is a bill that punishes people after they've paid their debts to society. The former registrants have proven that they don't pose a threat by being removed from the registry and become productive citizens. Yet, this bill would put all of them back in, very vindictive.

01-31-2023

linda shedlock []

I strongly oppose this bill ! Once you have completed your requirements your time is served . Registration requirements only keep people in a job . This requirement does NOT allow a human being to repair their lives and move forward !They need to be able to become a community member and a human again . Labels do not allow this . These politicians have nothing better to do in life then to continue to ruin another human beings . Time served , you should become a human again !

01-31-2023

Mike Wilson []

Hello, I don't understand what you are trying to solve here. We know that sex offenders that reoffend are less than 5% likely to do so. That is LESS than any other offense. We also know that those who DO offend are not on the registry, and those that do are already known to the victim: clergy, family members, or friends of the family. Also consider that those who have already paid there debt and then some after their registration has expired is ex post facto punishment for those that have served their time. This is not only absurdly illogical, it is a form of vicious legal vigilantism. If you really want to curb sex offenses, consider making therapy more available for those who may be predisposed to it while educating the public on prevention.

01-31-2023

Douglas Martinez []

Lifetime registration has been deemed unconstitutional by 18 courts12 federal and 6 stateand that isn't including the plethora of cases, both state and federal that have deemed the registry unconstitutional. To punish someone for life does nothing for public safety and empirical evidence has proven this time and again. Then you are voting to do this to those who no longer register?! now THAT is definitely anti American/Constitution.

01-31-2023

Sylvia R []

I 100% strongly oppose this unconstitutional bill to yet again punish a group of ex offenders and also their family members, including children. It is barbaric and inhumane, and a complete violation of Human Rights. It is in everybody's interest to let ex offenders reintegrate into society once their sentence has been served.

01-31-2023

Ebb Nelson []

This law is unfair, dehumanizing, isolating, unconstitutional, wasteful and obviously a political ploy. Those who have completed the entirety of their registration requirements (which in most cases is a decades long, arduous and often confusing process) should be allowed to move on and live a life without persecution. Registration is punishment restricting autonomy and domestic/international travel while also drastically reducing a registrants chances at attaining consistently safe work and housing. How the government has managed to label registration otherwise carries the stink of fear, ignorance and graft. I oppose this law.

01-31-2023

Ermioni Greinke [ ]

Registration is already a cruel punishment for people that have served their time and paid their dues. All it does is hurt the registrants and their families. Their children suffer. Registration does not help or benefit anyone and that is a fact. It deters people who are really trying hard to be productive citizens. It is really mindboggling why anyone would think it is a good idea to have a registry. But to put people back on the registry after they have completed their time on the registry is absolutely horrendous!

01-31-2023

Lisa Lillie [Lisa Lillie]

When a registrant has served their term, complied with all registration requirements and their registryrequirement is fulfilled they should not have to "reregister". That is clearly punitive and not adminstrative.It is making all registrants "life time" registrants. That is unacceptable and unconstitutional.

01-31-2023

John Covert []

Many policy makers around the country are heeding the ample research that the registry simply does not protect the public, and in some ways actually lessens public safety, and are looking at ways to get individuals off it. This is certainly not the time for Iowa to support and expand it with this punitive and poorly thought out proposal. Please defeat it.

01-31-2023

Ben Maurer [92120]

Although some courts have ruled opposite, there is no way that these draconian rules and laws have anything to do with public safety and everything to do with continued prosecution and persecution.Quit making headlines and make better decisions. Make smart laws that truly protect our citizens and children.

01-31-2023

kevin pez []

I oppose HF 77.HF77 is cruel and unusual punishment.This bill is an emotionbased solution looking for a problem.It is unconstitutional. Iowa cannot amend a sentence already imposed by a court.It damages the families of registrants, including their children.This bill clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed.This bill dehumanizes registrants.No other category of crime, however violent, is treated this way.Please vote NO on HF 77.Thank you!!

01-31-2023

Danyelle Carlysle []

Individuals that have been removed from the registry should remain off the registry. This is adding punishment after time has been served. Let people move on with thier lives and to become productive citizens.

01-31-2023

Tami Floyd [Advocate for Justice Involved Individuals ]

This is just so wrong These individuals have done their time, paid their dues, completed their sentence and serve their registry time. They should not have to reregister. Once they are done. This is barbaric.

01-31-2023

Gail Liedtke [United Voices for Sex Offense Reform]

I am in opposition to HF77, a bill to modify the sex offender registry requirements by requiring sex offenders whose registration requirements have expired to reregister. This bill is unconstitutional! These people have paid their price for their crimes. Extensive research shows that registries do nothing to keep communities safer, thus proving they serve no purpose other than to perpetually punish offenders. No other crimes are treated this way. Registries are a huge waste of taxpayer money. Money that can be better spent in education and prevention of sex crimes.These offenders deserve to have every chance to reintegrate back into society and make a future for themselves. When is the punishment going to end? Enough is enough say "no" to HF77!!!

01-31-2023

Kim Avery []

HF77 is immoral and unconstitutional. This is a cruel form of double jeopardy that causes great damage to registrants and their families. This bill is not based on the factual data about recidivism among registrants, the vast majority of whom cause no threat to society, but an emotionbased response based on false assumptions. There is no other crime, no matter how violent, that is treated with this kind of endless punishment and there is no justification for it.

01-31-2023

Jeremy Zier []

I oppose this unconstitutional legislation. This amounts to double jeopardy, and adding punitive measures after the fact is deplorable. If you pay your debt to society, then that's it. Stop creating legislation that panders for votes. Do better!

01-31-2023

Katie Wood []

I strongly oppose this bill for many reasons. The fact that it is unconstitutional alone should be reason enough to stop the proposed bill immediately, no matter what your personal view on the topic is. Ex post facto laws are forbidden according to Article 1 of the United States Constitution. Period. To say that this particular group of people warrants being the exception is preposterous. The registry as it stands NOW is unethical and unconstitutional, the fact that adding more to it is even being considered is frightening.

01-31-2023

David Kamen []

The requirement towards forcing offenders to continuously register and reregister is NOT necessary. Once someone registers they remain on the register until discharged. Requiring repeated registrations is an unnecessary hardship on too many oeople

01-31-2023

Eric Standefer []

The public registry creates grave hardship for those people. They are discriminated , harassed, and exploited making it very difficult to assimilate into society. States should be removing registry requirements not increasing them.

01-31-2023

RONALD SAMPSON []

This is insane and unconstitutional!! If this was risk based and not conviction based you may have a shot at passing this. All these resources for this registry but it is doing no good. Sex crimes nation wide have not been reduced one bit and its been well documented that the recidivism rate for sex offenders does not warrant this crazy modernday witch hunt!!!

01-31-2023

M Proud []

I oppose this bill. As and adult who experienced sexual harm as a child I do not appreciate my experiences being used as an excuse to harm others. Have you spoken with those who are on the registry? To their children? To those of us who have been harmed, who want money, time and effort put into actual rehabilitation and education instead of wasting it a proven method that does nothing? It is so easy to pass an emotionally charged bill to score a point than to look at the registered family and tell them you are about to continue to tear them apart for no reason. Please take the time to know the facts. Then you will see this is the absolute worst thing you could do on this issue as all you would be doing is selling a lie to the public, which will cause harm. Please consider a no vote. Thank you.

01-31-2023

Steffan Carroll [Carroll Associates]

I asked Chat.GPT at chat.openai.com/chat this question:Explain why a bill for an act modifying sex offender registry requirements by requiring sex offenders whose registration requirements have expired to reregister, and making penalties applicable is bad public policy.THE RESPONSEThere are several reasons why a bill requiring expired sex offenders to reregister and imposing penalties for noncompliance could be considered bad public policy:1. Lack of evidence of effectiveness: Requiring sex offenders to reregister, even if their registration requirements have expired, may not actually improve public safety or reduce recidivism. There is limited evidence to support the efficacy of sex offender registries in achieving these goals.2. Unnecessary burden on law enforcement: Reregistering a large number of expired sex offenders could put a strain on law enforcement resources and divert attention from other important tasks.3. Harsh penalties for noncompliance: Imposing severe penalties for noncompliance with the registry requirements, such as imprisonment, could lead to unintended consequences, such as making it more difficult for sex offenders to reintegrate into society and find employment.4. Lack of individualized assessment: Requiring all expired sex offenders to reregister regardless of their current risk level fails to take into account the individualized circumstances of each offender and could result in a onesizefitsall approach that is not effective in promoting public safety.5. Impact on rehabilitation and reentry: The requirement to reregister and the potential penalties for noncompliance could create additional barriers to rehabilitation and reentry for sex offenders, making it more difficult for them to lead productive lives and reducing the chances of their successful integration into society.In conclusion, modifying sex offender registry requirements by requiring expired sex offenders to reregister and imposing penalties for noncompliance could be considered bad public policy due to a lack of evidence of its effectiveness, unnecessary burden on law enforcement, harsh penalties for noncompliance, lack of individualized assessment, and impact on rehabilitation and reentry.

01-31-2023

April Losh []

I want to voice my opposition to this bill. This legislation is founded in ignorance and fearbased at it's very core. Not only do sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate (repeat offense rate) of any criminal act, but sex offenders have stricter laws than convicted murderers in our nation. Once a sentence is served and all requirements are met, to try to impose an additional sentence or restrictions would appear to be unfair and uneducated bias as well as the equivalent to double jeopardy. It is essentially trying the accused all over again. If we pass this legislation, perhaps we should just pass laws saying that once guilty, always guilty, and that all criminals get life sentences with no possibility of parole, because that is what you are doing in discriminating against one group of people.

01-31-2023

Sondra P []

Laws regarding the registry have grown out of proportion and have long passed the time when it was deemed civil and regulatory, when in person registration was not deemed punishment. We are way past only in person registration. Now we have Internet limitations, presence and residency restriction, travel restrictions, compliance checks, etc. It is way passed the once deemed non punitive nature. The registry is punishment, and having people to reregister is a double whammy and a clear kick in the gut. I oppose this bill and any bill that harms registrants and their entire families. In addition, registries put children in danger as people let their guards down, knowing where a registrant lives, yet they don't know if the next door neighbor runs a meth lab, has multiple DUIs, is an ex murderer or robber. People feel safe when all they should do is use common sense. Sex Offenders are the least likely to reoffend, so why oust them and ignore more dangerous criminals at the same time. Abolish the registry, focus on crime prevention and rehabilitation, and you will have a much safer world. Follow what the rest of the world does US! Let's stop being the laughing stock of the entire civilized world.

01-31-2023

Maura Lin []

It is absolutely unconscionable to require any registrant to reregister. Even if the registry was an effective or ethical, fair, and humane law (which it is NOT), anyone having to reregister should be subject to DUE PROCESS first. The registry is ALREADY a violation of civil rights. Believe that people can move forward, change for the better, and offer them the opportunity to do so. That is the foundation of humanity, goodness, and a truly Christianbased ethic!

01-31-2023

Maura Lin []

01-31-2023

John Weston []

OPPOSED. No other crime in history has a never ending tail of destruction. This is akin to public shaming. If you've done a crime and have done your time you should be done period. You shouldn't have to remain a pariah to the whole world forever. Contrary to all the hype and false reporting, sex offenders are LEAST LIKELY TO RECIDIVATE.Enough is enough, it's time to stop violating Civil Rights under the false guise of "public safety".

01-31-2023

Steve Dillon []

HF77 is cruel and unusual punishment.This bill is an emotionbased solution looking for a problem.It is unconstitutional. Iowa cannot amend a sentence already imposed by a court.It damages the families of registrants, including their children.This bill clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed.This bill dehumanizes registrants.No other category of crime, however violent, is treated this way.There are no gangs of registrants roaming the streets.please vote against this bill.

01-31-2023

Laurie Kepros []

Once someone has lived in the community without sexually reoffending for 20 years even the highest risk individuals have an actuarial risk level that is lower than someone with no history of a sexual conviction. Please stop wasting resources on this safety theater and instead invest in prevention and helping survivors of sexual abuse heal and end the cycle of violence.

01-31-2023

Anthony Deel []

I am opposed to this bill that Unconstitutionally compels former Registrants to reregister beyond the court mandated order. It is wrong to circumvent the law to amend a sentence already imposed by the courts. Similarly, the new SORNA rule imposed by DOJ has already been blocked in a California court because it has violated due process and the first Amendment creating precedent for future cases in regard to force registration beyond the sentencing of the former registrant. This cant be anymore unamerican. People have served there sentences and paid there debt ,DO NOT PASS HF77 !!

01-31-2023

Heather Wagner [Iowans Unafraid]

I oppose HF77 as it's unconstitutional, inhumane, and a waste of taxpayers money! Address mental health and sex addition publicly, like in the country of Germany, instead of giving Iowans a false sense of security, when data shows sex offenses to be the LOWEST crime to reoffend. As a rape by gunpoint survivor, married to a man molested by 4 family members, with us both battling a sex addiction from our trauma, PLEASE reappropriate Iowan's tax dollars into helping those battling a sex addition and its root cause. That's where our government needs to start, as a model state in the U.S. to finally acknowledge and be willing to openly discuss this taboo topic, which happens to be the fastest rising crime. A public registry is useless, does NOT make society safer, with factual basis to prove its ineffectiveness. When is enough enough? When does redemption begin?Volunteer advocate for: FAMM, Women Against Registry (WAR), ACSOL, NARSOL and President of Iowans Unafraid

01-31-2023

Thomas Karvitz []

There are no other offenses in any penal codes that force a person to continue to be punished, in any way, after they have served all of their courtordered requirements.It is time for this witch hunt to stop Sex Offenders from being punished over and over and over. This is not the way our laws work!

01-31-2023

Kirsten Salomon []

This is an inhumane and ineffective political response to a problem that does not exist. There is NO validity to the myth that registries prevent future offenses. This is NOTHING but a political ploy to try to appear to do something about a problem that has nothing to do with keeping people on the registry! We do not require this kind of intrusion for ANY other crime including murder. Shame on you authors of H F77.

01-31-2023

Kirsten Salomon []

This is an inhumane and ineffective political response to a problem that does not exist. Countless studies have categorically proven that registries do not protect against further offensesin fact 95% of new offenses are committed by people never on the registry. To make this even more egregious, this is an attempt to punish people who have served their time. We do not do this for ANY OTHER offense, including murder! This is nothing but a political ploy to garner favor with an uninformed public! Shame on you Iowa legislators behind this proposal!

01-31-2023

Israel O Estrada []

HF77 represents a brutal and inhumane form of punishment that contravenes the Constitution and harms the families, including minors, of those listed as registrants. This legislation is driven by emotions rather than evidence and dehumanizes registrants by suggesting that they can never rehabilitate themselves. The unjust treatment of registrants differently from other perpetrators of violent crimes, without credible justification, is unacceptable.

01-31-2023

A N []

I oppose this bill. This serves zero purpose especially after someone has served their time and completed any other requirements. This bill does not make the community safer or prevent any further crimes. Stop criminalizing things that arent crimes such as this bill that creates reregistering for the sex offender registry a crime. Our prison systems already are over capacity, so this makes zero sense to create something out nothing to just create more mass incarceration.

01-31-2023

Norman Wodell [Citizen]

I am opposed to automatically extending registry. This means a life sentence this class of crime. At a minimum, there must be a process to PROVE a continuing threat to society. The justice system should mandate that as part of the original sentence, a behavior remediation be conducted.

01-31-2023

Shannon Anderson []

I sit and wonder how humans can even make this kind of decision? I'm appalled! I, 100%, oppose this bill. Address the real issues that keep being swept under the table because society can't handle the truth. Society turns their backs on the people that need them the most. We have a mental health issue and we are ignoring it! I am shouting a very loud NO to this bill! Fix our system instead so loved ones can get the help they truly need.

01-31-2023

A K []

It is really unfortunate that we continue to see such potential draconian bills such as this one being pushed. You would think that at this juncture of the 21st century that our society would have evolved as human beings when it comes to giving people a second chance in life. It is very unfortunate that we continue to have certain individuals who continue to demonize human beings such as registrants who have paid their debts to society. Our Lord Jesus Christ preached that not forgiving are fellow man is an absolute sin in life, yet these certain individuals who attempt to push such heinous bills are committing sins against God. I ask that you act like human beings and vote no on this despicable bill. Thank you!

01-31-2023

Christopher Brown []

If there are any lawmakers with any guts and fact based practice, then they should oppose this bill. This is not a solution. The registry has never prevented a crime. Period. It is a colossal waste of money and time.

02-01-2023

David Heeren []

This Bill is, unfortunately, based in ignorance and hate. Iowa is better than this. Please examine current scientific literature and testimony of experts in this arena. Some basic facts:Registration IS punishment. SCOTUS, in 2003, was lazy, unprofessional, uninformed and biased. Registration does NOT prevent reoffense. Registration is EXPENSIVE. Registration is UNNECESSARY. WWJD? He would NOT impose additional registration. Registration does NOT equal Love!Please consider this bill with an open mind considering facts, academic literature and testimony by the vast majority of professionals. You will be convinced to VOTE NO on this bill. Thank you!

02-01-2023

Richard Dozier []

I am dismayed that the State of Iowa, the state where I grew up, is contemplating a law so completely without a rational basis. After several decades of sex offender registries throughout the United States, what is known, overwhelmingly, about people placed on those registries is that people change and that their capacity to reoffend dramatically diminishes over time. Sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rates among all offenders and this rate drops dramatically after five years and even more dramatically after ten years. Your registry has been, until now, remarkably attuned to this reality and it is a shame that you now are inclining towards making it out of touch with what we now know about registries and rehabilitation.I urge you not to enact this law.

02-01-2023

Trevor White []

This bill is a frivolous waste of public resources and time. Further, HF77 is cruel and unusual punishment.This bill is an emotionbased solution looking for a problem.It is unconstitutional. Iowa cannot amend a sentence already imposed by a court.It damages the families of registrants, including their children.This bill clearly implies that registrants will never be allowed to be redeemed.This bill dehumanizes registrants.No other category of crime, however violent, is treated this way.There are no gangs of registrants roaming the streets.

02-01-2023

David Kennerly [PrimeLED]

Well, whatever you think about the merits of this proposed law (and I think they're terrible) you need to be aware of the enormous legal challenge you face were it to become law. The State of Iowa will be embroiled in a courtroom battle that is doomed to failure because this is clearly a violation of ex post facto legal principles in both spirit and jurisprudence. You may think you're on solid ground with the Smith v. Doe ruling but you will find that fewer and fewer federal judges are willing to extend that increasingly shakey arbor of protection to cases such as this that clearly were not anticipated by Smith's very narrowly construed SCOTUS decision several decades ago. In other words, get ready for the battle of your careers. Your reputations may well rest upon the outcome.

02-01-2023

Kathleen Garner []

I strongly oppose this bill. No other crime requires a person to be punished a second time for the same crime! And do not say this is not punishment! Research consistently finds that the Registry does not accomplish what it was touted to do. To continue to find new ways to keep anyone unfortunate enough to be registered from living a normal life can only be called punishment.

02-01-2023

James Wood [Retired ]

This type of ignorance will continue until everyone realizes that not all sex offenses are the same,there has to be a separation from hands on victims and no hands on victims.There is a difference.I can't afford paying for sexual history polygraphs until I die.50.00 for the polygraph and 25.00 for gas.Not to mention 35.00 for a monitor on my cellphone. And these people contacted me over an adult dating site. I thought it was an adult because they never told me they were underage. We have serious problems and this bill HF77 should be called after the puritans,#1692.Its time to file lawsuits against the state of iowa,the D.O.J.and probation.Sitting around and do nothing but whine and complain will achieve nothing.We need to find lawyers who will help fight this injustice.I can't afford to do anything as it is.Talk to as many lawyers as possible and ask for their time in helping us fight this type of discrimination that runs rampant nationally and in this backward thinking state of iowa.This is how bad this system is,I will be homeless in a couple of months.pro suggested that I go back to the halfway house. Are you kidding me,that's going back towards prison not going forward living my life like a normal person and not being babysitted by the state.If this bill passes it will be the beginning of the end for the labeled group of people called sex offenders.The words Sex offender when there was no sex involved.sick people.

02-01-2023

Edward M []

I strongly oppose this bill. It is overkill and unconstitutional. It will impose a punishment similar to a "Life Sentence" on citizens unjustly, when the State Sentencing matrix doesn't legally call for that length of punishment. Registered offenders are still Citizens protected by the U. S. Constitution.

02-01-2023

Rachel Pacey []

As someone who is walking this walk right now and in the process of going back to school for social work I am totally against this . The registry in its entire is wrong . Once a person does their time that should be it m I'd their is probation after towards with certain limitations that's one thing but even the limitations on doing time and then being placed on parole is nothing but trip wires and red tape. The registry we will not as not not help protect anyone . If a predator wants to commit a child affense crime they will and no registry will stop them . Most SO never reoffend . Only like 4%. Their is enough sex offenders rules laws and regulations enough is enough . These people are still humans. If someone's time had expird that means they are a low risk SO to behin with done all the red tape did their time and have the chance most of the registry don't have to have a normal productive life which is what eveyone on the registry should have but few will ever have again becasue this destroyed the life's not just of the offender but the families as well .

02-01-2023

Rachel Pacey []

As someone who is walking this walk right now and in the process of going back to school for social work I am totally against this . The registry in its entire is wrong . Once a person does their time that should be it if their is probation after towards with certain limitations that's one thing but even the limitations on parold Is insane doing time and then being placed on parole is nothing but trip wires and red tape. The registry we will not help protect anyone . If a predator wants to commit a child affense crime they will and no registry will stop them . Most SO never reoffend . Only like 4%. Their is enough sex offenders rules laws and regulations enough is enough . These people are still humans. If someone's time had expird that means they are a low risk SO to begin with done all the red tape did their time and have the chance most of the registry don't have to have a normal productive life which is what eveyone on the registry should have but few will ever have again becasue this destroyed the life's not just of the offender but the families as well . I could go on and on but No no no against this all the way .

02-01-2023

Jason W []

I do not support this bill! Iowa should be working to remove the registry entirely, not expand on it by imposing additional penalties on people who have paid their debt to society. Multiple studies, some of which have been pointed out in other comments, have demonstrated that registries dont do anything but serve as political, performative theater. They dont decrease risk in the community since the overwhelming majority of sex offenses are committed by first time offenders. They simply serve to satisfy a lust for punishment. But its the state thats doing the harm when theres a registry. Family members and other loved ones as well as the individuals themselves who have recommitted to living honorable lives are used as scapegoats for society that doesnt want to deal with the hard work of true prevention and healing. Registries are a failed social experiment. Collectively, we didnt know that when they became more prevalent in the 1990s and before the internet, but we know now. History will not look kindly on states that behave so irresponsibly.

02-01-2023

T Person []

These type of bills are fear based and have no true educational backing. They hurt not only people that have served their sentences but their families as well, including the children of the offenders. I know this from personal experience. It's time to stop allowing officials who seek to be elected or reelected to use the public fear that has been produced by inaccurate information as a tool. All these bills and laws that make someone register after their sentence has been served for the crime is unconstitutional.

02-01-2023

Bryan Moll []

I strongly oppose this bill. It violates the US Constitution prohibiting application of ex post facto laws. A person who has completed his or her sentence, and completed the required time to register must be allowed to move on with hos or her life like any other person who has been convicted of a crime. Laws like this proposed bill do nothing but stir up fear in the public by stigmatizing registrants in that the public is made to believe that all registrants are dangerous, violent, or just waiting for an opportunity to abduct and assault a child. This is blatantly false. The vast majority of registrants want nothing more than to be able to reintegrate back into society and to become productive members of their communities. Laws like this proposed bill prevent registrants from living a meaningful and productive life, thus increasing recidivism. No other group of offenders are treated like a registrant. There are no laws like this for people convicted of drunk driving, drug dealing, gun crimes, or murder, yet people convicted of other crimes are given many opportunities to better their lives once their sentence is complete.I urge you to vote NO on this bill.

02-01-2023

Tami Smith [Iowan Unafraid]

I oppose this law. The laws need to be changed but, for the better. No one deserves a life sentence after serving their court given time. My Son got 14 years in a Federal prison for looking at 20 pictures on his cell phone and sending them to a friend. First offense. We need reform and consulting not prison or these insane laws. It's easy money for you all.

02-01-2023

Tennille Smith []

Please, do not pass this. These are PEOPLE who have already served their time. This bill will only prolong their punishment, and make it harder for them and their families to move on with their lives.

02-01-2023

B Melissa []

This law if passed, is unconstitutional. The laws surrounding those charged with sex offenses violate constitutional rights of citizens who have already served their time, it puts not only them, but their families at risk and danger. This must be stopped!

02-01-2023

cm mato []

this bill is and will still fall under SORNA either way this IV tier to be something like privateonly can be found if you call the LEOs dept I belive... guess again.INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL even if your tiered IV on a registry that is not public when you go to LEOs office to report your travel, take a wild guess who they report that too?SORNA (SMART OFFICE) yes the same national registry that this bill is trying to claim youwont appear on publicly!!!! cause for Iowa to be compliant they have to report all international travel this bill will give a loophole to SORNA trying to Back door putting ppl on national registry KILL THE BILL

02-01-2023

Sean Thomsen [Iowans Unafraid]

I have done my time for the past 22 years for something that did not even occur but felt somewhat compelled to accept a plea bargain that was suppose to maintain my freedom and expire and be done in ten years...some freedom!!A murderer has more rights than people in my position does on any given day

01-30-2023

Allen Sauer []

People with expunged records or got deferred judgment should not have to register at all the people that get that are being charge for it again and it not fare for people that getting charged for a crime that surpose to be erase from there records has to register for no reason and that is not a second chance of life

01-30-2023

James Brown []

I oppose this legislation. It boggles the mind to think that after someone completes their prison sentence and then completes their obligation to the registry that they then would have to reregister again for another term. I am not sure what purpose this serves other than retribution. I don't see what civil protective outcome this legislation would achieve. This legislation is purely punitive and vindictive. It says that there is no redemption in Iowa.

01-30-2023

Rev Rich Hendricks []

This is just plain wrong. An example of grandstanding claiming to fix a "problem" that does not exist. Christians especially ought to believe in the capacity of people to change, of clean slates and of fairness. This bill is the opposite of all those things.

01-30-2023

Derek Logue [OnceFallen.com]

Iowa should not behave like Florida. This is a blatantly unconstitutional law. Passing it will be a costly mistake. Iowa will be sued into oblivion and you will lose. The Feds have already been blocked by a federal court for trying to compel registration where registration is no longer required:https://reason.com/2023/01/19/afederaljudgesaysthedojssexoffenderregistrationrulesviolatedueprocessbyrequiringtheimpossible/

01-30-2023

jeramie reazer []

i cannot attend this meeting but would like to submit my opposition to this bill. sex offenders have done their given sentences.how can you repunish people who are trying to be productive citizens. bilss and laws are too extreme and further alienate people who are trying and doing the right things.

01-30-2023

Dylan Schares []

I oppose this bill as this is a form of double jeopardy, being punished more then once for a crime is a fifth amendment revocation and is illegal in federal court, not only is it already bad enough that one's life is no longer private due to info being found about one's life online but to traumatize a person who has fulfilled there duties/sentence that are successfully removed from the S.O.R. shouldn't have to reregister unless proven guilty after committing another criminal act that would be of the same type of nature of crime in which would constitute the requirement of the necessity of registering and a serial offender.

01-31-2023

cm Mato []

to state my thoughts I have a 8 yr old daughter Im raising alone with will destroy any typeof events of schools parks , thus as well 18 yr of rebuilding my reputation and a good personand involved in the community.the 10/25/life was what we have done we served our time and paid our duesths is clearly double jeopardy and D Logue is totally correct This is a blatantly unconstitutional law. Passing it will be a costly mistake. Iowa will be sued into oblivion and you will lose. The Feds have already been blocked by a federal court for trying to compel registration where registration is no longerrequired:https://reason.com/2023/01/19/afederaljudgesaysthedojssexoffenderregistrationrulesviolatedueprocessbyrequiringtheimpossible/

01-31-2023

cm mato []

siting back again taking all this in..we people have done our time REQUIRED by law.. we have made a new life for ourselves and our spouses and children,, yet the children will be the ones in this bill that will pay the price with the shame with abuse by other children, taking beatings every day after school, Ive seen it personally,Then have there Lives threaten and to live in fear due to the vigilantes who will try to take actions against the registered person, by vandalism or house fires or gunshots ring out only to kill and incent child of a registered person by passing this kind of bill. (proven In Florida) children are the victims of of the state and US government with unconstitutional laws It will be the incent child that could be killed or maimed for the rest of there life's leaving deep physically and mentally scared to deal with along with the PTSD that will go hand and hand every time a child steps out the door. This has been proven over the yrs with people who have children and on this registry this Bill" Fisher wants to present DONT PROTECT THE CHILDREN in fact it will cause more harm and putting childrens lives in danger, and when these children do get harmed or maimed the recourse is to put the liability on top of the people presenting such bills such as civil and punitive and monetary damages as they knew the outcome but dont care about childrens lives all they care about is making a name for them selves climbing the government ladder on the backs of children and there families Just sayin time we change things and make the Lawmakers responsible for there actions of directly or indirectly putting children in harms way knowing ahead of time and knowing well children will be the ones who pay the price

01-31-2023

James Wood [Retired ]

These legislatures need to take sexual history polygraphs. "Who ever cries wolf the loudest is probably the wolf themselfs,it's not a 100 percent quarantee but it is a 85 percent probability" we need a few hundred people to protest outside these peoples homes.lets see how they like the attention and there lives are no longer private.

01-31-2023

Jocelyn Meinders []

If people are off the registry and have not reoffended, what would be the purpose in forcing them to reregister? The sex offender is the only crime where a person pays for their crime over and over again even after going through the rehabilitation process, serving prison time, and showing that they are not a danger. I strongly oppose this bill people deserve an opportunity to show they can change and move on from their past.

01-31-2023

Heather Wickersham []

Hello, I am a family member opposed to this bill. We are making it harder and harder for people to reenter society and become productive members again. Instead we are trying to keep them locked up costing more to the tax payers. Let's please help offenders be a part of society and not outcastes costing more to the tax payer s

01-31-2023

Shane Jeansonne []

The Idaho state legislature has no business in amending a sentence already imposed by a court, either state or federal, for the sole purpose of furthering their discriminatory tactics against an entire class of people. Ex post facto laws are prohibited by the Constitution. U. S. Const. Article I, Section 10, Clause 1:No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.An ex post facto law is a law that imposes criminal liability or increases criminal punishment retroactively. Two separate clauses of the Constitution, Article I, Sections 9 and 10, ban enactment of ex post facto laws by the Federal Government and the states, respectively. The Supreme Court has cited cases interpreting the federal Ex Post Facto Clause in challenges under the state clause, and vice versa, treating the two clauses as having the same scope. The Courts decisions interpreting both clauses are therefore discussed collectively in greater detail in the Article I, Section 9 essays on the federal Ex Post Facto Clause. In particular, those essays on federal and state ex post facto laws discuss Supreme Court jurisprudence addressing imposing or increasing punishments, procedural changes, employment qualifications, retroactive taxes, inapplicability to judicial decisions, and deportation and related issues.The Supreme Court has interpreted the Ex Post Facto Clauses to limit only legislation that is criminal or penal in nature, though the Court has also made clear that the ex post facto effect of a law cannot be evaded by giving a civil form to that which is essentially criminal. In addition, the Court has uniformly applied the prohibition on ex post facto legislation only to laws that operate retroactively. In the 1798 case Calder v. Bull, the Court enumerated four ways in which a legislature may violate the Ex Post Facto Clauses prohibition on imposing retroactive criminal liability: (1) making criminal an action taken before enactment of the law that was lawful when it was done; (2) increasing the severity of an offense after it was committed; (3) increasing the punishment for a crime after it was committed; and (4) altering the rules of evidence after an offense was committed so that it is easier to convict an offender. The Ex Post Facto Clauses are related to other constitutional provisions that limit retroactive government action, including the federal and state Bill of Attainder Clauses, the Contract Clause, and the Due Process Clauses.Source: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIS10C15/ALDE00001101/ (footnotes omitted)

01-31-2023

Jonathan Grund []

Registration is a 2nd punishment for those who have already serve a sentence behind bars. This bill will tack on yet further punishment with a 3rd sentence; having to reregister after their original registration had been served. This is deplorable, heartless, and unconstitutional.

01-31-2023

James Wood [Retired ]

Everyone needs to contact senator Ernst and let her know your opposition to this insane out of touch and out of tune bill. Senator Grassley doesn't give a damn about felon or convicts, he won't help. Infact he would probably jump on board with this bill. My live is destroyed as it is.

01-31-2023

Bruce Hossfield [Iowans Unafraid]

I am unable to attend this meeting but I would like to express my opposition to this bill. Forcing people who have successfully served their duty on Iowa's registry to reregister for the duration of their lifetimes is cruel and vindictive and accomplishes nothing. Nationwide studies show that: (1) 95% of all sexual offenses are committed by first time offenders. In other words, the registry is virtually useless as a law enforcement tool. Besides, you've got my DNA forever whether you force me back on the registry or not, so feel free to use that to rule me out as a suspect.(2) 95% of all sexual offenses are committed by persons known to the victims. In other words, the registry is virtually useless as a law enforcement tool. Please go interview real suspects instead of treating me as an automatic suspect which I am not.(3) 95% of all persons convicted of a sexual offense never commit another sexual offense ever. In other words, the registry is virtually useless as a law enforcement tool. Also, 95% of those 5% who do reoffend do so during their first 5 years, while still on the registry as it exists today. I ask that you stop wasting taxpayers time and money on this cruel, vindictive and useless legislation.

01-31-2023

Nate Rinken [Narsol/Iowans unafraid/justice reform advocate]

Kill the Bill opposedIt is unconstitutional! Why?1) It gives citizens NO avenue off of it.(States recently challenged and lost California and South Carolina)2) It will drag thousands more back on to the registry bloating the system.3) It will cost the state more money to implement it.4) Statistics show the more you age the less chance of recidivism.5) There is no evidence registries accomplish safety in the first place.6) It does not follow the federal Adam Walsh act/guidelines. 7) There is no due process, in other words, the state has to show that there is a legitimate safety concern to bring anyone person back on the registry. It is now the states burden.8) This would be deemed expostfacto, meaning the government is adding punishment/punitive measures after the crime has been adjudicated.States around the country being challenged and are losing. Michigan along with several other states have already declared their state statues unconstitutional. Is Iowa willing to take that chance and waste tax payer funds for something that hasnt been proven to even work?

01-31-2023

Janice Bellucci [Family Safety Foundation]

People who have been removed from the registry should stay off of the registry for the rest of their lives until and unless they commit another sex offense which is unlikely to happen. Despite media accounts, the rate of reoffense for a person convicted of a sex offense is less than 1 percent while on parole or probation and about 5 percent over their lifetime. In addition, according to international expert Karl Hansen, if a person has been in the community for 17 years and not committed a subsequent sex offense, then they will not reoffend.

01-31-2023

Cheri Antillon []

01-31-2023

Bo Duke []

At what point do people get to put their past behind them? Not all on the registry are predators. In fact, its a minority. Some would very much like to move on a repair their lives and relationships. Some of the laws being passed are just punitive and cruel. The laws of the states more than adequately punish and humiliate these people. I ask you to stop this bill and let people mend their lives. Isnt that what we hope happens to an individual whos done wrong? That the rehabilitate? Let them.

01-31-2023

Deanna Foster []

I was absolutely floored when I read about this bill. I vehemently oppose it. I have always thought of Ohio as a very downtoearth, reasonable and thoughtful state and am therefore completely baffled that Ohio would consider a bill like this continuing to shame and punish your own people who only wish to move on and become productive, tax paying citizens. There are many studies that indicate the registry is ineffective, and not a good use of tax dollars. It is for all practical purposes about vengeance and public shaming, and not safety. The registry is a very punitive scheme bringing practically no value to society other than to inspire unnecessary fear in the citizenry and ultimately harm the families of registrants. Yes, there are families including children impacted by having a family member on a public registry.Continuing to inflict punishment on someone for their entire lives doesn't seem like something a rational and compassionate government would do. I hope you will reconsider this bill.

01-31-2023

bruce wally [the constitution ]

I thought you people where for freedoms you going to mandate a certain part of the public to keep coming back to review there status after they cleared there name and just started to feel good about themselves, repubs the party of civil freedoms dont mandate shots party its my body and dont tell me to inject vaccines you are the hypocrites party, if you pass this bill you must do it to all people that complete jail and parole and make them come back for reviews or be subject to penalty , they must relive their past shame on you , you put these people on the unconstitutional registry only to find them selves job less home less cant be with family members and attend school functions even GOD forgave if you believe in that kind of thing Im sure you know all the obsiticals registrants go though yet you want to keep shaming WHY I ask,

01-31-2023

Mona Manley [ACSOL ]

HF77 is cruel and unusual punishment this bill will damage the famines of the registrants including their children. Also implies that registrants can't be redeem. Registrants should also be given a SECOND CHANCE

01-31-2023

Judy Cockerham []

re HF77: Please bring some clarity and humanity to this bill and do not pass it. Persons who have paid the price and completed the requirements set out by the law are done! They must not be compelled to take this backwards step to reregister forevermore. No.

01-31-2023

Bonnie P []

They say: You don't judge a man by mistake he made, but by the way he fixed it!"Why continue this punishment over and over? If someone did a time, and their registry expired, it makes no sense to force registry over and over! There is no statistic that shows that that can or will help anyone, registry is hard enough and it does not do anything but torture entire families.

02-01-2023

Mig Larham []

It is unbelievable that Iowa would even consider passing this bill. Following all the rules, serving your time for years, then only to find out that Iowa created a Tier 4 which requires lifetime registration? This is idiotic. Hitler would be very, very proud of the Iowa legislators that support this bill.

02-01-2023

Shelly Reese [Iowan]

I strongly oppose HF77.I have worked with registrants for years. Some should absolutely be on the registry. Unfortunately of the 6400+ registrants only a very small percentage (10% of those are considered HIGH RISK TO REOFFEND. The registry has made it close to impossible to secure housing. So where do these registrants live? In jails, prisons,and homelessness. They stay in hotels, campgrounds,live in their car at rest stops & parking lots, anywhere they can. Think about that the next time you're travel. Does this make you feel safe because they are on a registry? If we had housing we would know where they were at all times. That's the goal right.To know where they are. HOWEVER insurance companies will not insure the landlords property if they rent to someone on the registry. Now employers have run into the issues with insurance companies and covering employers if they hire a sex offender. It is never ending for these individuals. How is this not seen as punishment? Never ending punishment. A lot of people talk about second chances and getting those with a criminal history jobs. My experience has been EXCEPT FOR THE SEX OFFENDER ON THE REGISTRY! We tell people no one should ever be defined by b the worst thing they ever did, EXCEPT FOR THE SEX OFFENDER ON THE REGISTRY! Enough. And with this bill where does the legislators plan to house them when they age? Despite what the personal view is of any one registrant that person is a human being. They have the same needs as they age. NOT 1 nursing home will accept a registrant. Not 1. If u want these registrants to continue being punished for an offense that occured over 1015 years ago without so much as 1 indication they have reoffended; where do you plan on putting them? Registrants are not robots. You cannot put them in a scrap pile when there is no use for them any longer. They need nursing homes too!Legislators who believe this law is for the sole purpose to protect our children and keep our communities safe have NO CONCEPT of what it takes to provide community safety and that is the bottom line.

02-01-2023

Jody Rinken []

I oppose this bill. If someone has served the time, been doing well in society it will cause an adverse effect, attitudes will change with nothing to look forward to. Its not fair to pick a group of individuals and punish them for life!!

02-01-2023

Charles Wardlow []

This law is nothing but harassment. Plain and simple.What makes you believe that continued registration will benefit victims or the general public much less deter any future sex oriented crimes ?When are you politicians going to get off the Sex Offender bandwagon and move on to solving more distasterous crimes like gun violence and mass shootings which happen to be more prevalent than sex crimes and far more victim impacting.

02-01-2023

Katherine Hobbins []

This is highly disappointing. Clearly, you have offered this bill for political performance. Please educate yourselves and propose legislation that would actually benefit Iowa citizens. Requiring people who have earned their way off the already ineffective registry would do nothing but waste taxpayer money.

02-01-2023

Rich Seago []

There is not one piece of data which shows that knowing where a sex offender lives has prevented child abuse. There is LOTS of data which shows that publicly publishing where sex offenders live acts as a "shaming" punishment which forever labels and stigmatizes the offender AND his family AND his children; forcing them to endure a lifetime of fear of physical harm or death, job termination or eviction from housing. The registry is the very definition of Cruel and Unususal resembling punishments formerly practiced in the Dark Ages.

02-01-2023

Michael Madonia [ACSOL]

This law is a terrible idea. HF 77 should be UnConstitutional. Instead of trying to work towards fixing the problem, this bill makes the problem much worse. Vote "No" on HF 77. Michael L. Madonia

01-31-2023

James Caulder []

Where is the data and evidence that suggests this law is needed? Why isnt it included in the legislative record? My guess is because there is none. This bill will do nothing to enhance public safety. Had the authors of the bill done any research on the subject of risk of recidivism after offense, they would have found that risk drops precipitously the longer the time period a person remains offense free.Laws are not free to implement. Iowa would be better served by spending the money this bill would cost, and indeed implementation and maintenance of the entire registry, on programs centered on prevention, healing, and rehabilitation that would enhance public safety.

Attachment

01-31-2023

Chuck Henderson [Women Against Registry]

Dear Honorable Members of the Iowa Legislature,I am writing to express my opposition to Iowa bill HF 77, which would modify "sex offender" registry requirements by requiring "sex offenders" whose registration requirements have expired to reregister and making penalties applicable.According to a study by Sandler, Freeman, and Socia (2010), "over 95% of all sexual offense arrests were committed by firsttime sex offenders." This suggests that the registry is not deterring those who have never committed a sexual offense before and is instead targeting individuals who have already served their time and are trying to reintegrate into society.Requiring individuals whose registration requirements have expired to reregister and making penalties applicable would further stigmatize and marginalize these individuals, making it even more difficult for them to successfully reintegrate into society. This can actually increase the risk of reoffending, as individuals who are unable to find employment, housing, and support may be more likely to engage in criminal behavior.Additionally, this bill would place an unnecessary burden on law enforcement resources and increase the risk of registry errors and false positives, as individuals who have not reoffended would still be subject to registry requirements and penalties.In light of these facts, I urge you to reconsider Iowa bill HF 77 and instead focus on evidencebased strategies that are proven to be effective in preventing sexual offenses and reducing recidivism, such as providing individuals with treatment, support, and opportunities for successful reintegration into society.Thank you for your time and consideration.Sincerely,Chuck Henderson

Attachment

02-01-2023

Sean Thomsen [Iowans Unafraid]

I oppose HF 77...I accepted a plea bargain under the conditions that my issue was over in ten years and I walk away with my freedom...for something that didn't occur.ENOUGH IS ENOUGH...ITS 22 YEARS LATER. SOME FREEDOM!!!I WILL PRAY FOR YOU...

Attachment